Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Has Truth Social removed or modified the post and is there an official transcript?
Executive Summary
There is no clear, documented evidence in the provided material that Truth Social removed or modified a specific post, nor that Truth Social issued an “official transcript” related to the 60 Minutes interview; available reporting instead focuses on CBS’s transcript obligations and independent archiving efforts. Reporting shows CBS agreed to release transcripts of candidate interviews after a settlement, and journalists identified an edited omission in the 60 Minutes broadcast that appears in the written transcript, but the supplied sources do not show Truth Social taking content-removal action [1] [2] [3] [4]. Independent archiving projects preserve Truth Social posts, and Truth Social’s own policies outline conditions under which content can be withheld, leaving open the possibility of removal but providing no case-specific confirmation in these sources [4] [5] [6].
1. What the Record Actually Shows About Removal Claims — Clarity Missing but No Direct Proof
The documents and analyses provided consistently report an absence of direct evidence that Truth Social removed or modified the post in question; news summaries that detail the 60 Minutes interview and surrounding controversy do not record a Truth Social takedown or an official platform transcript. Journalistic pieces note Trump’s posts criticizing NFL rules and reference the 60 Minutes interview and legal settlement requiring CBS to provide transcripts to eligible candidates, yet none of those items establish platform-level removal actions [1] [3]. The independent fact-checking and reporting focus on editorial choices by CBS and on what appears in transcripts versus video, not on Truth Social’s content actions, which means the claim that Truth Social removed or altered the post remains unsubstantiated in the reviewed material [2] [3].
2. Why the CBS Transcript Debate Matters — Transparency and Editorial Choices Under Scrutiny
The most concrete documentary thread in these sources concerns CBS’s handling of the 60 Minutes interview: a settlement compelled CBS to release transcripts for eligible presidential-candidate interviews, and reporters flagged that an answer from Trump about crypto and a pardon was present in the transcript but omitted from TV and extended online video, raising questions about editorial transparency and what is considered part of the published record [1] [2]. This dispute is about broadcast editing versus the written record, and the settlement increases the importance of transcripts as an accountability tool. The sources show that the contested exchange appears in the written transcript, which matters to researchers and critics who argue that omission from the video can affect public perception [2].
3. Independent Archives vs. Platform Control — Two Competing Preservation Pathways
Independent projects and nonprofit archives have been actively preserving Trump’s Truth Social posts, providing redundant public records that can counteract platform deletions; one project specifically archives posts, video transcriptions, and images to ensure historical access [4]. That work matters because Truth Social’s policies state content can be withheld under certain circumstances and that accounts or posts can be deleted, so external archiving provides a safeguard against unilateral erasure. The reviewed material indicates these archives exist and are used precisely to document posts that might otherwise be transient, but the sources do not document a particular post’s removal — they only show that archiving is a contingency against that possibility [4].
4. What Truth Social’s Own Policies Allow — Withholding, Legal Demands, and Minimal Takedowns
Truth Social’s public policy documents emphasize a viewpoint-neutral moderation approach and minimal removal, while simultaneously detailing procedures to withhold content in response to lawful demands or safety concerns and to preserve records for law enforcement where required [5] [6] [7]. Those policies mean the platform could legally remove or restrict access to content if presented with valid legal process, or if the content violated community rules, yet the documentation supplied does not indicate this actually occurred regarding the post tied to the 60 Minutes matter. Thus, while removal is procedurally possible under Truth Social rules, the provided sources do not supply a specific instance or proof of such action [6] [7].
5. Bottom Line and Where the Evidence Runs Out — What Can Be Concluded and What Needs More Reporting
Based on the available sources, the supported conclusions are that CBS transcript-release obligations and transcript-versus-video editorial disputes are well-documented, independent archives are preserving Truth Social content, and Truth Social’s policies permit withholding under specific conditions — but there is no corroborated record here that Truth Social removed or modified the specific post, nor that the platform issued an “official transcript.” To move beyond this point requires either a platform statement, archived snapshots showing deletion or alteration, or reporting that directly cites a Truth Social action; none of the supplied materials provide that, leaving the claim unproven rather than disproven [1] [2] [4] [5].