Fact check: What documented instances exist of Trump making controversial statements about Ivanka?

1. Summary of the results

The analyses reveal multiple documented instances of Trump making controversial statements about his daughter Ivanka across different time periods and contexts:

Public Television Appearances:

• Trump stated "If Ivanka weren't my daughter, perhaps I'd be dating her" during a 2006 appearance on 'The View' ^[1]. This comment was made in response to a hypothetical question about Ivanka posing for Playboy magazine.

Radio Show Comments:

• Trump discussed Ivanka's physique, including the size of her breasts, and called her 'a piece of ass' during conversations with Howard Stern ^[2].

White House Staff Incidents:

• According to reports, Trump made lewd comments about his daughter Ivanka in front of White House staff, including talking about her breasts and backside, and what it might be like to have sex with her ^[3]. These comments were reportedly so disturbing that they prompted his chief of staff, John Kelly, to remind Trump that Ivanka was his daughter ^[3].

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The analyses provide limited context regarding Trump's defense or explanation of these statements:

• Trump's spokesperson claimed he was "joking and making fun of himself for his tendency to date younger women" regarding the 2006 'The View' comment ^[1].

Missing perspectives include:

• No analysis of how these statements affected Trump's political standing or public perception
• Limited information about Ivanka Trump's own responses to these controversies
• One source mentions that Ivanka Trump says she 'hates' politics and plans to support her father during his second term ^[4], but doesn't connect this to the controversial statements

Who benefits from different narratives:

• Political opponents would benefit from highlighting these statements to damage Trump's reputation
• Trump supporters would benefit from framing these as jokes taken out of context or media distortion
• Media organizations benefit from the attention and engagement these controversial stories generate

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question appears factually neutral as it simply asks for documented instances rather than making claims. However, potential considerations include:

• The question uses the term "controversial" which could be seen as subjective framing, though the documented statements clearly meet this threshold
• The question doesn't specify a time frame, allowing for comprehensive coverage of incidents across multiple years
• No apparent bias is present in the phrasing - it seeks documentation rather than making assertions

The analyses themselves show some gaps in sourcing, as several sources ^{[5] [6] [7] [8]} provided no relevant information about the topic, suggesting either incomplete search results or sources that don't address the specific question asked.