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.
Fact check: Did Trump refuse to call governor walz
1. Summary of the results
Yes, Trump definitively refused to call Governor Tim Walz following deadly shootings in Minnesota. Multiple sources from June 17, 2025, confirm Trump's explicit refusal with direct quotes:
- Trump stated "I don't want to call him" and "why would I call him?" when asked about contacting the Minnesota governor [1] [2]
- He declared "I'm not calling him" and described calling Walz as a "waste of time" [3] [4]
- Trump characterized Governor Walz using derogatory terms, calling him "slick," "whacked out," and "a mess" [3] [4] [1] [5] [2]
The refusal represents a departure from common presidential practice of calling governors during crisis situations in their states [2].
2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints
The original question lacks several important contextual elements:
- The specific incident: The refusal occurred in the context of deadly Minnesota shootings involving a captured suspect [1] [2]
- Political dynamics: Tim Walz served as the 2024 Democratic vice presidential candidate, adding political tension to the situation [2]
- Timing and protocol: Trump's refusal broke with established presidential practice of reaching out to state governors during crises [2]
- Broader information warfare: The incident occurred amid far-right conspiracy theories and falsehoods being spread about the Minnesota shooter, with attempts to link the suspect to Democrats [6] [7]
Political beneficiaries of Trump's stance would include:
- Trump himself and his supporters, who benefit from maintaining partisan divisions
- Far-right media figures who profit from amplifying political conflicts and conspiracy theories [6] [7]
3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement
The original question appears neutral and factual, asking for verification of a specific claim without apparent bias. However, it lacks context that would help readers understand:
- The severity of the situation that typically warrants presidential outreach
- The unprecedented nature of a president refusing standard crisis communication protocols
- The broader disinformation campaign surrounding the Minnesota incident, where MAGA voices spread falsehoods to politically weaponize the tragedy [6] [7]
The question's brevity, while not inherently biased, omits the serious implications of breaking presidential norms during a state crisis and the inflammatory language Trump used to justify his refusal.