What did The New York Times’ reporting allege about the podiatrist who wrote Trump’s deferment letter?
Executive summary
The New York Times reported that a Queens podiatrist, Dr. Larry Braunstein, may have provided the heel‑spur diagnosis and supporting paperwork that produced one of Donald Trump’s Vietnam‑era medical deferments — and that the diagnosis may have been rendered as a favor to Trump’s father, Fred, who rented property to the doctor [1]. The Times’ story rests largely on interviews with Braunstein’s daughters and contemporaneous city directories and podiatric colleagues, while the paper found no surviving medical records or direct documentation tying Braunstein’s exam to Trump’s Selective Service files [1] [2] [3].
1. What The New York Times alleged: a favor from a Trump landlord
The Times alleged that Braunstein, who rented office space in buildings owned by Fred Trump, told family members he helped “a famous guy” — and Braunstein’s daughters told the paper they believed their father’s diagnosis of bone spurs for a young Donald Trump was “a favor” to the landlord [1] [2]. Reporting presented the core allegation as the family’s account: that Braunstein’s relationship with Fred Trump, including favorable rent terms, created the context for a diagnostic letter that contributed to Trump’s 1‑Y medical classification in 1968 [4] [3].
2. How The Times reconstructed the claim: interviews, directories and longtime colleagues
The Times said it received an anonymous tip prompting a fresh look at Trump’s draft record and then used old city directories and interviews with Queens podiatrists to identify Braunstein and corroborate his tenancy in Trump properties, while also interviewing Braunstein’s daughters and podiatric colleagues who recalled his vocal stories about helping the Trumps [1] [4]. The reporting cited colleagues who remembered Braunstein praising the Trumps and allowing he had been given favorable rent arrangements by Fred Trump, a detail used to suggest motive for a “favor” diagnosis [4] [3].
3. The evidentiary limits The Times acknowledged: no surviving papers and dead witnesses
The Times acknowledged significant gaps: Braunstein died in 2007, he left no medical records the paper could find, and government draft records from the era are often incomplete — the paper reported it was unable to find direct paper evidence connecting Braunstein’s exam or paperwork to Trump’s Selective Service file [2] [3]. That absence forced the story to rely on family recollection, directories and contemporaries rather than contemporaneous clinic notes or a signed report from Braunstein to the draft board [2].
4. Alternative explanations and pushback the reporting cited
The Times and subsequent coverage flagged alternatives: the Trump side had long described a “very strong letter” from a physician and Trump himself has sometimes pointed to a high draft lottery number — an explanation critics call inconsistent because the medical deferment predated the lottery — and other podiatrists have been floated as possible providers of the note, including Manny Weinstein, though his role remained unclear [5] [3]. Reporting also placed the episode in an era when deferments for privileged men were common, a context that suggests systemic — not solely personal — pathways out of service [6].
5. Why the allegation mattered and how outlets framed it
The Times framed the allegation as part of a larger inquiry into how Fred Trump helped his son and into the fairness of draft deferments in the Vietnam era; outlets from Gothamist to Vanity Fair and CNN amplified the “favor” narrative while also noting the reporting’s evidentiary gaps, the lack of documentary proof, and the broader historical pattern of deferments benefitting the well‑connected [4] [7] [5]. The net effect in coverage was to raise credible questions about whether familial ties and landlord favors played a role in Trump’s medical exemption, while leaving the decisive documentary link unproven in public reporting [1] [2].