A central theme emerging from the misinformation surrounding Trump’s presidency is the administration’s attempts to consolidate control, manipulate media narratives, and reshape policy discourse to fit its ideological objectives. These patterns appear in various claims, ranging from Elon Musk’s access to treasury systems to the removal of the U.S. Constitution from the White House website.

Elon Musk and the U.S. Treasury Payment System

A viral claim suggested that Elon Musk, appointed to lead the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), and his team of young engineers had gained access to the U.S. Department of Treasury’s $6 trillion payment system. The claim sparked widespread concern over potential unauthorized control over government funds and personal financial data.

While multiple reputable news outlets, including The New York Times, The Associated Press, Wired, and Politico, reported that Musk’s team had some level of access, their articles relied on anonymous sources. Politico initially reported that the access was “read-only,” but Wired later contradicted this, stating that a DOGE engineer, Marko Elez, had administrative privileges and had begun rewriting code within the Treasury’s system. The controversy intensified when Elez resigned following inquiries into racist posts, and 13 states sued the Treasury Department to bar DOGE’s involvement.

The claim that Elon Musk and his team at the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) gained unauthorized access to the U.S. Treasury’s $6 trillion payment system reflects broader concerns about unchecked power and lack of transparency within the administration. The mixed reports on whether Musk’s access was administrative or “read-only” highlight the current administration’s pattern of circumventing traditional oversight mechanisms. This raises a question – can individuals with significant corporate influence be wielding government power without public accountability? On that note, it is even more concerning that the leading fact-check sites aren’t hearing back from officials, hindering the public’s ability to understand what is actually happening. Variation across fact-checking sights depict clear signs of government censorship.

USAID Funding to Politico

A claim, amplified by conservative social media users, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Trump himself, and Elon Musk, alleged that the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) funneled over $8 million to Politico. Publicly available financial records firmly debunk this assertion, revealing that USAID paid only $44,000 for institutional subscriptions to Politico’s E&E News, not millions in direct funding.

Politico refuted the claim in a public statement, asserting that it has never received government subsidies or grants. Records confirm that while various government agencies have paid for Politico Pro subscriptions, USAID’s contribution was minimal, and the $8 million figure originated from misrepresented data. Read Politico’s Official Statement here.

The false claim that USAID funneled millions into Politico aligns with Trump’s longstanding strategy of delegitimizing traditional media. By suggesting that a prominent political news outlet was financially dependent on government funding, the administration fueled public distrust in mainstream journalism. This misinformation, spread by Trump, Karoline Leavitt, and Elon Musk, illustrates a broader effort to control the media landscape and discredit truthful reporting simply because it is unfavorable. Politico’s subsequent statement and financial records debunked these allegations, yet the claim had already gained traction in conservative circles, showing the dangers of politically motivated media attacks.

Nationwide Protests on February 5

Rumors of nationwide protests against Trump’s administration spread widely online, with calls for demonstrations in all 50 state capitols. The movement, labeled “50501,” was decentralized, with no official organizational leadership. Online forums such as Reddit and Discord played a crucial role in mobilizing participants, though attendance numbers varied. The protests focused on various grievances, including opposition to Trump’s executive orders, concerns over Project 2025, and broader political issues such as climate change, election integrity, and LGBTQ+ rights.

The “50501” protests reflects a grassroots pushback against Trump’s policies and executive actions. The administration and its supporters worked to paint these protests as chaotic and ineffective, despite the fact that their spontaneous nature symbolized widespread public dissatisfaction. By targeting concerns over Project 2025, civil rights, and governance, the demonstrations represent an organic counter-narrative to the administration’s efforts to reframe political discourse.

Who Removed The U.S. Constitution From the White House Website?

Another claim alleged that the Trump administration deleted the U.S. Constitution from the White House website, fueling speculation about authoritarian motives. While it is true that the page disappeared (pictured above), this was not an isolated incident; several other pages, including those on tourism, equity, and presidential biographies, were also removed. A White House spokesperson attributed the missing content to ongoing website updates, a standard process when administrations transition. Despite the panic, there is no evidence that the removal was intentional or permanent.

The removal of the Constitution page, while likely a part of routine website maintenance, sparked concern because of its symbolic implications. Given Trump’s previous rhetoric challenging constitutional norms, critics saw this as part of a broader trend of undermining legal institutions.

Karoline Leavitt’s Press Briefing

Karoline Leavitt, the youngest White House press secretary in history at 27, made waves during her first press briefing by dismissing traditional media and emphasizing the role of influencers, bloggers, and content creators. She positioned her administration as one that would challenge mainstream media, accusing legacy outlets of spreading misinformation about Trump.

When pressed about policy matters, including the administration’s suspension of federal grants and programs like Meals on Wheels, Leavitt remained dismissive. Her approach signaled a new media strategy for the administration, one that embraces nontraditional outlets while frequently attacking mainstream journalism in the eyes of The New York Times.

Trump’s Executive Order on Gender-Affirming Care

Misinformation also surrounded Trump’s executive order targeting gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth. The order claimed that doctors were “maiming and sterilizing” children, a characterization that clashes with leading medical research.

In reality, gender-affirming care for minors primarily consists of social transitioning and, for older adolescents, hormone therapy, which has been shown to improve mental health outcomes. Puberty blockers, commonly used since the 1980s, are reversible, and surgeries on minors are rare. The executive order’s claims of widespread “mutilation” are not supported by medical evidence.

Refer here to learn more about what Gender Affirming Care is.

Trump’s executive order on transgender health care falsely portrayed gender-affirming medical treatments as dangerous and widely regretted. This narrative contradicts established medical research, yet it serves as a strategic tool to galvanize support from his base by targeting marginalized communities. The administration’s framing of transgender health care as a public threat mirrors historical tactics used to justify restrictive policies on civil rights issues.

Trump’s Super Bowl Interview with Fox News

During a widely watched Super Bowl pregame interview, Trump avoided direct answers on key policy questions, including the economic impact of his proposed tariffs. Fox News’ Bret Baier failed to follow up on several of Trump’s vague responses, allowing the president to steer the conversation toward unrelated topics, including transgender athletes.

By deflecting questions about economic policy and instead shifting the discussion to cultural issues such as transgender athletes, Trump effectively controlled the narrative, avoiding scrutiny on pressing economic concerns. This interview underscores how friendly media platforms enable misinformation by failing to hold political figures accountable.

Key Events Timeline

References

• Snopes. (2025, February 4). Unpacking claims that Elon Musk and his DOGE team secured access to Treasury payment systems.
• Snopes. (2025, February 6). USAID paid $44K to Politico, not over $8M as White House claimed.
• Snopes. (2025, February 4). What we know about nationwide anti-Trump protests on Feb. 5.
• Snopes. (2025, January 21). Trump Admin Deleted Constitution from White House Site. It’s Not as Ominous as His Critics Think.
• The New York Times. (2025, January 28). White House Press Secretary Makes Steely and Unflinching Debut.
• Poynter. (2025, January 28). 5 misleading claims from Trump’s executive order on trans youth health care.
• Poynter. (2025, February 10). Opinion | Mediocre questions, rambling answers, no follow-ups: Fox News’ Super Bowl interview with Donald Trump.