The Trump Threatened Liz Cheney Hoax

3 minutes

The Hoax

Trump Threatened To Kill Liz Cheney At A Tucker Carlson Event

On October 31, 2024, Donald Trump made what appeared to be a violent threat to kill Liz Cheney during a campaign event with Tucker Carlson in Arizona. The media began implying Trump endorsed physical harm against her. Cheney has been one of Trump’s most outspoken Republican critics, particularly over his handling of the 2020 election and January 6 events, leading to her ousting in 2022 by a Trump-backed candidate. Recently, Cheney has even campaigned with Kamala Harris, calling for a united front against Trump.


What Really Happened

Trump Used Cheney As An Example Of How Politicians Are So Quick To Send young Americans To Die In War

In reality, Trump was criticizing politicians like Liz Cheney for their eagerness to involve the U.S. in endless foreign wars, sending young Americans to fight and die in conflicts with no clear end. When he spoke about “firing upon” Cheney, Trump was using hyperbolic language to illustrate her as a war-hawk—not to suggest any actual harm. His comments were aimed at calling out establishment politicians who, in his view, prioritize foreign interventions over American lives and interests. His point was not a threat but a commentary on the detachment between policymakers and the real consequences of the wars they support.


Hoaxology | How The Hoax Was Made

Here’s how this hoax was made.

Out-of-Context Quote

This technique was key in distorting Trump’s original statements. By isolating his critical comments about Cheney and exaggerating his rhetorical hyperbole, the media presented them as literal threats, even though they were clearly meant as pointed criticism of her hawkish political stance rather than any actual physical threat.

Pretending Hyperbole is Real

Trump’s exaggerated language, which is common in his rhetorical style, was taken literally by media outlets. This method allowed them to characterize his statement as a call for violence against Cheney, rather than as an illustrative critique on politicians quick to send Americans into foreign wars.

Selective Reporting

The media chose to highlight only specific phrases from Trump’s comments while ignoring the broader context. This selective focus created a misleading impression, suggesting he was endorsing violence rather than discussing political hawkishness and foreign policy disagreements.

Selective Video Editing

In this hoax, selective video editing played a crucial role by showing only the portion of Trump’s remarks that could be twisted into a threat. By clipping out context and key background remarks, the media was able to make Trump appear as though he was literally calling for violence against Liz Cheney. The video omitted portions where Trump’s hyperbolic language about Cheney was meant as a critique on her support for foreign wars, rather than an actual threat. This editing technique drastically changed the perceived meaning of Trump’s words, giving viewers the impression he made a physical threat, which fueled a misleading narrative and escalated the hoax.

These methods worked together to create a sensationalized narrative, suggesting Trump’s comments were a literal call to harm Cheney, rather than a critique of war-focused politicians.

Checkout Hoaxology 101 for more information about hoax techniques.


𝕏 @AmericanDebunk

One-Time
Monthly
Yearly

Help support our work and expand our reach with a donation!

Make a monthly donation

Make a yearly donation

Choose an amount

$100.00
$500.00
$1,000.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00
$5.00
$15.00
$100.00

Or enter a custom amount

$

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

Your contribution is appreciated.

DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly

14 responses to “The Trump Threatened Liz Cheney Hoax”

  1. Is there any reason to not like democrats?

    1. There are many, many reasons to not like them.

  2. DeportDemocrats Avatar
    DeportDemocrats

    It doesn’t even APPEAR that way. They’re just lying. Nobody who watches that video believes he was threatening her. They’re just lying.

  3. Trump needs to be clearer about things so controversial. But perhaps he did this on purpose because look at how quickly lamestream jumped on it without even thinking and how even more quickly the debunking is taking place, exposing the media and even KamalaHo for the liars they are! Brilliant! They are war hawks and need to face war themselves if they are so set on war!

    1. Umm yeah, your news needs to be more clear about reality. Not trump. No one else has trouble understanding what Trump says, but then again most people comprehend the way things are and not the way they want things to be. I mean the mentality it takes to throw grammar cards? Prepubescent school girls love to throw grammar cards also, they don’t have a deep enough understanding of the English language. “Color & colour” same word same meaning. English is an ever evolving mixture of all languages, unlike mathematics English has nothing concrete about it other than the fact it’s not concrete.

  4. This is not telling any truth about his statement! Place your loved one’s name or your own name, in place of “her” (Liz Cheney) & as his statement says ‘”See how she feels about it. You know, when the guns are trained (I think he meant aimed) at her face” . Now see how you feel. This is not a hoax. The clown meant exactly what he said. It may not be a clear threat, but if you were on the receiving end, you most definitely would think about being the one in this scenario. It would raise fear on your mind,

    1. If my loved one was a warmonger who kicks their feet back in the comfort of DC while thousands of men lose their lives in the war they call for, I wouldn’t mind, really.

    2. TravelPhotoWriter Avatar
      TravelPhotoWriter

      No Jamie. I was there that night. It was part of an even larger conversation that Trump was saying maybe they wouldn’t be so quick to send our young men and women to war if they had any feeling for what it was like. They have no empathy for the Americans that go and face mutation and death, or if they’re lucky enough to come back with PTSD. It’s simply saying a version of, “if we put her through what our troops go through, let’s see if she’s so quick to call for war.” It was very obvious while being in the room. AND Trump’s delivery is straight shooter. The moment it fell out of his mouth I leaned over to my husband and said, “Well, there’s what they’re going to twist from tonight!” It’s the best snippet they got from over 2 hours on stage talking.

    3. With the intelligence needed to comprehend, anything politisized is highly deceptive, Intelligence tells 1s self the obvious, most pushed and repeated narratives are to be considered false first, by default. POLITICS equat to deception and lies, the most evil political party will lie the most for money and power. In a deceptive atmosphere the original hoax/lie has 1000× the exposure than the truth that always prevails, days -years later. The lie comes first the truth comes last. Democrat supporters repeatedly argue the first, to be true, ignoring the full truth that prevails last.. Like retrd cpt. Obvious pointing out and demanding the first narratives pushed and repeated the most to be true, completely destroying any hint of the intelligence needed to comprehend deception.

  5. A lot of places also said something along the lines of “Trump says Liz Cheney should be put in front of a firing squad/line”.

    You should have a look for a couple of those and add those examples in too.

  6. Would be nice to have a list of all journalists and media organizations who participated in the hoax.

  7. I’d phrase it differently. Trump was saying Liz Cheney should go stand on the front lines with other soldiers, getting shot at by the enemy. This is a classic anti-war argument: cowardly politicians know they’ll never have to personally face the enemy’s guns, so they’re happy to start wars and let our soldiers pay the price while they sit safe at home. It’s not that Trump’s comments were “exaggerated” or “hyperbolic” (though it’s certainly not a serious proposal), it’s that the “nine barrels shooting at her” would be operated by the enemy, rather than by our own firing squad.

  8. Obvious hoax.

  9. Like almost ALL hoaxes, this could have been cleared up with one direct question from a reporter: Mr Trump, what exactly did you mean with this comment? Anytime you know that one clarifying statement could clear up the ambiguity, you KNOW it is a hoax. Anytime it smells like a dishonest reporting “gotcha”, you know it is dishonest reporting and the beginning of another hoax. That is the easiest way to identify a hoax. Why didn’t they clear it up with one question to Trump? Didn’t ask? HOAX.

Leave a Reply

Trending

Discover more from The American Debunk

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading