White House Defends Trump’s “Piggy” Remark to Reporter on Air Force One

The White House has publicly defended President Donald Trump following a controversial exchange with a reporter aboard Air Force One last week. During a tense interaction, Trump reacted sharply to questions regarding Jeffrey Epstein, reportedly saying, “Quiet, piggy!” while pointing at the journalist. This moment was captured on video and subsequently went viral, leading to widespread criticism of the President’s conduct.

In response to the backlash, a White House official characterized the reporter’s behavior as “inappropriate and unprofessional.” The official suggested that journalists in such situations should develop a thicker skin: “If you’re going to give it, you have to be able to take,” they stated, underscoring the contentious atmosphere surrounding the President’s interactions with the media.

The incident comes amid heightened scrutiny over Trump’s connections to Epstein, especially following the release of emails that mention him. This tension has manifested in Trump’s increasingly aggressive responses to reporters. On November 18, 2025, the President confronted an ABC News reporter who questioned him about the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Trump rebuked the reporter, asserting that their questioning style was “terrible” and threatened to revoke ABC’s broadcast license due to what he deemed biased reporting.

The White House’s defense of Trump’s remarks highlights the ongoing conflict between the administration and the press. Critics argue that such behavior from the President undermines journalistic integrity and raises concerns about the treatment of media professionals. This incident is part of a broader narrative regarding the relationship between Trump and the press, characterized by moments of hostility and confrontation.

As the discourse continues, the White House’s stance reflects a commitment to support the President’s approach, even as it draws condemnation from various quarters. The implications of such interactions resonate beyond the immediate incident, influencing public perception of both the President and the media landscape in the United States.