News

Trump Distorts Violent Crime Statistics in Ordering Takeover and Troops to D.C.

FactCheck.org · Alan Jaffe and Lori Robertson · last updated

President Donald Trump inaccurately claimed that the murder rate in Washington, D.C., “reached the highest rate probably ever” in 2023, and he ignored a decline in murders since then to justify a federal takeover of the city’s law enforcement.

In declaring a “crime emergency” in Washington, Trump wrongly claimed at an Aug. 11 press conference, “Murders in 2023 reached the highest rate probably ever. They say 25 years, but they don’t know what that means because it just goes back 25 years.”

Trump signed an executive order to take federal control of the Metropolitan Police Department for at least 30 days and issued a memo to deploy District of Columbia National Guard troops.

The city’s murder rate did increase in 2023 to the highest rate in 20 years, but it wasn’t the highest ever. And murders have decreased since.

Related Knowledge Center: Democracy and politics

State of Play

News organizations are scrambling to find a coverage approach that adequately informs the American public about the country’s slide from democracy to authoritarian rule.

The White House vs. the press


More informationabout Democracy and politics

Related Knowledge Center: Information integrity

State of Play

In an increasingly fractured media landscape, truth has been a casualty in the public discussion. Coverage has been warped by the business needs of struggling news organizations, and a significant segment of the public relies on bad-faith outlets that are little more than propagandists. While fact-checking has become routine, some organizations are exploring other ways to combat the trends. And misinformation spewed by AI-driven chatbots has become more of a feature than simply a bug. 

Fact-checking and its detractors


More informationabout Information integrity

Related Knowledge Center: Fact-checking and its detractors

State of Play

Fact-checking has become a familiar tool for political reporters to hold office-holders and candidates accountable. But critics ask if fact-checkers sometimes miss the forest for the trees, and if the practice often struggles with false equivalency the way conventional political coverage does.

Information integrity


More informationabout Fact-checking and its detractors