Honestly, if you’ve been following the news lately, it feels like every other week there’s a new chapter in the ongoing saga between Donald Trump and ABC News. It’s a relationship that’s basically a masterclass in high-stakes friction. One day they're coordinating a massive presidential debate that pulls in tens of millions of viewers, and the next, they’re facing off in a Florida courtroom over a multi-million dollar defamation settlement.
If you're trying to keep track of the twists, you aren't alone. It’s a lot. Between the "hot mic" drama of the 2024 debates and the recent $15 million settlement involving George Stephanopoulos, the tension between the Trump administration and the network has reached a boiling point. But what’s actually going on under the surface? It’s not just about "fake news" tweets anymore; it’s about legal precedents, massive financial payouts, and the future of how the White House interacts with the press.
The $15 Million Settlement That Shook the Industry
Let’s talk about the elephant in the room first. Recently, ABC News did something that a lot of media experts thought they'd never do: they settled. And they didn't just settle for a small "go away" amount. We are talking about a $15 million "charitable contribution" directed toward Donald Trump’s future presidential library and museum.
Why did this happen? It all stems back to an interview George Stephanopoulos did with Representative Nancy Mace. During that segment, Stephanopoulos repeatedly stated that Trump had been found "liable for rape" in the civil case involving writer E. Jean Carroll.
Now, here’s where the nuance matters. The jury in that New York civil case did find Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation. However, they specifically did not find him liable for "rape" as defined under New York’s very specific penal code. While Judge Lewis Kaplan later clarified that the conduct in question would be considered rape in many other jurisdictions and "common parlance," the legal distinction was enough for Trump’s legal team to pounce.
They argued that Stephanopoulos spoke with "actual malice" or reckless disregard for the truth. For a while, ABC looked like they were going to fight it. Then, suddenly, a judge ordered both Trump and Stephanopoulos to sit for depositions. Within days, the settlement was announced.
💡 You might also like: Michigan Breaking News Today Live Shooting: What Really Happened
It’s a huge win for Trump’s team. Not only did they get the $15 million for the library, but they also got $1 million in legal fees covered and a formal "editor's note" on the ABC website expressing regret. For many in the media world, this felt like a "chilling effect" moment. If a major network like ABC—backed by the deep pockets of Disney—is willing to settle rather than go to trial, what does that mean for smaller outlets?
The Debate Stage: Where the Feud Went Global
You can't talk about Trump and ABC News without mentioning that September 2024 debate. Remember that? It was the first time Trump faced off against Kamala Harris, and the moderators, David Muir and Linsey Davis, were immediately thrust into the center of a firestorm.
Trump’s supporters were furious. They felt the "real-time fact-checking" was one-sided. Every time Trump made a claim—like the infamous (and debunked) assertion about pets in Springfield, Ohio—the moderators jumped in to correct the record. Meanwhile, critics of the former president argued that ABC was finally doing its job by not letting falsehoods hang in the air.
The aftermath was predictable but intense. Trump took to Truth Social, calling it a "three-on-one" fight and suggesting that ABC’s broadcast license should be revoked. It wasn't just typical campaign trail rhetoric; it was a fundamental breakdown in the "rules of engagement" between a candidate and a major network.
Licenses and Threats: Is the FCC Actually Involved?
Fast forward to 2026, and the rhetoric has shifted from complaints to actual policy threats. Trump has recently doubled down on the idea that networks like ABC and NBC should have their broadcast licenses reviewed or even revoked for what he calls "partisan" coverage.
🔗 Read more: Will We Know Who the President Is Tonight? Why the Answer Is Kinda Complicated
- The Reality of Licensing: Most people don't realize that the FCC doesn't actually license "networks." They license individual local stations.
- The "Carr" Factor: FCC Chairman Brendan Carr, a Trump appointee, has been much more vocal about holding big tech and media companies "accountable."
- The "Concast" Nickname: Trump has been using the nickname "Concast" for NBC’s parent company, but he’s lumped ABC into the same bucket, calling them "Fake News ABC" and a "political pawn" for the opposition.
Is a license revocation actually going to happen? Probably not. The legal hurdles are insane. But the threat is often the point. It puts networks on the defensive. We’ve already seen Paramount/CBS settle a similar suit for $16 million regarding a 60 Minutes interview. It looks like a pattern is emerging: sue, pressure the parent company, and wait for a settlement that funds a presidential library.
The Kimmel Conflict: Entertainment Meets Politics
It's not just the news division, either. The friction has bled into ABC’s entertainment wing, specifically with Jimmy Kimmel Live!. In late 2025, there was a brief but wild period where Kimmel’s show was actually suspended.
The details were a bit murky, but it reportedly involved a segment that the administration claimed was spreading dangerous misinformation. FCC Chairman Carr even hinted that the agency had a "strong case" against ABC and Disney. Kimmel was back on the air within days after "thoughtful conversations" between the network and the White House, but the message was clear: no part of the network is "off-limits."
Why This Matters for You
You might think, "Okay, billionaires and TV stars are fighting. Why do I care?"
Basically, it changes how you get your information. When news organizations are afraid of $15 million lawsuits, they might become "softer" in their questioning. They might hesitate to fact-check in real-time. On the flip side, if you feel the media has been unfair for years, you might see these settlements as a long-overdue "correction."
✨ Don't miss: What Really Happened With Did the United States Just Bomb Iran: Separating Fact from Social Media Chaos
There’s also the money. These settlements aren't coming out of thin air; they’re coming from the budgets of the companies that provide your news and entertainment.
What’s Next? Actionable Insights
So, what should you keep an eye on as this moves forward?
- Watch the "Editor’s Notes": Look at how ABC and other networks are phrasing their corrections. Are they becoming more cautious? A shift in tone often signals a shift in legal strategy behind the scenes.
- Follow the Library Funding: Keep an eye on the development of the Trump Presidential Library. These "settlements" are essentially acting as a primary funding source for a massive historical project.
- Monitor the FCC: Watch Chairman Brendan Carr. If the FCC actually starts changing the rules for how local station licenses are renewed, that’s when the "license revocation" talk moves from a Truth Social post to a reality.
- Diversify Your Feed: Honestly, the best way to deal with the "war" between the White House and the networks is to read the same story from three different places. If ABC says one thing and a different outlet says another, the truth is usually somewhere in the middle.
The battle between Trump and ABC News isn't going away anytime soon. It’s a foundational shift in how the American government and the American media interact. Whether you see it as a "war on the press" or "accountability for the media," one thing is for sure: the old rules are officially out the window.
Stay tuned, because if history is any indication, the next lawsuit is probably already being drafted.
Next Steps for Readers:
- Check the FCC’s public filings for any new petitions regarding broadcast licenses.
- Review the specific language of the E. Jean Carroll verdict to understand the "sexual abuse" vs. "rape" distinction that led to the $15 million settlement.
- Compare the moderation styles of recent debates to see if networks are pulling back on real-time fact-checking.