POLICY WIRE FACT CHECK: AI safety warnings aren’t only coming from the left, despite Trump’s dismissal
The Claim On September 22, 2026, during a speech at the United Nations General Assembly, former President Donald Trump made a viral claim suggesting that the same group of individuals who previously...
The Claim
On September 22, 2026, during a speech at the United Nations General Assembly, former President Donald Trump made a viral claim suggesting that the same group of individuals who previously warned about climate change and the “Russia hoax” were now sounding alarms about artificial intelligence (AI) dangers. He stated, The very same people who said we’ll all be dead in 12 years because of global warming… are the same people that are now saying that AI is going to kill us all. This statement was widely shared on social media, particularly on Truth Social, where Trump has been active in recent months.
Trump further equated AI fears with other issues he has dismissed as hoaxes, including the “Ukraine hoax” related to his 2019 impeachment. The claim gained traction after a researcher from Anthropic, Jacob Coxon, resigned in September 2026 citing existential threats from AI. Trump’s rhetoric implied a coordinated effort by a specific group—primarily Democrats—to push alarmist narratives across multiple issues, including climate change, the Russia investigation, and AI safety. This framing raised concerns about whether the claim was an intentional mischaracterization or an unintentional distortion of complex policy debates.
The Details & Investigation
Trump’s claim relies on a conflation of distinct issues and groups. While there may be some overlap between climate change advocates and AI safety proponents, the assertion that these groups are identical or part of a single, coordinated movement is misleading. Climate change is a well-documented scientific phenomenon, with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirming its reality and human-driven causes. The 2030 benchmark for climate action was not a prediction of mass human extinction, as Trump suggested, but rather a call to limit temperature rise to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.
The “Russia hoax” reference pertains to the Special Counsel investigation led by Robert Mueller into potential Russian interference in the 2016 election. While this investigation was initially criticized by Trump and his allies, it was conducted under his own administration, with then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusing himself and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointing Mueller. Similarly, the “Ukraine hoax” refers to Trump’s 2019 impeachment over his pressure on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to investigate Joe Biden. These events were not solely driven by Democrats, nor do they represent a unified political faction.
Regarding AI safety, the warnings come from a broad spectrum of experts, including industry leaders such as Dario Amodei of Anthropic, Sam Altman of OpenAI, Demis Hassabis of Google DeepMind, and Elon Musk of xAI. These voices span different ideological backgrounds and are not confined to any single political party. Additionally, lawmakers from both parties have introduced legislation addressing AI risks, such as the “AI Kill Switch Act” by Reps. Ted Lieu and Nathaniel Moran, and the proposed ban on artificial superintelligence by Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Greg Casar. Even conservative figures like Sen. Josh Hawley and Rep. Anna Paulina Luna have expressed concerns about AI’s potential dangers.
📄 POLICY WIRE WHITEPAPER PUBLISHED: PAKISTAN’S NATIONAL SECURITY POLICY PRIORITIES
While some individuals, such as those involved in the effective altruism movement, may advocate for both climate action and AI safety, this is not a monolithic group. Furthermore, the claim that AI safety warnings are solely from the left ignores the growing bipartisan concern about AI’s societal impact. A September 2026 Politico poll found that 70% of voters who supported Kamala Harris believed there was a risk of AI destroying humanity, compared to 61% of Trump supporters. This suggests that AI concerns are not exclusive to one side of the political spectrum.
Despite these facts, Trump’s statement appears to be a deliberate attempt to dismiss legitimate concerns about AI by associating them with past controversies he has criticized. This rhetorical strategy aligns with patterns of disinformation, where complex issues are oversimplified or misrepresented to undermine public trust in science and policy. However, the claim also contains elements of misinformation, as it inaccurately attributes the origin of AI warnings to a singular group, ignoring the diverse range of voices calling for caution and regulation.
The Verdict
Donald Trump’s claim that AI safety warnings are exclusively from the left, and that these same individuals are behind previous “hoaxes” like climate change and the Russia investigation, is largely false. While there may be some overlap in advocacy between certain groups, the assertion that AI concerns are confined to a single political faction is demonstrably inaccurate. AI safety warnings come from a wide array of experts, industry leaders, and lawmakers across the political spectrum, reflecting a genuine and growing public concern about the risks of advanced AI.
Furthermore, the claim misrepresents the nature of the “Russia” and “Ukraine” investigations, which were not solely driven by Democrats and did not constitute hoaxes. By conflating distinct issues and attributing them to a single, coordinated group, Trump’s statement represents a form of disinformation aimed at undermining the credibility of AI safety advocates. It also reflects a broader pattern of using misleading rhetoric to discredit scientific and policy concerns.
Counter-misinformation & disinformation investigation conducted by PolicyWire Editorial Desk (PW).
