On November 14, 2025, President Donald Trump once again ignited controversy aboard Air Force One by calling Bloomberg reporter Catherine Lucey “Quiet, piggy” after she pressed him with questions about newly released emails linking him to Jeffrey Epstein. The incident, which has since reverberated across the political spectrum and media landscape, has become a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over Trump’s treatment of women and the normalization of hostile rhetoric from the nation’s highest office.
The confrontation unfolded as Lucey, a seasoned White House correspondent, asked the president why he opposed releasing files related to Epstein, the convicted sex offender whose connections to powerful figures have fueled bipartisan demands for transparency. Trump, visibly irritated, pointed his finger at Lucey and snapped, “Quiet. Quiet, piggy,” according to multiple sources, including The Nightly and The Hill. The moment was captured by journalists on board and quickly made headlines, drawing sharp criticism and, perhaps predictably, some defenses from Trump’s allies.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt was quick to defend Trump’s choice of words. Speaking to reporters on November 20, she described the president’s comment as a hallmark of his direct communication style. “Look, the President is very frank, and honest with everyone in this room,” Leavitt asserted, as reported by The Nightly. “He gets frustrated with reporters when you lie about him, when you spread fake news about him and his administration. But he is also the most transparent President in history.” Leavitt went further, suggesting that Trump’s “frankness and openness” with the press was more respectful than what she characterized as the evasiveness of previous administrations. “I think everyone in this room should appreciate the frankness and the openness that you get from President Trump on a near daily basis,” she said.
Earlier in the week, the White House doubled down on its defense, with an official claiming—without offering evidence—that Lucey had behaved “in an inappropriate and unprofessional way towards her colleagues on the plane.” The official added, “If you’re going to give it, you have to be able to take.” This line of argument, critics say, is part of a broader pattern of excusing or minimizing the president’s repeated verbal attacks on female journalists.
Indeed, Trump’s history of sexist and demeaning remarks toward women in the press is well documented. The incident with Lucey echoes moments from his first presidential campaign, such as his infamous retort to Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly in 2015, when he said she had “blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever” after she questioned him on his record of insulting women. According to The Nightly and other outlets, these patterns have continued unabated into his second term.
The latest episode has not gone unchallenged, however. While many journalists and commentators have condemned the “Quiet, piggy” insult as both childish and misogynistic, political figures have been more circumspect. One notable exception came from Florida Representative Maria Elvira Salazar, who defended Trump’s behavior on CNN’s “The Lead” with Jake Tapper. “President Trump is a very picturesque and difficult and different type of politician. But I always say that I look at his policies and not at his personality,” Salazar said, as reported by The Hill. She added, “No one is perfect. Those who are perfect are in heaven.”
Others, however, see the incident as part of a dangerous trend. According to a Los Angeles Times analysis, Trump’s use of animal-based insults like “piggy” is more than just a personal quirk—it’s a political weapon. The article argues that such language is designed to dehumanize and belittle women, reinforcing what researchers call “hostile sexism.” Cynthia Miller-Idriss, founder of the Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab at American University, described hostile sexism as a “Trojan horse” for authoritarianism. “When women are disempowered, democracies crumble,” Miller-Idriss warned. She pointed to global examples where the erosion of women’s rights has preceded broader democratic backsliding, arguing that Trump’s rhetoric is a “warning sign, red flag, bell ringing” for potential trouble ahead.
Research from UC Davis cited by the Los Angeles Times supports this view, finding that individuals who endorse hostile sexist beliefs are significantly more likely to condone or even participate in political violence. The study also found that self-identified MAGA Republicans were especially prone to justifying political violence and holding beliefs aligned with hostility toward women. The article links this climate directly to Trump’s rhetoric, suggesting that his words have real-world consequences for both gender equality and the health of American democracy.
This normalization of misogynistic language, critics argue, has broader implications. “It’s just so normalized, you know?” Miller-Idriss noted, reflecting on the casual way Trump delivered his insult to Lucey. The concern, echoed by other analysts, is that such normalization not only degrades the status of women in public life but also erodes the foundational norms that underpin democratic societies.
The “Quiet, piggy” episode came just days after another contentious exchange between Trump and the press. During a meeting in the Oval Office with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Trump dismissed questions from ABC’s Mary Bruce about the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi—a killing that U.S. intelligence agencies have linked to the Crown Prince. “A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about. Whether you like him or didn’t like him, things happen, but (Mohammed) knew nothing about it,” Trump said, as reported by The Nightly. “And we can leave it at that. You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that.” This flippant response, coupled with the earlier insult to Lucey, has fueled concerns that the president’s approach to both press freedom and women’s dignity is fundamentally at odds with democratic values.
Meanwhile, bipartisan fervor over the Epstein files has only grown, with lawmakers from both parties expected to unite behind a bill to compel the release of the documents. The House Oversight Committee’s investigation into Epstein’s connections has become a rare point of agreement in an otherwise polarized Congress, underscoring the public’s demand for accountability and transparency in the wake of persistent rumors and allegations.
For many observers, the real danger lies not just in Trump’s words, but in the willingness of those around him—advisors, lawmakers, and supporters—to excuse, defend, or even celebrate his behavior. As the nation grapples with the fallout from yet another incendiary Trump moment, the question remains: At what point does the normalization of such rhetoric become a threat not just to individuals, but to the very fabric of American democracy?
In the end, the “Quiet, piggy” incident is more than just another headline. It is a litmus test for how the United States confronts questions of gender, power, and the boundaries of acceptable political discourse. The nation—and its leaders—will have to decide where, and if, they draw the line.
