Trump claims his uncle taught the Unabomber, offers no evidence to support claim - ABC News
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Kaczynski never attended MIT where John Trump taught, the school said.
ByIvan PereiraJuly 17, 2025, 3:32 PM
President Donald Trump raised eyebrows this week when he claimed his uncle, John Trump, taught the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski.
However, there is no evidence that Kaczynski, one of the most infamous domestic terrorists in American history, had ever been in a classroom with the president's uncle despite his boasting.
Trump made the claim during one of many off-the-cuff moments Tuesday afternoon at a roundtable with business leaders in Pittsburgh, where he touted tech and brought up his uncle, who taught electrical engineering at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology for 37 years.
"Kaczynski was one of his students," Trump claimed. "Do you know who Kaczynski was?"
MORE: How the Unabomber evaded capture for nearly 20 years, and became America's 'most prolific bomber'
Kaczynski was once one of the most wanted domestic terrorists for his letter bombing campaigns between 1978 and 1995, where he killed three people and wounded 23 others. Kaczynski was a math prodigy and earned degrees at Harvard and the University of Michigan before he became a recluse and went uncaptured for 17 years.
Mugshot of Ted Kaczynski, identidentified as the domestic terrorist known as the Unabomber, April 1996.Bureau of Prisons/Getty Images
He was arrested in 1996 after his brother deduced he was the anonymous Unabomber and contacted the FBI. Kaczynski, who had sent writings expressing anti-technology beliefs before his arrest, pleaded guilty and was sentenced to life in prison. He took his own life in prison in 2023.
A spokesperson for MIT told ABC News in a statement Thursday that the school has "no enrollment record or information that Ted Kaczynski ever attended MIT." The spokesperson added that the school creates enrollment records for students who cross enrolled from another school for a MIT program or class.
The school said in the past that Kaczynski was accepted to the school in 1958, but he rejected their offer.
MORE: Unabomber Ted Kaczynski dies by possible suicide in prison: Source
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was asked about Trump's claims during a news briefing Thursday, but she did not answer. Instead, she touted John Trump's tenure at MIT and took another question.
Trump, however, claimed during the roundtable that his uncle noticed the Unabomber's strange characteristics while at MIT.
President Donald Trump shakes hands with Senator Dave McCormick at the Pennsylvania Energy and Innovation Summit, at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, July 15, 2025.Nathan Howard/Reuters
"There is very little difference between a madman and a genius. But Kaczynski … I said, 'What kind of a student was he, Uncle John? Dr. John Trump, what kind of student?'….He said, 'Seriously? Good.' He would go around correcting everybody.' But it didn't work out too well," Trump claimed.
John Trump died in 1985, long before Kaczynski was identified as the Unabomber or in the public discourse.
Tags
Who is online
102 visitors
This is a weird one. Private fantasy? Spur of the moment delusion?
Other than the fact that John Trump did teach at MIT, no part of this story is true.
Wonder if it's something in the White House? I recall Biden often doing the same thing. Or maybe it's just a part of being a politician? This seems to be fairly common among them, or at least, not rare.
You may be 'on' to something: This nation needs to end electing (mature) elderly people for high office. Because it is clearly not working out, in general. Sadly, all such people will fall short during their term or several.
trump's maga hat is too tight ...
Just because there is no evidence, doesn't mean it couldn't be true.
Right now, the President is enjoying a very successful first 6 months in office. I am glad we established that John Trump taught at MIT. I'm not too concerned with who his students were. I'll check back for updates.
John Trump was dead long before Trump knew the name Ted Kaczynski. On that basis alone the chances of Trump asking his uncle what kind of student he was are about 100 million to 1.
Except that is the basis of trumps claim. He lies like the rest of us draw breath.
There is evidence. There is loads of evidence that it’s not true. The evidence shows that it’s impossible.
Welcome to the club. No one cared before a couple days ago. But then the president decided to invent and disseminate this elaborate tale about the old man teaching the Unabomber, and the whole thing is impossible. It’s 100% a fantasy.
When it’s the president, it’s fair to ask what the hell is going on with him.
MAGA supporters do not care about evidence (it's for Spinning-anyway). Trump is 'owning' the libs for them; driving down (and out) liberal policies 'in droves.' That is all they see and what they VOTED to see happen. Rightly or wrongly. They know it and so does Trump.
Trump is the ONLY jerk big enough for the job they want him to accomplish and so they could not be happier with him. They don't give a damn about his jerkiness or his greed. These are par for the course to them getting what they want in policy: a severely limited federal government so they can run their state-controlled institutions without federal oversight and control what these states' citizens are able to read, hear, and above all be informed.
[✘]
Then show it!
Can't be TDS when Trump is obsessed with liberals and secularists, but my comment must have struck (a) nerve.
It’s in the article, man. Just read.
Trump claimed that his uncle told the story of teaching Ted Kaczynski - the Unabomber - at MIT.
That’s impossible because his uncle died in 1985 - 12 years before anyone knew the identity of the Unabomber. He could not possibly have known that any of his students - or anyone else, for that matter - was the Unabomber.
It’s also impossible because the notorious Kaczynski is very well known and studied, and we know where he went to college. It wasn’t MIT - ever.
Pathetic. What we have here is an example of people who make up their minds without looking at the material.
There ya go!
Btw Kaczynski was accepted at MIT, but he went elsewhere.
Yes. This is the point.
That is your point.
My point is that most politicians tend to lie at some point, but it is irrelevant to policy. That is what makes politics so important. It effects the quality of life. I would vote for Donald Trump every day of the week and twice on Sunday based on what he has done for us and what the democrats have done to us.
sometimes you just have to beat the truth into someone's head
You mean like "Biden is doing fine"?
Or "the economy is doing great under Biden"?
Or "inflation is transitory"?
Or "they are asylum seekers trying to make their lives better"
Pointing out a denial isn’t striking a nerve. It is pointing out the obvious.
Or Hunter Bidens laptop is not real
Joe Biden insulted New Guinea by falsely claiming his uncle was eaten by cannibals. This story won’t create an international incident
Or that his son Beau died in Iraq. Bidens lies are copious.
No, your point was that it might be true and you were demanding evidence. I perceive a similar honesty trend (or rather, lack thereof) between you and your orange messiah.
As someone who typically has to provide evidence of things that are common knowledge, I expect others here to do the same.
Finally, it's plain MAGA supporters like being excessively aggressive with their fellow citizens to get what they want This admission should be noted by all whom read it.
I see somebody is back from making the 'rounds' with another less than pithy reply!
My original comment stands! A shock to the "nervous" system.
Even though that evidence was already in the story. And then your reaction was that it's totally fine that your president is a liar.
The President has been a great success. I'm getting what I voted for.
Nope, once again, the obvious is never a shock. Unless as noted, one is in denial. And I beg your pardon. My comment is full of pith ….. and some vinegar. Pith and vinegar for my friends on left. Always!
Exactly. I wonder how many “moderates” on the left got what they voted for from self appointed “moderate” Biden. Any honest people left here?
Trump, like Biden before him is a serial exaggerator. Don’t think either is really a liar per se. They are just both, very impressed with themselves
No doubt.
Joe Biden spent a lifetime being full of shit. I have said so many times. But he’s not president right now, and isn’t spewing any bullshit today. Trump is. People of any political affiliation should be able to call out bullshit when it happens without resorting to “oh but this other guy lied too.”
Don't bother begging me, make substantial comments and I will agree with you. Otherwise, we spent a great deal of time digressing. That serves NOONE in this discussion well.
Trump lied about knowledge of "Project 25" as he begin immediate implementation of it policies January 20th, his presidential inaugural day. That is bold-face lying to the public, Sparty On.
Is that what you think I just did? Interesting.
Lol …. Begging? Wow!
You know, if you really wanted to, you could have a regular conversation. Discuss the topic, clarify your position, and so on. Or you could just troll and say shit like, “interesting.” The choice you made is not interesting - at all.
My comment stands. That you misrepresented it stands as well.
Nobody is stopping you from explaining yourself.
And no one is stopping you from properly representing others comments. This NT two step you are attempting here, is just sad.
No "wow" factor here. Want to improve discussion? Be participants, plural, wishing for more than shallow disagreements and negativity as it will increase the "wow" factor!
Yeah, I still don’t know what you’re talking about, but if you’re sad, maybe go have a good cry.
Awww, if only you were always so considerate …. Then we’d be cooking with gas
A lying sack of shit who likes to see little girls unclothed, who likes to sexually abuse women, and who wants the entirety of the nation to bow before him, amongst many other stellar /s characteristics?
Nobody should ever expect the truth from Trump. He has demonstrated over and over ad nauseum throughout his life that the truth simply isn't part of his mental makeup.
Lately there are signs that Donald Trump is becoming senile.
All the more reason IMO why the investigation into Joe Biden's decline needs to be brought to conclusion. If they can show that the staff, VP and Cabinet members knew and hid the issue, it shows that the 25th Amendment needs to be revised. As it sits now, the 25th Amendment can only be initiated if the VP and a majority of the Cabinet agree that the President can no longer discharge the powers and duties of the office. Congress can only become involved after that.
This does raise the risk of a Constitutional Crisis but which would be worse? Bringing charges against Harris and the Cabinet members and WH staff who knew and hid the information in order to run the country themselves, or a repeat of the issue where the sitting President is mentally unstable and brings harm to the country thru his actions?
Even if the president was impaired in some way - and the VP or anyone else in the Cabinet held the opinion that he was impaired - failing to act on that opinion is not a crime. And it would only be an opinion. There is no objective standard.
No, you completely missed my point. I never said there was any crime in the VP and Cabinet not performing their duties under the 25th if they should have. What I said is that the episode with Biden needs to be fully investigated so that it can aid in amending the 25th Amendment to allow Congress to start the process if the VP and Cabinet fail to do so. The way the process is now, Congress is only involved after the VP & Cabinet invoke the 25th and both houses must vote with a 2/3 majority in both. That vote should remain, it should remain a high bar to remove a sitting President. But it was obvious that Biden had cognitive issues. Trump is currently 79 years old, there really is no guarantee that he will remain able to perform the duties for the next 3.5 years. Do we really want a repeat where the White House insiders hide the issue and run the country themselves? (Which I believe is a crime itself.)
You raise a good point. How would we solve it, though? Back in 2021, Dems were throwing out the idea we needed to invoke the 25th to remove Trump. Imagine if they had control of both houses back then and they got to initiate the proceedings. The way the country is now, how could we possibly set up an impartial whatever to properly ensure a true and honest invocation of the 25th?
Also, I can think of another way for the 25th to go wrong. Right now, Trump is on a roll. Suppose a year from now he messes up so badly he's a liability? Would it be unimaginable that his cabinet, along with Vance, decide to try the 25th and install Vance? If the Republicans were mad enough at Trump, they could go along with it, whether he's mentally unfit or not. Or is that just too Machiavellian?
Also, I wonder if the Dems would be happier with Vance?
Yes, the partisanship bias that Washington works under could definitely toss a wrench into the mix. That's why I would not eliminate the 2/3rd vote requirement from both House and Senate to actually remove the sitting President under the 25th. I would think that any attempt by Congress to invoke the 25th would require a majority vote in both House and Senate to get it started. By having a majority vote in both houses, it would lessen (I think) the appearance of impeachment.
Yeah, there's really nothing stopping that from occurring now except for the blind obedience to party over country exhibited in Washington by both sides. To paraphrase a t-shirt, "Machiavellian. It's not just a word, it's a life style!"
Good example of a Hobson's choice.
Maybe, maybe not. Republicans talk about how we should have removed Biden, without seeming to consider whether or not Harris was a better option. And this kind of thing is problematic in a couple ways. On policy, the VP may be worse than the extant president. But also, it sets them up in the presidency as a kind of incumbent for the next election. Do it early enough in the term, and it could greatly advantage that person in the next election.
So for example, if Biden had been removed in 2022 or 23, it might have been much easier for Harris to beat Trump.
Of course, this is not how I prefer to conceptualize the matter. I’d rather do what’s best for the country, as a whole. But politicians will absolutely view this as a strategic issue for their party.
Not sure what Republicans though of that, to be honest or whether they even did. For myself, I don't think anything would have changed much as far as the administration went.
You know, I was actually thinking that when Biden was running. Only, I wasn't expecting anything as drastic as the 25th. I just had a suspicion he'd just step down for medical reasons or something and Harris would be president. Sort of backdoor her in.
You pretty much nailed it. It's why I don't trust either side. Each side, Democrats or Republicans, are first and foremost for their party. They aren't even for everyday Americans as second place. Each wants to impose their own goals as second, and we only count as chips in their game.
Campaign donors are probably second, every day Americans are an afterthought at best.
Speak for yourself! I am not beholden to either party, although I have major problems with the lying GOP!
I wonder if his uncle knew Corn Pop?
Thank god, I thought trump was going to tell us his uncle got eaten by cannibals.