Did White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt "end up exposing herself on live national TV" after NBC News correspondent Garrett Haake dramatically sought to "correct the record" during a briefing? No, that's not entirely true: In March 2025, Haake did briefly fact-check Leavitt's description of a federal judge as an Obama appointee. However, a widely-shared June 2025 blog post exaggerated the intensity of the exchange between the two, and fabricated certain quotations attributed to Haake.
The dramatized account appeared in a June 29, 2025, blog post with the title "Karoline Leavitt stood at the White House podium, ready to attack a federal judge -- but NBC's Garrett Haake shattered her confidence with just one fact."
The post read:
"Karoline Leavitt Tried to Embarrass a Federal Judge -- But Ended Up Exposing Herself on Live National TV"
"That's just not true, Karoline."
The words didn't come from a rival politician or a liberal commentator.
They came from a journalist. Calm. Controlled.
And in that moment -- under the bright lights of the White House Press Briefing Room -- Karoline Leavitt blinked. Just once. But it was all anyone watching needed to know:
She had just been caught.
Live.
With cameras rolling.
And there was no spinning her way out...."Judge James Boasberg," she began, voice thick with disdain, "is a Democrat activist judge appointed by Barack Obama. His wife, by the way, has donated over $10,000 to Democrat candidates. So let's not pretend this ruling was neutral."
In that sentence, Karoline did what she was trained to do: cast doubt, assign partisanship, paint anyone who ruled against the administration as corrupt.
What she didn't count on... was that someone in that room had done their homework.
THE INTERRUPTION THAT STOPPED THE ROOM
Garrett Haake, senior correspondent for NBC News, wasn't known for theatrics.
But this time, he raised his hand calmly -- then spoke before she could call on him.
"Karoline, I have to correct the record here."
His tone wasn't combative. It was surgical. Almost... disappointed.
"Judge Boasberg was originally appointed by President George W. Bush. Obama elevated him later, yes -- but he wasn't an Obama appointee."
A pause. Then he added, "If we're going to question judges' integrity, let's at least get the facts right."
The story was based on a real incident, on March 19, 2025, when Haake briefly corrected Leavitt's claim that Judge James Boasberg had been appointed by President Barack Obama. However, it's a dramatized account of what really happened, and includes remarks which Haake never actually made.
The exchange can be watched in full below, and a transcript of the most relevant section follows:
Haake: ...Will those flights to El Salvador continue while this case is being appealed?
Leavitt: We don't have any flights planned specifically, but we will continue with the mass deportations, and I would just like to point out that the judge in this case is essentially trying to say that the president doesn't have the executive authority to deport foreign terrorists from our American soil. That is an egregious abuse of the bench. This judge does not have that authority, it is the opinion of this White House and of this administration, and that's why we're fighting it in court. And it's very very clear that this is an activist judge who is trying to usurp the president's authority. Under the Alien Enemies Act, the president has this power and that's why this deportation campaign has continued. And this judge, Judge Boasberg, is a Democrat activist. He was appointed by Barack Obama, his wife has donated more than $10,000 to Democrats, and he has consistently shown his distain for this president and his policies, and it's unacceptable.
Haake: You took me right where I wanted to go about the idea that these people are all foreign terrorists, but Judge Boasberg was originally appointed by George W. Bush, and then elevated by Barack Obama. I just feel like I should clear that up --
Leavitt: Well let me just say something to that effect, Garrett. 67 percent of all of the injunctions in this century have come against which president? Donald J. Trump. Let me say that again: 60 percent of injunctions by partisan activists in the judicial branch have come against President Donald Trump. And 92 percent of those have been from Democrat-appointed judges. This is a clear, concerted effort by leftists who don't like this president and are trying to slow down his agenda.
Haake: So given that, do you think it's a good use of Congress's time and the president's political capital, to try to impeach and remove a federal judge, which would take 67 votes you're unlikely to get in the Senate?
Leavitt: Well look, the president has made it clear that he believes this judge in this case should be impeached, and he has also made it clear that he has great respect for the Chief Justice John Roberts, and it's incumbent upon the Supreme Court to reign in these activist judges. These partisan activists are undermining the judicial branch by doing so. We have co-equal branches of government for a reason, and the president feels very strongly about that.
That brought an end to the exchange between Haake and Leavitt, and at no time did Haake say "Karoline, I have to correct the record here", or "If we're going to question judges' integrity, let's at least get the facts right". Nor did Haake make those remarks later on in the press briefing.
Read more
For previous Lead Stories debunks about Karoline Leavitt, click here.
