#FactCheck - Misleading Video Misinterprets Trump’s Handling of Official Folder as Xi Jinping’s “Private Notebook”
Executive Summary
A video circulating on social media claims that during a summit in Beijing, Donald Trump was seen peeking into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s “private notebook” while Xi briefly stepped away. However, a fact-check by CyberPeace Research Wing found the claim to be baseless. A review of the full event footage clearly shows that the folder in question belonged to Donald Trump himself, not Xi Jinping. The viral interpretation is therefore misleading.
Claim
An X user shared the clip alleging, “Trump caught sneaking a peek at Xi Jinping’s private notebook during a Beijing banquet while Xi stepped away.”
Fact Check
A longer version of the video, shared by NBC News on May 14, shows the state banquet held at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing. Around the 1-minute-50-second mark, Xi Jinping, seated to Trump’s left, gets up and walks to the podium. The viral clip follows shortly after, showing Trump opening the folder placed to his left and flipping through its pages.
The White House also uploaded the full footage on its official YouTube channel, showing wider, uninterrupted shots of the event. Around the two-minute mark, the announcer says, “And now a toast by President Xi,” after which Xi Jinping stands up. Immediately after, Trump is seen opening the folder on his left and reading from it.
Later in the video, around the 12-minute mark, when Xi returns to his seat, Trump is seen standing up, taking the folder with him to the podium, turning pages, and reading from it. The same sequence can also be seen in the NBC News footage at around 11 minutes and 50 seconds. This clearly indicates that the folder belonged to the U.S. President and not Xi Jinping, and that Trump was not peeking into any private notebook. Another key detail is the embossed emblem on the folder, which closely resembles the Seal of the President of the United States. The American bald eagle, the national bird of the United States, is clearly visible at the centre. A comparison between the viral screenshot and the official seal shows they are nearly identical.
Conclusion
The viral claim is misleading and taken out of context. A detailed review of the full footage, including official recordings from NBC News and the White House, clearly shows that the folder in question belonged to Donald Trump and not Chinese President Xi Jinping. At multiple points in the video, Trump is seen opening, handling, and reading from the same folder, including while Xi Jinping is away from his seat and later after he returns. The visual evidence from the event also supports this conclusion. The embossed seal on the folder matches the official Seal of the President of the United States, further confirming that it was part of Trump’s official briefing material and not any private document belonging to Xi Jinping. Taken together, the full sequence of events and official video sources make it clear that the viral narrative has been incorrectly framed. There is no evidence to suggest that Trump was peeking into Xi Jinping’s personal notebook.
Related Blogs
Introduction
In the wake of the Spy Loan scandal, more than a dozen malicious loan apps were downloaded on Android phones from the Google Play Store, However, the number is significantly higher because they are also available on third-party marketplaces and questionable websites.
Unmasking the Scam
When a user borrows money, these predatory lending applications capture large quantities of information from their smartphone, which is then used to blackmail and force them into returning the total with hefty interest levels. While the loan amount is disbursed to users, these predatory loan apps request sensitive information by granting access to the camera, contacts, messages, logs, images, Wi-Fi network details, calendar information, and other personal information. These are then sent to loan shark servers.
The researchers have disclosed facts about the applications used by loan sharks to mislead consumers, as well as the numerous techniques used to circumvent some of the limitations imposed on the Play Store. Malware is often created with appealing user interfaces and promotes simple and rapid access to cash with high-interest payback conditions. The revelation of the Spy Loan scandal has triggered an immediate response from law enforcement agencies worldwide. There is an urgency to protect millions of users from becoming victims of malicious loan apps, it has become extremely important for law enforcement to unmask the culprits and dismantle the cyber-criminal network.
Aap’s banned: here is the list of the apps banned by Google Play Store :
- AA Kredit: इंस्टेंट लोन ऐप (com.aa.kredit.android)
- Amor Cash: Préstamos Sin Buró (com.amorcash.credito.prestamo)
- Oro Préstamo – Efectivo rápido (com.app.lo.go)
- Cashwow (com.cashwow.cow.eg)
- CrediBus Préstamos de crédito (com.dinero.profin.prestamo.credito.credit.credibus.loan.efectivo.cash)
- ยืมด้วยความมั่นใจ – ยืมด่วน (com.flashloan.wsft)
- PréstamosCrédito – GuayabaCash (com.guayaba.cash.okredito.mx.tala)
- Préstamos De Crédito-YumiCash (com.loan.cash.credit.tala.prestmo.fast.branch.mextamo)
- Go Crédito – de confianza (com.mlo.xango)
- Instantáneo Préstamo (com.mmp.optima)
- Cartera grande (com.mxolp.postloan)
- Rápido Crédito (com.okey.prestamo)
- Finupp Lending (com.shuiyiwenhua.gl)
- 4S Cash (com.swefjjghs.weejteop)
- TrueNaira – Online Loan (com.truenaira.cashloan.moneycredit)
- EasyCash (king.credit.ng)
- สินเชื่อปลอดภัย – สะดวก (com.sc.safe.credit)
Risks with several dimensions
SpyLoan's loan application violates Google's Financial Services policy by unilaterally shortening the repayment period for personal loans to a few days or any other arbitrary time frame. Additionally, the company threatens users with public embarrassment and exposure if they do not comply with such unreasonable demands.
Furthermore, the privacy rules presented by SpyLoan are misleading. While ostensibly reasonable justifications are provided for obtaining certain permissions, they are very intrusive practices. For instance, camera permission is ostensibly required for picture data uploads for Know Your Customer (KYC) purposes, and access to the user's calendar is ostensibly required to plan payment dates and reminders. However, both of these permissions are dangerous and can potentially infringe on users' privacy.
Prosecution Strategies and Legal Framework
The law enforcement agencies and legal authorities initiated prosecution strategies against the individuals who are involved in the Spy Loan Scandal, this multifaced approach involves international agreements and the exploration of innovative legal avenues. Agencies need to collaborate with International agencies to work on specific cyber-crime, leveraging the legal frameworks against digital fraud furthermore, the cross-border nature of the spy loan operation requires a strong legal framework to exchange information, extradition requests, and the pursuit of legal actions across multiple jurisdictions.
Legal Protections for Victims: Seeking Compensation and Restitution
As the legal battle unfolds in the aftermath of the Spy loan scam the focus shifts towards the victims, who suffer financial loss from such fraudulent apps. Beyond prosecuting culprits, the pursuit of justice should involve legal safeguards for victims. Existing consumer protection laws serve as a crucial shield for Spy Loan victims. These laws are designed to safeguard the rights of individuals against unfair practices.
Challenges in legal representation
As the legal hunt for justice in the Spy Loan scam progresses, it encounters challenges that demand careful navigation and strategic solutions. One of the primary obstacles in the legal pursuit of the Spy loan app lies in the jurisdictional complexities. Within the national borders, it’s quite challenging to define the jurisdiction that holds the authority, and a unified approach in prosecuting the offenders in various regions with the efforts of various government agencies.
Concealing the digital identities
One of the major challenges faced is the anonymity afforded by the digital realm poses a challenge in identifying and catching the perpetrators of the scam, the scammers conceal their identity and make it difficult for law enforcement agencies to attribute to actions against the individuals, this challenge can be overcome by joint effort by international agencies and using the advance digital forensics and use of edge cutting technology to unmask these scammers.
Technological challenges
The nature of cyber threats and crime patterns are changing day by day as technology advances this has become a challenge for legal authorities, the scammers explore vulnerabilities, making it essential, for law enforcement agencies to be a step ahead, which requires continuous training of cybercrime and cyber security.
Shaping the policies to prevent future fraud
As the scam unfolds, it has become really important to empower users by creating more and more awareness campaigns. The developers of the apps need to have a transparent approach to users.
Conclusion
It is really important to shape the policies to prevent future cyber frauds with a multifaced approach. Proposals for legislative amendments, international collaboration, accountability measures, technology protections, and public awareness programs all contribute to the creation of a legal framework that is proactive, flexible, and robust to cybercriminals' shifting techniques. The legal system is at the forefront of this effort, playing a critical role in developing regulations that will protect the digital landscape for years to come.
Safeguarding against spyware threats like SpyLoan requires vigilance and adherence to best practices. Users should exclusively download apps from official sources, meticulously verify the authenticity of offerings, scrutinize reviews, and carefully assess permissions before installation.
References
Executive Summary
A video showing thick smoke rising from a building and people running in panic is being shared on social media. The video is being circulated with the claim that it shows Iran launching a missile attack on the United States.CyberPeace’s research found the claim to be misleading. Our probe revealed that the video is not related to any recent incident. The viral clip is actually from the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in the United States and is being falsely shared as footage of an alleged Iranian missile strike on the US.
Claim:
An Instagram user shared the video claiming, “Iran has attacked a US airbase in Qatar. Iran has fired six ballistic missiles at the Al Udeid Airbase in Qatar. Al Udeid Airbase is the largest US military base in West Asia.”
Links to the post and its archived version are provided below.
Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we extracted key frames from the viral video and ran a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the search, we found visuals matching the viral clip in a report published by Wion on September 11, 2021. The report, titled “In pics | A look back at the scenes from the 9/11 attacks,” included an image that closely resembled the visuals seen in the viral video. The caption of the image stated that it was a file photo from September 11, 2001, showing pedestrians running as one of the World Trade Center towers collapsed in New York City.
Further research led us to the same footage on the YouTube channel CBS 8 San Diego. At the 01:11 timestamp of the video, visuals matching the viral clip can be clearly seen.
We also found an Al Jazeera report dated June 23, 2025, which confirmed that Iran had attacked US forces stationed at the Al Udeid airbase in Qatar in retaliation for US strikes on Iran’s uclear facilities. However, the visuals used in the viral video do not correspond to this incident.
Conclusion
The viral video does not show a recent Iranian attack on a US airbase in Qatar. The clip actually dates back to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in the United States. Old 9/11 footage has been falsely shared with a misleading claim linking it to Iran’s alleged missile strike on the US.
The European Union (EU) has made trailblazing efforts regarding protection and privacy, coming up with the most comprehensive and detailed regulation called the GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation). As countries worldwide continue to grapple with setting their laws, the EU is already taking on issues with tech giants and focusing on the road ahead. Its contentious issues with Meta and the launch of Meta’s AI assistant in the EU are thus seen as a complex process, shaped by stringent data privacy regulations, ongoing debates over copyright, and ethical AI practices. This development is considered important as previously, the EU and Meta have had issues (including fines and and also received a pushback concerning its services), which broadly include data privacy regarding compliance with GDPR, antitrust law concerns- targeting ads, facebook marketplace activities and content moderation with respect to the spread of misinformation.
Privacy and Data Protection Concerns
A significant part of operating Large Language Models (LLMs) is the need to train them with a repository of data/ plausible answers from which they can source. If it doesn’t find relevant information or the request is out of its scope, programmed to answer, it shall continue to follow orders, but with a reduction in the accuracy of its response. Meta's initial plans to train its AI models using publicly available content from adult users in the EU received a setback from privacy regulators. The Irish Data Protection Commission (DPC), acting as Meta's lead privacy regulator in Europe, raised the issue and requested a delay in the rollout to assess its compliance with GDPR. It has also raised similar concerns with Grok, the AI tool of X, to assess whether the EU users’ data was lawfully processed for training it.
In response, Meta stalled the release of this feature for around a year and agreed to exclude private messages and data from users under the age of 18 and implemented an opt-out mechanism for users who do not wish their public data to be used for AI training. This approach aligns with GDPR requirements, which mandate a clear legal basis for processing personal data, such as obtaining explicit consent or demonstrating legitimate interest, along with the option of removal of consent at a later stage, as the user wishes. The version/service available at the moment is a text-based assistant which is not capable of things like image generation, but can provide services and assistance which include brainstorming, planning, and answering queries from web-based information. However, Meta has assured its users of expansion and exploration regarding the AI features in the near future as it continues to cooperate with the regulators.
Regulatory Environment and Strategic Decisions
The EU's regulatory landscape, characterised by the GDPR and the forthcoming AI Act, presents challenges for tech companies like Meta. Citing the "unpredictable nature" of EU regulations, Meta has decided not to release its multimodal Llama AI model—capable of processing text, images, audio, and video—in the EU. This decision underscores the tension between innovation and regulatory compliance, as companies navigate the complexities of deploying advanced AI technologies within strict legal frameworks.
Implications and Future Outlook
Meta's experience highlights the broader challenges faced by AI developers operating in jurisdictions with robust data protection laws. The most critical issue that remains for now is to strike a balance between leveraging user data for AI advancement while respecting individual privacy rights.. As the EU continues to refine its regulatory approach to AI, companies need to adapt their strategies to ensure compliance while fostering innovation. Stringent measures and regular assessment also keep in check the accountability of big tech companies as they make for profit as well as for the public.
Reference:
- https://thehackernews.com/2025/04/meta-resumes-eu-ai-training-using.html
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/meta-to-train-ai-models-on-european-users-public-data/article69451271.ece
- https://about.fb.com/news/2025/04/making-ai-work-harder-for-europeans/
- https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/15/meta_resume_ai_training_eu_user_posts/
- https://noyb.eu/en/twitters-ai-plans-hit-9-more-gdpr-complaints
- https://www.businesstoday.in/technology/news/story/meta-ai-finally-comes-to-europe-after-a-year-long-delay-but-with-some-limitations-468809-2025-03-21
- https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-13/meta-opens-facebook-marketplace-to-rivals-in-eu-antitrust-clash
- https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/22/business/meta-facebook-eu-privacy-fine.html#:~:text=Many%20civil%20society%20groups%20and,million%20for%20a%20data%20leak.
- https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_5801
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/european-union-accuses-facebook-owner-meta-of-breaking-digital-rules-with-paid-ad-free-option/article68358039.ece
- https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/14/ireland_investigation_into_x/
- https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/18/24201041/meta-multimodal-llama-ai-model-launch-eu-regulations?utm_source=chatgpt.com
- https://www.axios.com/2024/07/17/meta-future-multimodal-ai-models-eu?utm_source=chatgpt.com
