A story that set social media ablaze: an American general allegedly refused to hand Donald Trump the nuclear codes during the Iran crisis. The White House categorically denies it. But does the story matter even if it isn't true?

The narrative comes from Larry Johnson, a former CIA officer, who claimed on the "Judging Freedom" podcast that at the White House meeting on April 18, General Dan Caine, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, refused the president's order. Footage of the general walking through the White House grounds with his head bowed was presented as "evidence."

Facts versus narratives

No credible media outlet or government official has confirmed that Trump requested activation of the nuclear arsenal. Even Republican Senator Tom Tillis said he would "need confirmation from multiple sources" before even commenting.

The very structure of America's nuclear command refutes the dramatic scenario. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is an advisor, not an operational commander. A legally issued presidential order must be executed - it can't simply be refused at a meeting. Such a thing would be an unprecedented constitutional crisis.

As for Johnson's credibility: the former CIA officer regularly appears on Russian state media and promotes pro-Kremlin narratives. In 2017, he made unfounded claims about British intelligence - claims both London and Washington rejected.

The story is a textbook example of how disinformation works: take a real event (the April 18 meeting), add drama (nuclear codes), push it through a supposed "insider" - and let the internet do the rest. Does it matter that it's unconfirmed? For the millions who've already shared it - not at all.