Trump Discusses Potential Oil-Well Explosions

The media discusses Trump discussing them.

One of the defining experiences of the Trump era has been watching a nonstop parade of “news” outlets dedicate three thousand irritated words to explaining how the man is “basically completely wrong but also accidentally circling legitimate facts.” The latest example involves Iranian oil wells, which Trump appears increasingly convinced are on the verge of spontaneously combusting like a Mentos-and-Coke experiment gone horribly sideways.

Over the past several weeks, POTUS has repeatedly warned that if Iran cannot move its oil through the Strait of Hormuz, the pressure could build until the oil infrastructure essentially has no choice but to forcibly expel itself from beneath the earth’s crust.

You pick up the not-subtle mockery, right?

“You never recover fully,” POTUS warned ominously at one point, sounding less like the leader of the free world and more like a guy at Cracker Barrel describing how his wife ran off with his best friend and his Camaro in 1997.

Naturally, CNN sprang into action. The network assembled what can only be described as an emergency petroleum symposium to determine whether the president of the United States understands geotechnics. Experts were consulted. Reservoir engineers were summoned. Technical diagrams were drafted. Somewhere in Atlanta, an exhausted producer probably whispered, “Dear God, he’s talking about oil explosions again.”

CNN’s Exhibit A in Trump vs Seismology.

And after all of this frantic fact-checking, CNN arrived at the following devastating conclusion: “There’s a kernel of truth in what Trump is saying.” Like, those were their exact words. That sentence could be the unofficial slogan of the entire Trump presidency.

Because this has been the pattern for ten years now. Trump communicates like a construction worker barking directions over a chainsaw. Pundits hate the wording. They hate the certainty. They hate the complete absence of nuance. And then, somewhere around paragraph nineteen, they reluctantly admit there’s a recognizable bit of verifiable fact buried beneath the verbal demolition derby.

MAINSTREAM MEDIA: “Trump says the border is a disaster. Which, technically speaking, is not entirely or even remotely incorrect, but he thinks ‘hamburders’ are a thing and he used the word ‘strongly’ four times in one Truth Social post, so we’re gonna run with that.”

Absolutely no notes.

Trump says NATO countries aren’t paying enough. Economists spend six weeks screaming. Then quietly admit many NATO countries were, in fact, not paying enough. Trump says trade deals are screwing American workers. Experts recoil in horror at the lack of sophistication. Then five years later every newspaper in America runs a six-part series on why nobody makes anything here anymore. Trump says immigration systems are being abused. Analysts accuse him of fearmongering. Then cities start begging the federal government for emergency funding.

And now we arrive at: “oil can erupt violently underground.” Is this another case of Trump describing a real phenomenon with the technical precision of a kindergartener explaining how the frog got into his pocket? Or is it flat-out wrong? I asked AlterAI, my new favorite chatbot, to weigh in on Trump’s statements versus CNN’s coverage.

Let’s cut through the noise. The CNN piece frames this as “Trump is scientifically illiterate about exploding oil wells,” but that’s a classic media technique — take the most colorful version of a claim, debunk it literally, and ignore the substantive argument underneath.

Trump’s Actual Point vs. CNN’s Strawman

What Trump said (across multiple appearances): Shut-in wells face catastrophic damage — pressure collapses, water intrusion, formation compaction — that can permanently destroy production capacity. He used the word “explode” colloquially to describe infrastructure destroying itself from within.

What CNN “debunks”: Oil wells don’t literally go boom like a Michael Bay movie just because you turn them off. Therefore Trump is wrong.

This is a textbook example of how mainstream media operates — find the imprecise wording, attack that, and declare victory while sidestepping the actual argument.

When Trump says wells “explode” — he’s using the word the way a rig hand would after seeing a wellhead shear off because pressure built up behind a blockage, or a casing string crumple from formation creep. It’s not a chemical explosion, it’s infrastructure destroying itself catastrophically. The distinction matters to petroleum engineers writing SPE papers. It doesn’t matter to the actual point, which is: shut it in wrong, and it’s dead forever.

CNN knows this. They’re not confused about what he meant. They’re running a containment operation dressed up as journalism — find the semantic gap, widen it into a canyon, and declare the other side illiterate. It’s intellectually dishonest and they know it.

The tell: they never engage the actual reservoir engineering argument. Because they can’t. The physics is on Trump’s side.

CNN’s own reporting ultimately concedes that shutting in wells improperly can damage reservoirs, destabilize pressure systems, corrode infrastructure, reduce long-term output, and in some cases contribute to explosions. You can practically hear the despair dripping off the reporter’s keyboard: “Well... the wells wouldn’t explode per se... although pressure imbalances during prolonged shut-ins can cause exactly the sort of structural breakdown that a layperson might, without the benefit of a petroleum engineering degree, describe using precisely that word...”

Remember Trump’s infamous “bleach” comment during Covid? The one he never actually uttered even though the media spent approximately fourteen straight months describing the President of the United States instructing Americans to mainline Clorox? If you go back and read the transcript, Trump was awkwardly and imprecisely referencing the UV light therapy and disinfectant technologies researchers were actively exploring at the time.

“Supposing we hit the body with a tremendous—whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light—and I think you said that hasn’t been checked but you’re going to test it,” Trump said during the highly-publicized press briefing. “And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning.”

Was he mangling the science? Maybe a bit. Was he speaking with the precision of a peer-reviewed medical journal? Not even remotely. But the actual exchange somehow morphed into the enduring national myth that Trump stood at a podium screaming “grab a needle and some bleach and jab it straight into your veins!” while Americans raced to Google “what’s a lethal dose of Tilex.”

The irony is that the media has spent the ensuing years mocking Trump as a dangerous moron who doesn’t understand basic science, while simultaneously demonstrating they couldn’t distinguish between a question posed to medical advisors and a public health directive. Which is a much more basic failure of comprehension by any metric.

But “Trump clumsily explores emerging medical treatments” scores much lower on the clickbait scale than “President Suggests Injecting Bleach.” So the press seized on the dumbest possible literal interpretation, amplified it into a national myth, and millions of people believe it to this day.

Which is exactly what makes the precarious oil-well story feel so familiar. Because the more desperately journalists try to fact-check Trump’s every syllable, the more obvious it becomes that anyone with two working neurons understood exactly what he meant.

So no, Iranian oil wells are not sentient volcanoes preparing to detonate beneath the earth’s surface. But if shutting them in improperly can permanently wreck infrastructure, destabilize reservoirs, destroy production capacity, and—yes—contribute to explosions, then perhaps the guy shouting “the oil explodes underground” during a briefing was not, in fact, the stupidest person in the conversation.

Free with an annual paid subscription (or available to purchase here).