Demands are escalating for the White House to disclose the full transcript of a 2019 phone call between former President Donald Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. This call has become a focal point of political contention, especially following Trump’s recent defense of the crown prince amidst ongoing scrutiny over the 2018 murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
During a meeting at the White House earlier this week, President Trump publicly reaffirmed his support for bin Salman, countering US intelligence findings that implicate the crown prince in Khashoggi’s killing. This defense has intensified accusations from both sides of the political aisle, as lawmakers consider whether any withheld records could be relevant to oversight or legal inquiries.
Former National Security Council lawyer Eugene Vindman has been particularly vocal about the need for transparency. He reviewed the controversial call during his tenure and described its contents as “shocking.” Vindman has urged that the transcript be made available to both the Khashoggi family and the American public, framing this demand as a moral obligation and a measure of democratic accountability.
In a speech on the House floor, Vindman referenced two conversations he found notably troubling: the call with bin Salman and a separate exchange with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. He called for the release of the transcript, reflecting on the fallout from the Zelenskiy call that led to Trump’s first impeachment. Vindman posited that the implications of the Saudi call could be similarly significant, stating, “If precedent holds, the receipts will be shocking.”
The White House has released summaries of the crown prince’s recent visit, emphasizing cooperation on trade, defense, and investment. However, it has not disclosed the transcript from the 2019 call, raising questions about the administration’s commitment to transparency. During a press conference on November 18, 2025, Trump dismissed inquiries regarding bin Salman’s involvement in Khashoggi’s murder, asserting that the crown prince “knew nothing about it.” This assertion has attracted criticism from human rights advocates and various lawmakers.
The White House fact sheet accompanying the recent diplomatic engagement highlights substantial economic commitments from Saudi Arabia, citing figures around $600 billion in investments in the United States. This economic framing appears to serve as justification for prioritizing strategic alliances over public accountability.
Critics argue that financial incentives should not overshadow the need for transparency and accountability. Should a transcript exist that contradicts the President’s public statements, releasing it could result in significant legal and political repercussions. Vindman’s challenge is likely to be the first among many, as rights organizations, foreign policy experts, and members of Congress continue to call for the release of pertinent records.
The comparison to the Zelenskiy call heightens scrutiny of the White House’s actions. Releasing the full transcript of the Trump-bin Salman conversation could alleviate claims of concealment, yet it would also expose sensitive diplomatic communications. Conversely, withholding the transcript risks ongoing political damage, especially given the implications of the crown prince’s visit on US-Saudi relations following Khashoggi’s murder.
For the Khashoggi family and advocates for press freedom, the stakes extend beyond political maneuvering. They seek clarity on what was communicated during the call, when it occurred, and whether the administration’s public assertions align with the private dialogue. Until the transcript is released, this controversy is likely to cast a shadow over the evolving relationship between the US and Saudi Arabia, as well as the administration’s claims regarding national interests. The prevailing sentiment is that if the call holds significance for the nation, its contents should be shared with the public.
