During a recent security incident in Turkey, U.S. President Donald Trump discreetly moved from Air Force One using a catering truck, while several individuals, including U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and the 13-person press pool, remained on the plane.
One of the key figures who accompanied Trump during the move was Natalie Harp, a 35-year-old executive assistant who holds a special assistant position in the president’s team. Harp has been a constant presence by Trump’s side, both in the Oval Office and during his travels, since 2022. She has been described as an essential support to the president, providing him with immediate access to necessary information through a mobile office equipped with a mobile printer.
Harp first entered Trump’s circle in 2019 after publicly praising him for a law benefiting patients seeking experimental treatments. She has been lauded for her unwavering loyalty and admiration for the president by multiple Republicans. In a profile by Fox News, Harp expressed her admiration for Trump’s unwavering focus and dedication to his purpose.
Recently, Democratic Senator Jon Ossoff made remarks suggesting that Trump is more focused on personal pursuits, such as White House renovations and traveling with Harp, than on his presidential duties. In response, Trump dismissed Ossoff’s comments, referring to him as “Pee-wee Herman” and emphasizing his administration’s efforts in White House improvements.
The exchange between Ossoff and Trump sparked controversy, with White House communications director Steven Cheung using strong language to criticize Ossoff. Some commentators accused Ossoff of sexism and insensitivity, particularly given Harp’s history as a cancer survivor.
The incident has garnered attention from various political circles, with Democrats and critics of Trump engaging in discussions around Ossoff’s comments and their implications. While speculation and rumors have circulated about the nature of the relationship between Trump and Harp, there is no concrete evidence to support any improper conduct.