Rumors Surface of Apprentice Outtakes Showing Trump Using N-Word, Burnett Refuses Release

During the 2016 presidential campaign, widespread rumors emerge of damaging outtakes from “The Apprentice” showing Donald Trump using the n-word and other racist and sexist language. Producer Mark Burnett, through his company now owned by MGM, refuses to release any footage, citing contractual and legal restrictions, while sources indicate Burnett threatens to sue anyone who leaks the material. The controversy highlights how entertainment industry NDAs and corporate ownership can suppress potentially consequential information about a presidential candidate.

The Rumors Emerge

In October 2016, just weeks before the presidential election, reports surface that damaging footage exists from Trump’s years hosting “The Apprentice.” Multiple people with knowledge of the show’s production claim that outtakes contain Trump using racial slurs, including the n-word, making sexist comments, and insulting his own family members. Actor and comedian Tom Arnold becomes one of the most prominent voices claiming such footage exists, stating he has personally seen or has access to tapes showing Trump’s behavior behind the scenes.

The rumors gain credibility when Omarosa Manigault, a former “Apprentice” contestant and Trump ally, acknowledges during the campaign that such tapes might exist, though she attempts to minimize their significance. Producer Bill Pruitt later confirms that troubling footage exists but that he and other staff are bound by restrictive non-disclosure agreements with severe financial penalties.

Burnett’s Refusal and Legal Threats

Mark Burnett, the show’s creator and executive producer, refuses to release any unaired footage. MGM, which owns Burnett’s production company and holds the rights to “The Apprentice” material, issues a statement: “MGM owns Mark Burnett’s production company and ‘The Apprentice’ is one of its properties. Despite reports to the contrary, Mark Burnett does not have the ability or the right to release footage or other material from ‘The Apprentice.’ Various contractual and legal requirements prohibit the release of such material.”

However, sources close to Burnett report that he has made clear to production teams that he will sue anyone who leaks footage. The threat carries weight: “Apprentice” staff members are bound by non-disclosure agreements featuring penalties of up to $5 million and potential criminal liability. These NDAs effectively create a legal fortress around any damaging Trump material, making leaking financially ruinous for anyone who worked on the show.

Tom Arnold’s Claims

In December 2016, after the election, Tom Arnold claims on KIRO Radio that he has obtained or seen outtakes showing Trump “sitting in that chair saying the N-word, saying the C-word, calling his son a retard, just being so mean to his own children.” Arnold describes Trump as saying “every bad thing ever, every dirty, every offensive, racist thing ever.”

Arnold claims he received the material from “Apprentice” staff members who circulated it in early November as a “funny Christmas gift,” not expecting Trump would actually win the election. Arnold’s subsequent attempts to obtain and release the footage—including a Viceland television show titled “The Hunt for the Trump Tapes”—prove unsuccessful due to the legal barriers surrounding the material.

Trump tweets in response that Burnett called him to say “there are NO TAPES of the Apprentice where I used such a terrible and disgusting word,” though this denial does not address other alleged offensive behavior captured on tape.

The Legal Fortress

The controversy reveals how entertainment industry NDAs and corporate media ownership can function to suppress potentially significant political information. Staff members who witnessed Trump’s behavior firsthand face financial ruin if they speak publicly about what they saw. The material is owned by a corporation (MGM) that has business interests potentially affected by angering Trump or his supporters. Burnett himself, despite being the show’s creator, claims he cannot release footage even if he wanted to due to corporate ownership structures.

This arrangement creates a situation where credible allegations of racist language and behavior by a presidential candidate cannot be verified or disproven because the evidence is locked behind corporate legal protections designed for entertainment industry purposes. The NDAs, originally intended to protect television production secrets and maintain dramatic suspense for viewers, instead function to protect a political candidate from potential scandal.

Significance: Media Complicity Through Silence

The “Apprentice” outtakes controversy exemplifies how entertainment media’s legal and business structures can enable political outcomes by suppressing inconvenient information. Burnett and NBC spent 14 seasons creating an image of Trump as a successful businessman, then—when that manufactured image facilitates Trump’s presidential campaign—the same entertainment industry claims it cannot release material that might correct the false impression it created.

The incident also demonstrates the power and limitations of NDAs in protecting powerful figures. While such agreements effectively prevent staff members from publicly revealing what they witnessed, the existence of the NDAs and the aggressive legal posture around the footage actually confirms that damaging material exists. The legal barrier itself becomes evidence of something being hidden, yet this knowledge has no practical effect if the material remains inaccessible.

Burnett’s personal and business relationship with Trump further complicates the situation. Having created the show that rehabilitated Trump’s image and made his political career possible, Burnett has both personal loyalty to Trump and business interests in maintaining good relations with him. This creates overlapping incentives—personal, business, and legal—all pointing toward suppressing any damaging footage.

The outtakes remain unreleased as of the 2016 election, demonstrating that entertainment industry legal structures can effectively function as political protection mechanisms. The system designed to protect television production secrets proves equally effective at protecting a presidential candidate from accountability for his documented behavior. This represents a form of media complicity distinct from editorial bias: not actively promoting Trump, but passively enabling him through institutional mechanisms that prevent damaging information from reaching the public.

The controversy also highlights the strange reality that multiple people witness and document Trump’s racist behavior, yet legal agreements prevent this evidence from affecting his political viability. The gap between what entertainment industry insiders know about Trump and what the public can verify becomes a political factor in itself, with NDAs functioning as tools of disinformation by omission.