Why questions about Trump’s health aren’t going away

Visible questions about the president’s health are fueling speculation, but the deeper issue is why Americans are left guessing at all.

For more than a year now, there has been a strange and increasingly difficult-to-ignore pattern involving Donald Trump’s hands. Bruising. Bandages. Makeup appearing to cover discoloration. And now new images from Trump’s meeting with King Charles that seem to show something else becoming harder to dismiss: significant swelling.

The images are striking. Trump’s hands appear puffy, almost ballooned, and in some shots there are visible patches of lighter makeup seemingly attempting to conceal bruising or discoloration. This is not a one-off photograph caught at a bad angle. It is part of a pattern people have been noticing for months.

And at some point, it becomes reasonable to ask questions.

---

---

What we know and what we don’t

There is an important distinction here that too often gets lost.

We do not know what is causing the bruising or swelling. We do not know whether it is benign, serious, age-related, medication-related, or something else entirely.

There has been speculation ranging from simple fluid retention to possible medical treatments, including the kind that can leave bruising on the back of the hand. There are also far more routine explanations. Diet could matter. Medication could matter. Age could matter.

The point is not to diagnose someone from photographs, that would be irresponsible.

But the point is also not to pretend there is nothing to discuss.

Because what we do know is that explanations offered so far have often been inconsistent or implausible. We were told bruising might be from handshaking, even though Trump famously does his elaborate handshakes with his right hand, while the recurring bruising has often appeared on the left. There have been shifting explanations about cuts, aspirin regimens, and other possibilities, but no real clarity.

And when there is no clarity, speculation fills the vacuum.

Secrecy creates conspiracy

This is where the conversation gets bigger than Donald Trump’s hands.

Whenever leaders refuse transparency about their health, they invite the very speculation they later condemn. You cannot provide vague or contradictory information and then act shocked when people begin connecting dots. That is especially true when the person involved is not some private citizen, but the president of the United States.

Health matters when you hold nuclear codes. Health matters when your decisions affect financial markets, wars, treaties, and potentially billions of people. Raising questions in that context is not voyeurism. It is a legitimate public-interest concern.

And there is a pattern here as well. We have seen selective disclosures that often read more like political image management than medical transparency. We have seen confusion around scans and procedures. We have seen official statements that sometimes raise as many questions as they answer. None of that proves some hidden medical crisis. But it does help explain why skepticism persists.

The real issue is the information vacuum

I think some people misunderstand the criticism. The takeaway is not that swelling automatically means something catastrophic is wrong. It may mean very little. It may mean something more. We do not know, and that uncertainty is precisely the point.

The real issue is that we are left trying to interpret photographs and video clips because more reliable information is absent. And once a government creates that kind of vacuum, it loses control over what rushes in to fill it. Suspicion is often a product of secrecy, and that applies in politics as much as anywhere else.

And frankly, legacy media often compounds the problem by treating these questions as unserious or somehow off limits, as though discussing visible physical changes in an aging president crosses some ethical line. It does not. Ignoring obvious questions is not responsible journalism. It is avoidance.

Where this leads

What interests me most is not amateur diagnosis.

It is what happens when a government provides so little transparency that citizens start doing forensic analysis of presidential hand photos.

That is a trust problem. And trust problems tend not to stay confined to health disclosures.

They spread.

So I’m curious what you think: is the bigger story the swelling itself, or the fact that Americans are left guessing about the health of a sitting president at all?

---

We’re reaching over 150 million people every month across YouTube, podcasts, Substack, and beyond. But algorithms can change. Platforms can fold. And when that happens, this newsletter is how we stay connected.

If you’re not yet a paid subscriber, please consider joining.
If you’re already paid on one platform, consider supporting us on both Substack and our website.

You can subscribe on our website and right here on Substack.

And if you’re really on fire, consider gifting a subscription—we’ve got thousands on our waiting list ready to read, watch, and fight back.

Let’s keep building.

—David

PS: Can’t contribute right now? No problem. You can support us for free by subscribing on YouTube, listening to our audio podcast on Spotify or Apple Podcasts, or become a free subscriber to this very Substack. Every bit counts.