Trump facing Biden-like health issues? Nephew drops bombshell claims
Fred Trump III, nephew of President Donald Trump, pointed to a troubling family history of dementia while voicing concerns about his uncle's mental fitness. Trump's nephew notes troubling signs of cognitive decline and contrasts them with the public image of his grandfather's health.(Bloomberg)
Fred, who recently authored All in the Family: The Trumps and How We Got This Way, didn't mince words during a recent appearance on The Dean Obeidallah Show on SiriusXM and spoke about worrying signs of cognitive decline in the 45th U.S. President.
'I know what I saw in my grandfather,' Fred said, referring to Fred Trump Sr. , Donald Trump's father, who lived with Alzheimer's for eight years before passing away in 1999. Fred III claimed the elder Trump's health was far from what Donald had publicly said.
ALSO READ| 'Great American pilots very upset:' Trump continues flip-flop over damage done to Iranian nuclear sites
'You know, Donald said, 'Oh, my father was tiptop until the end.' I can assure you, that was not the case.'
POTUS' nephew also brought up other members of the Trump extended family, like Donald's cousin John Walters, who reportedly struggled with dementia as well. Fred noted that Donald now 'looks older' and seems increasingly unfocused in his public appearances.
'The things he's spewing and the craziness, and he just can't stick to a message. He used to be able to stick to a message,' he pointed out. Trump niece echoes the same concern about her uncle
Fred's comments echo those made by his sister, Mary Trump, a psychologist. Both siblings have repeatedly raised alarms over their uncle's behaviour and public statements, and both have endorsed then Vice President Kamala Harris for the 2024 presidential race.
Ironically, this comes at a time when Trump himself has repeatedly questioned former President Joe Biden's cognitive health, accusing him of mental decline throughout the previous election cycle. But now, some voters and experts are starting to reflect those same concerns back onto Trump.
Dr. Jennifer R. Mercieca, a communications and journalism professor at Texas A&M University, told told the Daily Beast, 'His lack of focus makes it seem as though he's experiencing cognitive decline, that his brain is not well-disciplined, and he's unable to maintain a thought and carry it through to a logical conclusion.'
ALSO READ| Natasha Bertrand vs Donald Trump: Why POTUS says CNN journalist should be 'thrown like a dog'
However, White House physician Sean Barbarella declared the President in 'excellent health,' stating that a standard mental test showed 'Cognitive function, assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), was normal with a score of 30 out of 30.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
18 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Iran could again enrich uranium 'in matter of months': IAEA chief
UN nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi says Iran likely will be able to begin to produce enriched uranium "in a matter of months," despite damage to several nuclear facilities from US and Israeli attacks, CBS News said Saturday. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi said Iranian nuclear facilities might be "still standing" after US President Donald Trump insisted Iran's nuclear program had been set back "decades."(File/Reuters) Israel launched a bombing campaign on Iranian nuclear and military sites on June 13, saying it was aimed at keeping Iran from developing a nuclear weapon -- an ambition the Islamic republic has consistently denied. The United States subsequently bombed three key facilities used for Tehran's atomic program. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi says the extent of the damage to the nuclear sites is "serious," but the details are unknown. US President Donald Trump insisted Iran's nuclear program had been set back "decades." But Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said "some is still standing." "They can have, you know, in a matter of months, I would say, a few cascades of centrifuges spinning and producing enriched uranium, or less than that," Grossi said Friday, according to a transcript of the interview released Saturday. Another key question is whether Iran was able to relocate some or all of its estimated 408.6-kilo (900-pound) stockpile of highly enriched uranium before the attacks. The uranium in question is enriched to 60 percent -- above levels for civilian usage but still below weapons grade. That material, if further refined, would theoretically be sufficient to produce more than nine nuclear bombs. Grossi admitted to CBS: "We don't know where this material could be." "So some could have been destroyed as part of the attack, but some could have been moved. So there has to be at some point a clarification," he said in the interview. For now, Iranian lawmakers voted to suspend cooperation with the IAEA and Tehran rejected Grossi's request for a visit to the damaged sites, especially Fordo, the main uranium enrichment facility. "We need to be in a position to ascertain, to confirm what is there, and where is it and what happened," Grossi said. In a separate interview with Fox News's "Sunday Morning Futures" program, Trump said he did not think the stockpile had been moved. "It's a very hard thing to do plus we didn't give much notice," he said, according to excerpts of the interview. "They didn't move anything." US Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Saturday underscored Washington's support for "the IAEA's critical verification and monitoring efforts in Iran," commending Grossi and his agency for their "dedication and professionalism." The full Grossi interview will air on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on Sunday.
Hindustan Times
29 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Utterly insane, destructive': Elon Musk on latest Senate draft bill
Billionaire Elon Musk has criticised the latest version of the tax and spending bill released by the United States senate and said that it will cause 'immense strategic harm' to the US. Musk's renewed criticism comes just weeks after he and the US President Donald Trump exchanged jibes over the former's disapproval of the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' before they made up. Elon Musk's remarks come while the US Senate is getting ready for an important vote on Saturday (local time).(File/AFP) In a post on X, Musk wrote, 'The latest Senate draft bill will destroy millions of jobs in America and cause immense strategic harm to our country!' 'Utterly insane and destructive. It gives handouts to industries of the past while severely damaging industries of the future,' he added. Read: Big Beautiful Bill: List of Republicans who will vote against Trump's spending measure Musk's remarks come while the US Senate is getting ready for an important vote on Saturday (local time) as Republicans rush to pass President Donald Trump's bill, which includes tax cuts, spending reductions, and more funding for deportations, before his July 4th deadline. Republicans are putting their majority in the Senate to use to push aside Democratic opposition to the bill. However, not all Republican lawmakers are rallying behind the bill due to its plan to cut funding for Medicaid, food stamps, and other programs. Big, Beautiful Bill up for vote The latest version of the bill, which is 940-pages long, is a collection of tax breaks, cuts in government spending on programs such as Medicaid and more money for Republican priorities such as national defense and deportations. This bill is a key part of Trump's plans for the United States and is up for a vote in the Congress. Trump has asked his party's lawmakers, who hold a majority in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, to get the bill passed by the country's independence day on July 4th Senators are working through the weekend to pass the bill and send it back to the House for final vote, all while Democrats are thoroughly opposing the bill. With AP inputs.
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Confusion and anxiety grips immigrant communities nationwide after US Supreme Court's ruling on birthright citizenship
Confusion and anxiety gripped immigrant communities nationwide after the Supreme Court's ruling on birthright citizenship, leaving pregnant asylum seekers like Lorena, a 24-year-old Colombian in Houston, fearing her unborn child could become stateless, according to a Reuters report. "I don't understand it well," she admitted, voicing concerns that her September-born baby might lack Colombian citizenship if she can't add the child to her pending asylum case. Her panic reflects a broader uncertainty: The court's 6-3 decision curbed federal judges' power to issue nationwide injunctions against President Trump's executive order denying citizenship to babies born to undocumented or temporary-visa holders, but did not rule on the order's constitutionality. Instead, it triggered a 30-day countdown before the policy could take effect, during which lower courts must reconsider narrower ways to block it. Immigrant advocates reported a surge of calls from distraught parents-to-be, including a visa holder in Ohio terrified his child would be denied rights in a non-plaintiff state. "I don't want her to be adrift with no nationality," Lorena said, highlighting the humanitarian crisis brewing beneath all the legal chaos. The ruling's ambiguity centers on its potential to fracture citizenship rights state-by-state. While Trump's order remains blocked for plaintiffs like members of Maryland's CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project, it could apply elsewhere after 30 days, creating what experts call an "unworkable patchwork." For instance, a baby born to undocumented parents in Louisiana (a non-plaintiff state) might be denied citizenship, while an identical birth in Massachusetts (a plaintiff state) would secure it. This disparity could force hospitals to act as de facto immigration enforcers, checking parents' statuses during childbirth. "Would individual doctors have to figure out how to determine citizenship?" asked Migration Policy Institute analyst Kathleen Bush-Joseph, as per Reuters. Trump, meanwhile, doubled down at a press conference, falsely claiming "hundreds of thousands" exploit birthright citizenship as a migration magnet. In a rapid response, advocacy groups filed class-action lawsuits to shield families nationwide. Within hours of the ruling, CASA and the Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project amended their Maryland lawsuit to seek certification for a nationwide class covering all children born after February 19, 2025, who'd be stripped of citizenship under Trump's order. "We're going to get protection for everyone," vowed lawyer William Powell, arguing class actions could achieve what universal injunctions no longer can. But hurdles persist: Joining these groups requires resources that many lack, and Republican-led states may still enforce the policy during litigation. Betsy, a Virginia teen and CASA member whose undocumented parents migrated from El Salvador, fears targeting 'innocent kids who haven't even been born.' Meanwhile, Democratic attorneys general in 22 states signaled they'll argue in lower courts that only nationwide injunctions prevent bureaucratic chaos, like tracking parents who cross state lines to give birth. As Honduran asylum seeker Nivida fielded panicked calls from pregnant friends in Louisiana, she echoed a community's plea: "Is the baby going to be a citizen?" With the Supreme Court likely to revisit the order's constitutionality this fall, the clock ticks toward a fragmented America.
