CNN fact-checker proves the BS can be "river deep and mountain high" when Donald Trump and his gang of toadies gather for their monthly cabinet/cult meeting

Donald Trump addresses attendees at yesterday's cabinet meeting. (NBC News) 

In yesterday's post, I dreamed up an imaginary opening statement that Donald Trump might give at his May 27, 2026, White House cabinet meeting. It turns out the statement I made up was more fact-based than the utterances that actually came out of Trump's mouth. Of course, that probably is not a surprise to those who have learned that Trump's public ramblings often bear little resemblance to the truth.

With that, let's take a look at the work of CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale, who examines primary issues discussed in the meeting and shows that Trump's statements on them range from the fabulous to the fraudulent. (I will highlight the most startling misstatements in yellow and include my comments at the end of each section.) Under the headline "Fact check: Trump makes false claims about Iran war, the economy, and the reflecting pool at cabinet meeting," Dale writes: President Donald Trump made false claims about the war with Iran, the economy, and other subjects during public comments at a Cabinet meeting on Wednesday. Many of them have been debunked before. Here’s a quick fact check of the false claims and some others that were misleading or lacked critical context. This is not intended as a comprehensive list; CNN is still looking into some of the president’s remarks at the meeting:

The war with Iran

(A) Iran’s military capabilities: Trump, speaking of Iran’s military, said, “Their navy is gone, their air force is gone, everything’s gone.” Though there’s no doubt the US and Israel have significantly degraded Iran’s military capabilities during the war that began in late February, it’s not true that “everything” is gone — as Trump implicitly acknowledged last week when he said, “They have a little ability. Their missiles are 82% gone, we estimate. … Same thing with drones, they’re largely gone but they still have a little capacity.” CNN reported in April that, according to three sources familiar with US intelligence findings, roughly half of Iran’s missile launchers were still intact and thousands of one-way attack drones remained in Iran’s arsenal; CNN reported last week that four sources said US intelligence indicates Iran’s military is reconstituting much faster than initially estimated and that “Iran also still maintains ballistic-missile, drone-attack and anti-air capability despite the serious damage inflicted by US-Israeli strikes, according to recent US intelligence assessments, meaning the quick rebuilding of military production capacity isn’t starting from scratch.” 

(B) How Trump describes the war with Iran: Mixing up Iran with Venezuela, Trump spoke about how Americans’ 401(k) balances are high “despite the conflict — I don’t call it a war, I call it a conflict — despite the conflict with Venezuela.” (His subsequent comments made clear he was referring to Iran.) Though Trump has indeed sometimes called the war with Iran a “conflict,” or used other words like “excursion” or “skirmish,” it’s not true that he doesn’t call it a “war.” He has repeatedly called it a war in recent weeks even as he has intermittently insisted he doesn’t use that term; in fact, he called it a war later in this same Cabinet meeting, noting that the US lost 13 service members “between two wars, two big wars, Venezuela and Iran.” 

The war, inflation, and the economy 

(A) Gas prices: Trump claimed, “When I was in Iowa, we had — driving by, we saw gas stations: $1.90 a gallon, $1.85, $1.87 were the three that we saw.” He has previously made clear that such comments are referring to supposed prices on the day he visited Iowa in late January. But on that day, the AAA state average for regular gasoline was $2.57 per gallon; the firm GasBuddy found just four stations in the state selling that day for under $2 per gallon — $1.97, to be specific, not $1.85 to $1.90 — out of 2,036 stations the firm was tracking there. And a CNN reporter noticed that the station right outside the venue where Trump spoke was at $2.69 per gallon that day.

It’s possible Trump was referring to the price of E85, an ethanol-gasoline blend that is sold in a minority of gas stations and can only be used in the small percentage of vehicles that are compatible with it; the blend was selling for around $1.85 per gallon in Iowa at the time of his visit. But, as when he made this claim about Iowa gas prices on previous occasions, he offered no indication on Wednesday that he was talking about a niche product.

(Legal Schnauzer sez:  CNN nabbed Trump in a "gotcha moment" here, and it's important because gas prices might be the single most sensitive issue for many voters. It is particularly damning that a CNN reporter noted a gas station right outside the Iowa venue where Trump spoke that sold gas for $2.69 per gallon -- while Trump claimed to have spotted prices in that area for well under $2.00 per gallon At best, this is an example of Trump speaking carelessly; at worst, it's a president being caught in an attempted con on an issue that matters a lot to many Americans. Bottom line: Gas prices are not as low as Trump wants us to believe, and they likely will not come down as fast as he claims -- and that only can be blamed on Trump for starting his war of choice with Iran.)

(B) Prescription drug prices: Trump falsely claimed, of prescription drug prices, “We have drugs down 400, 500, 600%.” He then added, “Now you could say 80, 90, 70, 60, 50% if you want; there are two ways (to phrase it), depends on the way you ask the question.” But the first “way” is invalid; drug-price reductions of 400%, 500% and 600% are mathematically impossible, as CNN and others have repeatedly noted. If Trump magically got companies to reduce the prices of all of their drugs to $0, that would be a 100% cut. A cut of 400%, 500% or 600% would mean that Americans would be paid money to acquire their medications, which is not happening.

Trump used more defensible phrasing when appearing to read from a prepared text moments earlier, claiming he is achieving “price differences” of 400% to 600% through the website TrumpRX.gov. But then he reverted to his usual inaccurate phrasing. 

(Legal Schnauzer says: In my view, this also is an attempted con, and props to CNN for not letting Trump get away with it. A president should know a price reduction of 600% is mathematically impossible. If he doesn't, he's not smart enough to be in office. Trump, however, is smart enough to know that saying a price has gone down 600% is  likely to make some casual listeners think, "Wow, that's great news. Wonderful job, Mr. President." It's critical that Americans pay close attention to what Trump says because much of it is pure BS. In fact, I would suggest Walmart start selling BS detectors in its hardware departments.)

(C) Investment in the US: Trump repeated a figure he has used for months about supposed investment in the US during his second presidency, saying there is “$18 trillion coming in” and “that’s not including the 12th month, that’s 11.” The $18 trillion figure is fiction. As of the time he spoke on Wednesday, the White House’s own website said the figure for “major investment announcements” this term is “$10.6 trillion,” and even that is a major exaggeration of actual investment. A detailed CNN review in October found the White House was counting trillions of dollars in vague investment pledges, pledges that were about “bilateral trade” or “economic exchange” rather than investment in the US, and vague statements that didn’t even rise to the level of pledges. 

(Legal Schnauzer sez: So Trump cites an $18-trillion figure when his own website  cites a figure that is much lower than that. Trump should be ashamed of such subterfuge, assuming he is capable of feeling shame.)

The Lincoln Memorial Reflecting pool

(A) Obama, Biden and the Lincoln Memorial: The Trump  administration is spending more than $13 million on a project to improve the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool in Washington, federal records show. Trump falsely claimed Wednesday, “The Biden administration and the Obama administration spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to get it to work,” adding a bit later, “They spent hundreds of millions, over $100 million.” Those figures are incorrect; the White House could not offer any corroboration for them when CNN inquired last week. The Obama administration spent about $35 million on a contract to try to fix issues with the pool, but that’s not hundreds of millions, and the Biden administration did not go ahead with any major pool repair project. Chuck Sams, who was director of the National Park Service under Biden, told CNN last week that they had received a cost estimate “above $100 million” for a “full rehabilitation” but had not done the project. (Sams said it “would have more than likely moved forward if we had remained in office,” but Trump asserted that it had already happened.)

(Legal Schnauzer sez: Trump has a problem with facts in general, but he especially has a problem with numbers. The only question: Does he throw around numbers carelessly or is he intentionally trying to deceive. I will let readers reach their own conclusions on that. But this much is clear: When Trump starts talking numbers, he likely is just pulling digits out of his fanny. Particularly glaring in this case, is the claim that the Biden administration  was part of an effort to spend millions on the reflecting pool -- when, CNN learned, they did not go ahead with any major pool-repair project. This seems to be a case of, as many observers have noted, of Obama and Biden being alive and well and living inside Trump's head.)  

(B) The size of the reflecting pool: Trump claimed that the reflecting pool is “like 2,400 feet long,” claimed that is “longer than the tallest building in the world,” and added, “the world’s tallest skyscraper is shorter than 2,400 feet.” This is a matter of trivia rather than substance, but none of the president’s claims are correct. The reflecting pool is 2,028 feet long, according to the National Park Service website; Trump correctly wrote in a social media post earlier this month that it is “approximately 2,030 feet.” And even 2,400 feet would not be larger than any building in the world; the tallest skyscraper, the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, is more than 2,700 feet tall.

(Legal Schnauzer sez: This is another area where Trump has problems, and we are talking about superlatives. Whenever you hear Trump say that something is the tallest this or the biggest that, it's a safe bet that he is making comparisons with nothing to back them up. At best, it's likely he is exaggerating -- by a lot.) 

Immigration

(A) Biden, migrants and murder: After denouncing the Biden administration’s immigration record, Trump claimed there were “11,888 murderers, more than half of which have committed more than one murder; that’s what they allowed in.” As usual, Trump didn’t make clear that, as the Department of Homeland Security and independent experts noted in 2024, the figure it appears he is referring to is about non-citizens who entered the US not just under Biden but over the course of multiple decades, including during Trump’s own first administration. They were convicted of homicide at some point, usually in the US after their arrival, and are still in the US while being listed on Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s “non-detained docket” — which includes people who are currently serving their prison sentences. And it has never been clear whether there is a factual basis for Trump’s claim that more than half of the people in question committed more than one murder; the White House did not respond in January to a CNN request to explain where Trump might have gotten this information. You can read more here. 

(Legal Schnauzer says: This would be amusing if it weren't so egregious. Trump cites a number of 11,888 murderers allowed into the U.S., as if the Biden administration alone welcomed all of those immigrants -- when, in fact, the data covers several decades, including during Trump's own first administration. I see no way this wasn't an intentional lie -- a case of Trump laying a problem at the feet of a political opponent, when Trump himself was part of the same problem. Americans should not quietly put up with that kind of deceit.)

Social Security

(A) Social Security and deceased people: Trump said, “I think we have a chance to save Social Security without doing anything to it, by just the numbers of fraudulent people on Social Security — people that are 115 years old, 125 years old, getting payments.”

But Trump’s White House has not presented evidence of obviously deceased people who were born 115 or 125 years ago continuing to be sent Social Security payments after their deaths, let alone that there is enough of this kind of fraud to meaningfully alter the fiscal trajectory of the program. (It’s possible there have been such payments at some point, either due to fraud or administrative error; CNN reached out to the White House once more after the Cabinet meeting.) Even before Trump became president the first time, Social Security had an automated system in place to stop payments to deceased people listed as being age 115 and older. And while a 2023 report from the inspector general monitoring Social Security Administration found that there were 18.9 million people age 100 or older who were not marked as deceased on their Social Security database entry, it also found that only 44,000 of these 18.9 million people were receiving payments. Even those 44,000 instances were not obviously fraudulent or erroneous; the inspector general noted that a larger number of living people in the US, an estimated 86,000, were age 100 or older.

In early 2025, the acting commissioner of the Social Security Administration at the time, Leland Dudek — who was elevated to that post by the Trump administration — tried to set the record straight after Elon Musk, then leading a government efficiency initiative for Trump, promoted baseless claims of massive Social Security fraud involving people so old they were obviously dead. Dudek explained, “The reported data are people in our records with a Social Security number who do not have a date of death associated with their record. These individuals are not necessarily receiving benefits.”

(Legal Schnauzer sez: Have I mentioned that Trump has a lot of problems with fact-based issues? Well, here is another, and it's called evidence. Ask Trump or one of his underlings for evidence to support one of their fishy-sounding claims, and you are likely to get a shrug of the shoulders or no response at all. Trump has stated on a number of occasions, when pressed on a legal matter, that he is not a lawyer. In fact, it's one of his favorite go-to responses. And that's probably because even the worst lawyer to ever hold a bar card could handle matters of evidence better than Trump. We have a president who is interested only in evidence that he can cover up. Other than that, forget it.)

What might Donald Trump say at today's White House cabinet meeting, where administration successes are to be discussed? Will he be in his usual caustic form?

Trump counts ballroom/bunker project as major success (ABC News)

Donald Trump announced yesterday that a cabinet meeting planned for today at Camp David would be moved to the White House because of concerns about possible stormy weather. What's on the agenda? Several news outlets report it likely will be a cross between a pep rally and a cult meeting, with Trump giving each attendee an opportunity to praise him, Dear Leader, for an unerring ability to create chaos out of stability, war out of peace, inflation out of economic growth, distrust out of longstanding alliances.

Of course, we don't expect the gathered Trumpers to actually get real with the president; that would cause heads to roll and ketchup bottles to fly. Some reports, however, indicate attendees might discuss ways to end the war in Iran while trying to salvage at least a bit of our country's reputation as an indispensable world power.

But most accounts suggest the meeting will be heavy on the pep-rally component, with a lot of chest thumping and back slapping. Here's how a report at ABC News puts it:

According to a White House official, all Cabinet members were expected to attend, and the meeting would "highlight recent successes of the administration including economy and small business wins, Task Force to Eliminate Fraud highlights, and foreign policy updates."

So members of the Trump administration are going to talk about their successes? Your reaction to that news probably was a lot like mine: "Gee, that should be a short meeting."

But then the obvious hit me: The lackeys filling the Trump White House reside in a  different world than the one you and I inhabit. When I started the Legal Schnauzer blog in June 2007 -- it soon will complete its 20th year of continuous publication -- I quickly realized there was hunger out there for information about our justice system, which many people correctly seemed to sense was deeply flawed. They wanted to know specifics, about the judges, lawyers, cops, and administrators who had befouled American justice. They also wanted to know about the folks on the right side of history -- people often in the same professions noted above, who brought a sense of honor and fairness to an embattled system. And they wanted to know about good people who had been harmed by the system -- well known people like Don Siegelman, Richard Scrushy, and Paul Minor -- and relatively unknown people like Bonnie Cahalane, Sherry Carroll Rollins, Dr. Mark Hayden, David Roberson, Burt Newsome, and many more. And they wanted to know about other journalists, activists, broadcasters and authors, such as K.B. Forbes, Donald Watkins, Andrew Kreig, Tommy Gallion, Scott Horton, and Peter B. Collins, who were (and still are) part of a widespread effort to expose corruption.

It has been rewarding to share this space with readers who have their values in the right place, who bring curiosity and intellect to a subject that is sprawling and complex -- filled with mystery and promise. I sense that Legal Schnauzer readers value our democracy and the rule of law upon which it's built -- understanding our system, with all of its flaws, is grounded in civic virtue that still is worth cherishing.

That's why I'm certain our readers would be out of place in a meeting like the one to be held at the White House today. I have written dozens of posts about the rot and self-dealing, the prejudice and selfishness, that is at the core of the Trump ethos. 

Trump has built an administration on loyalty to him, with no regard for competence or a desire to actually govern. That has produced opportunists and bootlickers like Todd Blanche and Pam Bondi, RFK Jr. and Kristi Noem, Tulsi Gabbard and Kash Patel, Elon Musk and Pete Hegseth. From direct feedback here at the blog and various social-media sites where my work is cross-posted, I know our followers ache for the day when Trump and his acolytes are removed from power, held accountable, and the process of healing can begin. 

That's why I suspect our readers, and millions of Americans like them, can't imagine that a meeting focused on discussion of Trump-era successes would take very long. Here is the reality: Trumpers are likely to find success in actions and events that horrify regular Americans -- and people of conscience around the world. So I began to realize that Team Trump will find plenty to discuss, even if it means inventing "successes" where only failure actually resides. I began to imagine Trump welcoming his troops with an introductory statement that goes something like this . . .

Welcome, and I look forward to our discussions about the many successes we've had over the past 16 months. The Dumocrats under "Sleepy Joe" Biden and Barack Hussein Obama can't imagine the kind of accomplishments we have made. It all starts with this commandment: "Say what you mean, and mean what you say." Here are examples of the leadership our MAGA movement has  brought to the nation and the world:

1. I said, "I will be your justice, I will be your retribution." Did we succeed at that? Ask James Comey;

2. I said we didn't have time to grant due process and trials for migrants prior to deportation. Did we succeed at that? Ask the ones who've been deported anyway;

3. I said we would use the military to assist with domestic law enforcement, to fight crime in our cities, especially those led by Dumocrats. I said we would fight "the enemy within." Did we succeed at that? Ask the thugs who have been locked up;

4. I said we would use DOGE to greatly reduce the power, influence and body count of the regulatory state. Did we succeed at that? Ask the so-called "experts" who were in the bureaucracy and now are in the bread line;

5. I said we would have the fairest elections ever, that we would use the power of the courts and redistricting to make sure we never again let the Dumocrats steal elections. Did we succeed at that? Wait until you see how the 2026 midterms turn out;

6. I said I would appoint conservative, originalist judges to federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Did I succeed at that? Just do the arithmetic;

7. I said I would strengthen ICE and empower them to effectively and firmly enforce our immigration laws. Did I succeed at that? Ask Tim Walz and the Dumocrats who have failed miserably in Minnesota;

8. I said we would reduce our involvement with the UN, NATO, and European "allies" who can't be trusted to pay their fair share of the freight. Did I succeed at that? Ask yourselves this question: Do we need France or does France need us?

9. I said the Kennedy Center needed to be renovated, revived, and reinvigorated. It's a tired, dilapidated structure, but our improvement program is in progress. Did I succeed at that? Just wait until you see the new facility, with a great lineup of artists like Kid Rock, George Strait, and Lee Greenwood; 

10. I said we badly needed a White House ballroom, and we are moving forward with that, while the project has added a world-class military and security complex. When finished in summer 2028, there will be no other facility like it in the world. Did I succeed at that? Wait and see!

With that, let's start discussions of the incredible list of successes we have under our belts. Even George Washington and Abraham Lincoln could not have dreamed of the kind of achievements we have made -- and we are just getting started. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Trump heads to Walter Reed today for his 3rd medical checkup in 13 months, prompting outside physicians to raise serious questions about his health and fitness

Donald Trump will make a doctor's visit today, the third such appointment for the 79-year-old president since the beginning of his second term. That comes after a report at The Washington Post (WaPo) and Yahoo! News that some physicians are starting to question  if Trump is as healthy as he often claims -- and if the White House is covering for him. Under the headline "Trump faces health questions ahead of another Walter Reed trip," Dan Diamond writes:

President Donald Trump today is expected to undergo his third scheduled medical checkup in 13 months, as outside physicians say they have persistent questions about the nearly 80-year-old president’s health and fitness.

Trump, the oldest president ever to be inaugurated, is scheduled to visit Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for a medical and dental visit, the White House said earlier this month. The president went to Walter Reed in April 2025 for his annual physical exam - and returned in October for what officials characterized as a “scheduled follow-up,” sparking weeks of inquiries about Trump’s diagnosis and procedures that the White House repeatedly sidestepped.

Nearly three months after the visit, Trump and the White House clarified that the president had received a CT scan. His doctor, Sean Barbabella, described the imaging as preventive “to definitively rule out any cardiovascular issues.”

That lack of transparency, not surprisingly, seems to be prompting alarm among medical experts about the president's health status. Diamond writes:

While the White House has a round-the-clock medical team that can privately attend to the president if needed, Walter Reed has facilities for advanced imaging and other procedures. Trump also has made two visits to a Florida dentist since January, the White House has said, with officials saying those were for routine cleaning and care.

The White House repeatedly has said the president is in “excellent health,” including in response to questions this weekend, citing medical reports produced by White House physicians, including one from Barbabella in October that said Trump “remains in exceptional health.”

Trump’s health and fitness have been central to his political identity, in part because the president has continually invoked it, seeking to turn persistent doubts about his age into a point of strength. Trump campaigned in 2023 and 2024 by touting his vigor, particularly compared with then-President Joe Biden, regularly boasting of his results on cognitive exams while attacking his opponent as “Sleepy Joe.”

While Trump once tried to fuel speculation about Biden's physical and mental capabilities, the tables -- and the skeptics -- now seem to have turned in his direction. Also, polls show that everyday Americans increasingly are skeptical about Trump's health status. From The WaPo report: 

As an aging president, [Trump] now receives some of the same questions that dogged Biden - - namely, whether he is mentally and physically fit to perform the duties of commander in chief. Independent doctors have asked why Trump’s hands have been repeatedly bruised, why his legs are swollen and whether his occasional sleepiness is a sign of a deeper issue, saying they find White House explanations insufficient. 

“This White House doesn’t seem to want to acknowledge any physical ailment, but older people develop medical issues, and the president is almost 80 years old,” said Jonathan Reiner, a longtime cardiologist for former vice president Dick Cheney. “There just seems to be a lack of candor from the White House.”

A growing share of the public has doubts, too. A Washington Post-ABC News-Ipsos poll conducted last month found that 40 percent of Americans thought Trump had the mental sharpness to serve as president, down from 47 percent last September. Forty-four percent of Americans thought Trump had the physical health to do the job, down from 54 percent last September.

Presidents are not required to disclose their health records, although annual trips to Walter Reed have become a modern tradition. Some lawmakers in both parties have called for more checks on chief executives, such as creating an independent commission that could assess the president’s health. 

In addition to boasting of his physical health, Trump has regularly touted his results on cognitive exams, insisting that the tests validate his fitness. He repeated claims about his cognitive scores as recently as Friday at a rally.

Some of Trump's attempts to tout his physical and mental prowess border on the comical, even the absurd. Diamond writes:

He also has invoked past diagnoses from his physicians, including Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas), who served as a White House physician in Trump’s first term. Trump has said Jackson told him he was healthier than Trump’s predecessors Barack Obama and George W. Bush, both of whom were at least 15 years younger than Trump when first sworn into office. The two former presidents also had consistent exercise routines, a contrast with Trump who eschews exercise except for golf.

“I just care that he was my doctor and he said I’m the healthiest human being he’s ever - Ronny, am I healthier than these guys back here?” Trump said in February, standing in front of the U.S. Naval Academy’s football team.

“Yes sir,” Jackson replied.

“All right. See, this is why I like him,” Trump said.

Some of Trump's aides don't help matters by joining in the jokefest: Diamond cites examples: 

His aides trumpet his energy, including this weekend, when they touted his commitment to working through Saturday.

Trump and some of his top deputies, such as Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Mehmet Oz, have made a recurring joke of the scrutiny of the president’s health.

“Dr. Oz looked at his medical records and said he’s got the highest testosterone level that he’s ever seen for an individual over 70 years old,” Kennedy said on a podcast with former White House official Katie Miller this year. Officials later said he was repeating a private joke. 

The White House has a tendency to send mixed signals about Trump's health, alternating between jokiness and defensiveness:

In a sign of how seriously the White House has treated the issue, press secretary Karoline Leavitt had personally handled questions about the president’s health before she took maternity leave this month. Trump also has spoken directly to some reporters who pursued stories about his fitness.

The White House has become increasingly aggressive when rumors have spread about Trump’s health, which have sometimes corresponded with periods when the highly visible president abruptly lowered his public profile.

In early April, hundreds of thousands of social media users amplified claims that Trump had been taken to Walter Reed - drawing the ire of White House officials, who said the president was instead sequestered to monitor search-and-rescue operations in Iran. The White House subsequently created a digital “Wall of Shame” that criticized social media influencers who had fueled claims about a hospital visit. The page also included reporters and news organizations that had merely noted facts about the situation, such as that Trump had yet to make a public appearance.

“The response was warranted because this was clearly an organized misinformation campaign peddled by left-wing accounts,” Leavitt told The Washington Post in a statement last month. “Spreading false and slanderous misinformation about the President is dangerous, and the White House will always hold people accountable for their egregious lies.”

That is quite a statement from an administration led by a president with a documented propensity for engaging in falsehoods. In short, the White House wants to have it both ways -- contributing to a culture of misinformation, while tolerating misinformation that suits its needs. Diamond reports:

Trump has been a victim of misinformation, said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania, who has studied how misinformation spreads. The president has also contributed to it, she said.

“Conspiracy theories can be accurate,” Jamieson said, alluding to how Trump’s political career has been shaded by questions around his health - some of his own making. “It’s perfectly possible that unexplained absences are worthy of investigation.”

On the other hand, some experts seem to be growing weary of the White House's approach to queries about Trump's health. Diamond writes: 

In interviews, several physicians who have treated presidents and other VIPs said they had come to distrust the White House’s process for releasing information about Trump, with some invoking the doubts around Biden too.

“After a decade of delusion, deceit, denial or delay from the administrations and White House physicians regarding presidential evaluations, my expectation bar is pretty low,” said Jeffrey Kuhlman, who served as a physician to former presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama. “I hope they are at least transparent and truthful.” 

Perhaps careful news consumers can take cues from the approach experts plan to take regarding coverage of today's visit to Walter Reed:

In interviews with The Post, Kuhlman and other physicians listed several questions they’re focused on as Trump heads to his latest Walter Reed visit.

Mental fitness

Trump has touted his performance on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, which is used to screen for dementia or cognitive decline. The president has said he was prompted to undergo the assessment during his first administration because of persistent questions about his mental health.

“I don’t mind being called a brilliant, total tyrant dictator, but I don’t want to be called dumb,” he said at a rally on Friday. He added that “all presidents and vice-presidential candidates should be forced to take a cognitive test and a test on intelligence,” claiming that he would outperform Obama and Biden.

That's the kind of nonsensical statement Trump uses to distract the public from a serious appraisal of what should be seen as a serious issue, especially in an era when Trump recently threatened to bomb Iran "back to the Stone Age." Diamond writes:

Democrats have repeatedly called for Trump to have an independent medical evaluation, citing his sometimes shocking statements, including his recent threat to end Iran’s “civilization.” Some physicians say that given the president’s age, more cognitive testing is warranted too.

“In addition to a cognitive screening test, he may need further screening of his cognitive executive function as we know 80-year-olds do have a decline in memory, reasoning, speed of processing and spatial visualization,” said Kuhlman, who detailed his experiences treating presidents in a book called “Transforming Presidential Healthcare.”

Swollen legs

Reiner said that he had concerns about the president’s visibly swollen legs, which had become apparent by last summer. The White House last July said that Trump had developed chronic venous insufficiency, a mild but chronic illness related to his age - a rare admission of a presidential health issue.

Reiner noted that no mention of the condition was made in Trump’s April 2025 medical report. If the condition was present at the time, it raises questions of whether physicians missed or did not disclose the diagnosis, he said. 

Alternately, if Trump developed swollen legs in the weeks after the April exam, that would indicate a condition called acute edema - and “that usually warrants an  in-depth evaluation to make sure that you don’t have conditions like congestive heart failure,” Reiner said.

The president’s October medical report said nothing about the condition. 

Bruised hands

The White House has said that recurring bruises on Trump’s hands are not a sign of a more serious medical condition, chalking it up to his daily use of aspirin and frequent hand-shaking.

Reiner said he found those explanations not credible.

“If you’re taking too much aspirin, one would likely take less aspirin. So that explanation doesn’t make a lot of sense to me,” Reiner said. “We’ve seen a similar bruise from time to time on his left hand, and I doubt he’s shaking hands with his left hand,” he added.