Trump’s Weird Bruise Looks Worse Than Ever

The U.S. president appeared with yet another strange mark on his hands at the World Economic Forum in Davos, once again raising concerns that his health is not what he has claimed it to be.

Donald Trump—the oldest person to ever be elected president—was photographed with what appeared to be another large bruise, this time marring the back of his left hand. Normally, his right hand is bruised.

The 79-year-old has repeatedly claimed that he is in pristine condition, brushing off public alarm over his deteriorating body, but several health scares over the last several months have sparked questions over his ability to remain in office.

The large bruises on his hands—often covered with ill-matched makeup—have become a near routine fixture on the president’s aging body as they shift from hand to hand. The White House has blamed the superficial injuries on handshaking and aspirin, though doctors have suggested that the bruises could be the warning sign of something more serious.

Other symptoms of his deteriorating condition have been more concerning, such as the sagging mouth and drooping expression he sported in September during 9/11 memorial ceremonies, causing some onlookers to suggest that the president could have suffered a stroke.

The next month, Trump spent hours at Walter Reed Medical Center. The White House refused to disclose the reason, but eventually Trump let slip that he had received MRI scans, the results of which he said came back “perfect.” At least one former White House physician questioned the timeline of Trump’s appointment, pointing out that his four-hour visit to the hospital was far longer than would be required by an MRI test. Trump later revealed he might not have gotten an MRI at all, but something “less than” that.

Trump has also appeared discombobulated and lethargic during critical meetings with world leaders. Over the course of the last year, Trump has fallen asleep roughly a dozen times during critical public appearances. It happened during Cabinet meetings, in the middle of bombastic military parades, while meeting leaders of critical allies, and even during the Pope’s funeral.

Earlier this week, Trump aggressed relations with Europe, wrote to the leaders of Norway that he intended to pursue Greenland since they had not given him a Nobel Peace Prize last year (Norway’s government has no control over the award or its designees), and spent more than an hour on the dais in the White House press briefing room mumbling to himself about a stack of papers.

Responding to his recent behavior, Ty Cobb, a former White House attorney from Trump’s first administration, said that the shift in Trump’s psychological condition was “palpable.”

Former Special Counsel Jack Smith doubled down Thursday on his decision to bring criminal charges against President Donald Trump.

“To be clear, I stand by my decisions as special counsel, including the decision to bring charges against President Trump. Our investigation developed proof beyond a reasonable doubt that President Trump engaged in criminal activity,” Smith said during his opening statement at a public hearing before the House Judiciary Committee.

“If asked whether to prosecute a former president based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether that resident was a Democrat or a Republican,” he said.

Smith continued to assert that Trump had “willfully” broken the law.

“Grand juries in two separate districts reached this conclusion based on his actions as alleged in the indictments they returned. Rather than accept his defeat in the 2020 election, President Trump engaged in a criminal scheme to overturn the results and prevent the lawful transfer of power,” he said.

“After leaving office in January 2021, President Trump illegally kept classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago social club, and repeatedly tried to obstruct justice to conceal his continued retention of those documents. Highly sensitive national security information was held in a ballroom and a bathroom.”

In December, Smith testified for eight hours in a closed-door hearing before the committee. He has long sought to testify in a public hearing, but was rebuffed by Republicans in favor of one behind closed doors.

Ryan Coogler’s Sinners—a commercially and critically successful African American vampire film—has set an all-time Oscars record with 16 total nominations. These include best picture, Michael B. Jordan for best leading actor, Wunmi Mosaku for best supporting actress, and Delroy Lindo for best supporting actor.

The film follows hustling twin brothers who simultaneously fight back against Jim Crow racism and vampires who are attracted to the blues music coming from their juke joint. The box office hit is defined by Coogler’s respect for African American music and culture.

“There’s a firm argument to be made that this art form, the Delta blues, is our country’s most important contribution to global popular culture. You know, I think it’s probably [Black people’s] most important artistic contribution to the world,” Coogler told Democracy Now! last spring. “And it was such a profound discovery, that this music made by people who were, you know, for all intents and purposes, living under a backbreaking form of American apartheid, you know, denied their humanity on a daily basis, would create something so artistically excellent that it would affect global culture from that time forward.”

Sinners’s 16 nominations eclipse the record of 14 that All About Eve (1950), Titanic (1997), and La La Land (2016) all shared. Its costume designer, Ruth E. Carter, also becomes the most nominated Black woman in Oscars history after being named in five categories. Other best picture nominees, such as Paul Thomas Anderson’s audacious One Battle After Another, Chloé Zhao’s Hamnet, and Josh Safdie’s Marty Supreme, will offer Coogler some stiff competition.

Win or lose, Coogler has made history and continues to produce a robust catalog of Black blockbusters—from Black Panther to Fruitvale Station to Creed to Sinners—that will be appreciated for years to come.

View the full 2026 Oscar nominations here.

Donald Trump’s support has plummeted, with a new poll showing that he is underwater with all of the groups responsible for his 2024 election victory.

The poll from The New York Times and Siena University has Trump with a 56 percent disapproval rating, and when that is broken down by age and race, the results look similar to 2020, just before Trump’s election loss that year.

Overall, 49 percent of voters say that the country is worse off than it was last year, with 32 percent saying it was better. About 56 percent of respondents disapprove of Trump’s management of the federal government, 58 percent disapprove of his immigration policies, and 66 percent disapprove of his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files. About 44 percent of people who have turned against the president cite economic issues, and 58 percent of all of the poll’s respondents disapprove of his handling of the economy.

Clearly, Americans don’t like Trump’s policies. Reports from across the country, most recently Minneapolis, show Border Patrol and ICE agents engaging in violence against not only suspected undocumented immigrants but also U.S. citizens protesting against them. Despite a new law requiring full disclosure of the government’s unclassified Epstein archives, only about a small amount has been released, with much of what has been published fully redacted. And the public isn’t seeing any benefits from the president’s incoherent economic policies.

With the midterm elections only months away, Trump and the Republican Party seem headed for massive losses. That’s probably why Trump keeps “joking” about canceling elections; if ICE keeps making the headlines for horrific actions, the president keeps flip-flopping on tariffs, and the administration continues to stall on the Epstein files, it’s safe to say that Trump is in trouble come November.

America’s latest and greatest threat, according to the White House, is the American people.

A leaked security threats assessment obtained by independent journalist Ken Klippenstein from the Department of Homeland Security reveals the department’s intention to shift the definition of domestic terrorism toward a new subset of individuals acting on “class-based or economic grievances.”

As Klippenstein points out in his Substack Wednesday, that could refer to any American, from an “angry MAGA Midwesterner” to a “Mamdani-supporting urban dweller.”

The report itself, which is marked for “official use” and has not yet been made publicly available, identifies extremism emerging from the American public as the country’s gravest threat.

“Of threat actors with ideological motivations, domestic violent extremists in recent years have been the most active plotters,” the report reads, according to screenshots shared by Klippenstein. “They are motivated to conduct attacks by a wide range of factors, including anti-government sentiment, racial and ethnic grievances, anti-Israel and anti-Semitic beliefs, and class-based or economic grievances.”

Part of the rise, according to DHS, has been fanned by the “ongoing Israel-HAMAS conflict and a resurgence in English-language terrorist media.”

The report appears to be a blatant slap in the face to the Constitution, which enshrined the public’s right to freedom of speech and protest within the folds of the First Amendment. And by all means, the American public has a lot to be incensed over when it comes to the federal government.

In Minnesota, thousands have participated in mass protests after ICE agents shot and killed Renee Nicole Good, a 37-year-old mother and U.S. citizen. DHS was quick to brand her a “domestic terrorist.”

Since Good’s death, federal officers have participated in myriad forms of overreach, including ripping people from their homes and families, pulling over school buses, attacking teachers and students at a Minneapolis high school, and even clashing with local law enforcement.

In an attempt to defend their own city from the state-sponsored violence, some Minneapolis residents have opted to openly carry their firearms through the city, brandishing their Second Amendment right to bear arms. Locals have formed neighborhood watches to follow ICE vehicles, banging pots and pans and screaming to alert others when agents enter their residential neighborhoods. But DHS’s latest definition could place an even more severe target on those resisting the government’s violent agenda.