Raw Story

A clinical psychologist flagged a sign that President Donald Trump may be experiencing a "serious cognitive problem" during a podcast interview that debuted on Sunday.

Trump has displayed some questionable behavior in recent days, including an instance where he snapped at a reporter on Air Force One and told her, "Be quiet, piggy." The event renewed conversations about Trump's cognitive health.

Dr. John Gartner, an author and former professor at Johns Hopkins University, discussed Trump's mental fitness during an interview with The Daily Beast's Joana Coles on a new episode of "The Daily Beast Podcast."

Gartner noted that Trump has admitted to taking multiple cognitive tests since taking office. Trump appears to be divulging the information to address concerns about his mental state, but Gartner said the admissions reveal a much larger problem.

"They said they did advanced imaging," Gartner said. "Okay, well, Trump said not once, not twice, but three times that he had taken cognitive tests. Plural. Okay, so not just a screening exam...They gave him multiple tests. We do not give people multiple cognitive tests unless we suspect there's a serious cognitive problem."

"We also never, ever...give someone an MRI unless we suspect or need to rule out a serious problem," he continued. "So, we know his doctors gave him multiple cognitive tests and an MRI. They didn't say explicitly because of the brain, but we can certainly be sure they scanned his brain. If they're giving him a neuropsychological battery, they're scanning his brain."

"If Donald Trump were just an ordinary patient and you saw these kinds of serious signs of dementia, a responsible doctor would give him both a neuropsychological battery and an MRI," he added. "Of course, they're not telling us why they gave those tests.
They're not telling us the results."

Jeffrey Epstein's brother is warning that Republicans are "scrubbing the files" and "sabotaging" the full release, according to reports.

Mark Epstein said Tuesday in an interview with NewsNation that President Donald Trump and Republicans have changed course over releasing the Epstein files because they are making moves behind the scenes to alter them.

“I’ve been recently told, the reason they’re going to be releasing the files and the reason for the flip is that they’re sabotaging these files,” Mark Epstein told NewsNation.

He added that the GOP is “scrubbing the files to take Republican names out" and claimed the files are being sanitized at a "facility" about 78 miles northwest of Capitol Hill in Winchester, Virginia, The Daily Beast reports.

“He didn’t tell me what he knew, but Jeffrey definitely had dirt on Trump,” he said.

“You could see in the emails. Trump could deny it all he wants, but it’s pretty clear everything Trump says is a lie," he added.

Trump has denied any involvement or knowledge of Epstein and accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell's sex trafficking ring and abuse of girls. And after weeks of pushing to block the release of the files and pressuring other Republicans not to sign the discharge petition, he decided to reverse his moves and now has asked Republicans to sign the petition to release the files.

The U.S. House of Representatives on Tuesday voted 427-1 to release the Jeffrey Epstein files and send the discharge petition to the Senate in a move aimed to reveal more information about the disgraced late financier and convicted sex offender and his potential ties to other powerful entities.

Rep. Jesus "Chuy" García (D-IL), a prominent progressive lawmaker from the Chicago area, triggered a firestorm of controversy when he announced his retirement at precisely the filing deadline to run for his district, a move that meant the only candidate who declared for the Democratic primary was his own chief of staff, Patty Garcia.

The congressman, who has said he is retiring due to health concerns and his adoption of a grandchild after the death of his daughter, has faced accusations that he effectively rigged the primary to hand-pick his successor, but denies the accusation. However, paperwork obtained by Politico seems to provide evidence that he was fully aware of and supported the effort by his chief of staff to get on the ballot immediately before his retirement.

"A petition signature page submitted by Patty Garcia to the Illinois Board of Elections shows the representative and his closest allies, whom Chuy García has also helped get elected over the years, signed their names. They include Cook County Commissioner Alma Anaya, Illinois state Sen. Celina Villanueva, state Reps. Aaron Ortiz and Norma Hernandez, and Chicago City Council members Jeylú Gutiérrez and Michael Rodriguez," reported Shia Kapos and Nicholas Wu. "The form is dated Nov. 1, two days before the filing deadline and three days before Chuy García formally announced his retirement."

A spokesperson for the congressman has said this paperwork doesn't prove he manipulated the primary, and that "he did not circulate petitions" for his chief of staff, even though he signed one.

On Tuesday, the House passed a resolution, filed by Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (D-WA), reprimanding García's interference in the primary to succeed him.

This came despite the objections of both Illinois Democrats and House leadership, who are broadly standing behind García's decision.

The White House blamed Bloomberg News correspondent Catherine Lucey after President Donald Trump referred to her as "piggy."

On Friday, Lucey had asked Trump about the Jeffrey Epstein scandal during a gaggle aboard Air Force One.

The reporter wondered why the president was defensive, “if there’s nothing incriminating in the files.”

“Quiet. Quiet, piggy," Trump snapped.

Without providing evidence, an unnamed White House official later told The Guardian that Lucey was to blame.

“This reporter behaved in an inappropriate and unprofessional way towards her colleagues on the plane,” the official said. “If you’re going to give it, you have to be able to take.”

Advocates for hemp on Wednesday decried a provision of the Republican government funding law signed by President Donald Trump that tightens restrictions on the versatile plant—a move critics say will devastate a $30 billion industry.

The new restrictions set a stricter limit on the amount of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)—the psychoactive chemical in cannabis—in order to close a loophole that allowed for the sale of unregulated food and beverages containing intoxicating hemp-derived compounds.

Twenty-two Democratic senators—including advocates for legal recreational or medical marijuana—joined almost all Republicans in voting against an amendment introduced by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) to strip out the restrictions from the final bill. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas was the only other Republican to back Paul’s effort.

“Our industry is being used as a pawn as leaders work to reopen the government,” Jonathan Miller, general counsel for the US Hemp Roundtable, an industry group, warned ahead of the vote. “Recriminalizing hemp will force American farms and businesses to close and disrupt the well-being of countless Americans who depend on hemp.”

Hemp—which is used in a wide range of products from clothing to construction materials to fuel, food, and biodegradable plastics—was legalized under the 2018 farm bill signed by President Donald Trump during his first term.

But lawmakers including Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)—who backed the 2018 legislation—argued that cannabis companies are exploiting a loophole in the farm bill to legally manufacture products with enough THC to get consumers high.

Paul, however, ripped the provision, arguing in a Thursday Courier Journal opinion piece that it “destroys the livelihood of hemp farmers.”

“This could not come at a worse time for our farmers,” Paul wrote. “Costs have increased while prices for crops have declined. Farm bankruptcies are rising.”

“For many farmers, planting hemp offered them a lifeline,” he continued. “Hemp can be used for textiles, rope, insulation, composite wood, paper, grain, and in CBD products, and growing hemp helped farmers to mitigate the loses they’ve endured during this season of hardship.”

Paul noted that “the provision that was inserted into the government funding bill makes illegal any hemp product that contains more than 0.4 milligrams of THC per container.”

“That would be nearly 100% of hemp products currently sold,” he said. “This is so low that it takes away any of the benefit of the current products intended to manage pain or other conditions.”

Charles and Linda Gill have grown hemp on their family farm in Bowdoinham, Maine, since the plant was legalized in 2018.

“We are not in the business of these intoxicating hemp products on the market, which are the ones that are screwing it up for everybody,” Charles Gill told Maine Morning Star‘s Emma Davis on Wednesday. “They’re abusing the system.”

“All our current products would be banned,” Gill said of the new restrictions. “It would pretty much put us out of business.”

Hemp defenders vowed to contest the new law.

“The fight isn’t over,” Hemp Industry & Farmers of America executive director Brian Swensen said on X after the law’s passage.

“In 2018, President Trump and Congress legalized hemp, delivering more jobs and opportunities to American farmers and small businesses,” Swensen said, adding that the restrictions “will devastate American farmers, business owners, veterans, and seniors.”

“The hemp ban will also open up dangerous black markets for hemp and allow China to take over the entire hemp market,” he added, claiming “it kills over 325,000 American jobs and destroys the industry.”

After 43 days, the U.S. government shutdown finally came to an end late on Nov. 12, 2025, when Congress voted through a long-overdue funding bill, which President Donald Trump promptly signed.

But the prolonged gap in government-as-usual has come at a cost to the economy.

The Conversation spoke with RIT economist Amitrajeet A. Batabyal on the short- and long-term impact that the shutdown may have had on consumers, on the gross domestic product and on international trust in U.S. stewardship of the global economy.

What is the short-term economic impact of the shutdown?

Having some 700,000 government workers furloughed has hit consumer spending. And a subset of those workers believed they may not have a job to come back to amid efforts by the Trump administration to lay them off permanently.

In fact, the University of Michigan’s monthly index on consumer sentiment tumbled to a near record low in November — a level not seen since the depth of the pandemic. Because lower consumer sentiment is related to reduced spending, that has a short-term impact on retailers, too.

And because parks and monuments have been closed throughout the shutdown, tourism activity has been down — a decline no doubt worsened by the reduction in flights enforced due to shortages in air traffic controllers.

The effect was particularly pronounced in places like Washington D.C. — one of the most popular destinations for tourists — and Hawaii. This short-term effect will likely extend to secondary businesses, such as hotels. Indeed, prior to the shutdown, the U.S. Travel Association warned that such an event would cost the total travel industry around US$1 billion a week.

And the longer-term impact?

Estimates range, but the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said that the cost to America’s gross domestic product in lost productivity is in the range of $7 billion to $14 billion — and that is a cost from a self-imposed wound that will never be recovered.

And from an international macroeconomic point of view, trust in the U.S. has been hit. Even before the shutdown, political dysfunction in Washington contributed to a downgrade in the U.S. credit rating — something that could result in higher borrowing costs.

The shutdown further erodes the United States’ standing as the global leader of the free market and rules-based international order. Accompanied by the economic rise of China, this shutdown further erodes international investors’ impression of the U.S. as an arbiter and purveyor of the established trade and finance system — and that can only hurt Washington’s global economic standing.

Has the economic pain been felt evenly?

Certainly not. Large numbers of Americans have been hit, but the shutdown affected regions and demographics differently.

Those on the lower end of the income distribution have been hit harder. This is in large part due to the impact the shutdown has had on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as food stamps. Some 92 percent of SNAP benefits go to American households below the federal poverty line.

More than 42 million Americans rely on SNAP payments. And they were caught up in the political maelstrom — left not knowing if their SNAP payments will come, if they will be fully funded and when they will appear.

There is also research that shows Black Americans are affected more by shutdowns than other racial groups. This is because traditionally, Black workers have made up a higher percentage of the federal workforce than they do the private sector workforce.

Geographically, too, the impact of this shutdown has been patchy.

California, Washington D.C. and Virginia have the highest proportion of federal employees, so that means a larger chunk of the workers in those regions were furloughed. Hawaii has also been disproportionately hit due to the large number of military there. One analysis found that with 5.6 percent of people in the state federally employed, and a further 12 percent in nonprofit jobs supported by federal funding, Hawaii was the second-hardest-hit state during the shutdown.

How easy is it for the US to recover from a shutdown?

Because shutdowns are always temporary, recovery depends on how long it has gone on for. Traditionally, the long-term economic trend is not badly affected by the short-term pain of shutdowns.

But it may be slightly different this time around. This shutdown went on longer than any other shutdown in U.S. history.

Also, the nature of this shutdown raises some concerns. This was the first shutdown in which a president said that backpay was not a sure thing for all furloughed federal employees. And the uncertainty over those threatened with layoffs again broke from past precedent. Both matters seemed to have been settled with the deal ending the shutdown, but even so, the ongoing uncertainly may have affected the spending patterns of many affected.

And we also do not know what the economic impact of the reduction of domestic flights will be.

Have other economic factors exacerbated the shutdown affect?

While the shutdowns in Trump’s first administration did take place while tariffs were being used as a foreign policy and economic tool, this year is different.

Trump’s tariff war this time around is across the board, hitting both adversaries and allies. As a result, the U.S. economy has been more tentative, resulting in greater uncertainty on inflation.

Related to that is the rising grocery prices that have contributed to an upward tick in inflation.

This all makes the job of the Federal Reserve harder when it is trying to fine-tune monetary policy to meet its dual mandates of full employment and price stability. Add to that the lack of government data for over a month, and it means the Fed is grasping in the dark a little when it comes to charting the U.S. economy.