Reporter from MyPillow guy's network asks White House the secret behind Trump looking ‘healthier than ever before'
Absolutely teeing up her question to Leavitt, the Lindell TV 'reporter' wondered if the White House would be able to share Donald Trump's secret 'fitness plan' because the 78-year-old president looks 'healthier than ever before' and better than when he first began running for political office.
The fawning 'question' to wrap up Friday's presser — which largely focused on the continued impacts of Trump's chaotic tariffs, the upcoming talks with Iran, and the Supreme Court ruling the administration must 'facilitate' the return of a wrongly deported man — is yet another example of how this administration is reshaping press coverage within the White House.
The president was scheduled to undergo his yearly physical exam at Walter Reed on Friday, which would be his first comprehensive examination in over 18 months. Despite being the oldest president to be sworn into office for a new term, Trump — who spent much of the past four years assailing his former President Joe Biden's mental fitness — is reportedly not expected to take a cognitive test during this exam.
Castronuova, who asked Leavitt two days ago if Trump was 'disappointed' with conservative Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett, took the opportunity to close out this latest press briefing by gushing over Trump's physical appearance.
'Will you guys also consider releasing the president's fitness plan?' Castronuova asked after Leavitt pledged that the White House would quickly share the results from Trump's medical exam.
'He actually looks healthier than ever before,' the Lindell TV White House correspondent continued. 'Healthier than he looked eight years ago, and I'm sure everyone in this room can agree. Is he working out with Bobby Kennedy, and is he eating less McDonald's?'
Castronuova seemed to be referencing Health and Human Services Director Robert F. Kennedy's 'Make America Healthy Again' agenda, which would target processed food — among other things. At the same time, the McDonald's-loving president infamously forced Kennedy to pose for a photo alongside a feast from the fast food joint, prompting the Trump official to later testify that he's not coming after your 'cheeseburger and Diet Coke, which my boss loves.'
'I can confirm that the president is in very good shape as you see on your daily basis here,' a pleased and smiling Leavitt responded to Castronuova. 'And in that vein, thank god it's Friday. It's been a long, busy week at the White House. We will see you all Monday. We will release the results of that report as soon as we can.'
Since Trump's return to office, the administration has seized power from the White House Correspondents' Association on the press pool rotation and is threatening to take over seating assignments in the briefing room. Additionally, Leavitt has elevated so-called 'new media' voices in the pressers — which has included a number of MAGA loyalists from fringe outlets.
Castronuova, who was a trainer on season 11 of The Biggest Loser, made headlines last year when she sued the New York State Board of Elections for allegedly preventing her name from being written in as a Republican challenger to Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY). She was initially kept off the GOP ballot when party leaders decided to forego a Republican primary.
Earlier this year, she was hired to be the chief White House correspondent for Lindell TV, the MAGA digital channel run by the Trump-boosting pillow magnate who's been facing existential financial and legal peril in recent months.
'We're absolutely thrilled to welcome Cara Castronuova to the team. Our viewers will get an up-close and personal look at White House press coverage like they've never seen before,' Lindell said in a statement about Castronuava's hiring. 'She will provide the kind of hard-hitting, competent reporting that pulls no punches while she delivers unbiased breaking news stories from the White House that other networks refuse to report.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Exclusive-Judge in US crosshairs warns Brazil banks not to apply sanctions locally
By Ricardo Brito and Brad Haynes BRASILIA (Reuters) -Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who recently had sanctions imposed on him by the U.S. government, told Reuters that courts could punish Brazilian financial institutions for seizing or blocking domestic assets in response to U.S. orders. Those remarks raise the stakes in a standoff that has hammered shares of Brazilian banks caught between U.S. sanctions and the orders of Brazil's highest court. In a late Tuesday interview from his office in Brasilia, Moraes granted that U.S. law enforcement regarding Brazilian banks that operate in the United States "falls under U.S. jurisdiction." "However, if those banks choose to apply that law domestically, they cannot do so — and may be penalized under Brazilian law," he added. His remarks underscore the potential consequences of a Monday ruling by fellow Supreme Court Justice Flavio Dino, who warned that foreign laws cannot be automatically applied in Brazil. That ruling was followed by a sharp rebuke from the U.S. State Department's Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, which warned on social media hours later that Moraes was "toxic" and that "non-U.S. persons must tread carefully: those providing material support to human rights abusers face sanctions risk themselves." The U.S. Treasury Department slapped the sanctions on Moraes last month under the Global Magnitsky Act, a law designed to impose economic penalties on foreigners deemed to have a record of corruption or human rights abuse. The order accused him of suppressing freedom of expression and leading politicized prosecutions, including against former President Jair Bolsonaro, a staunch Trump ally on trial before Brazil's Supreme Court on charges of plotting a coup to reverse his loss in the 2022 election. Bolsonaro has denied any wrongdoing and denounced the case as politically motivated. In his interview, Moraes said decisions by foreign courts and governments can only take effect in Brazil after validation through a domestic process. He said it is therefore not possible to seize assets, freeze funds or block the property of Brazilian citizens without following those legal steps. The global reach of the U.S. financial system means foreign banks often restrict a wider range of transactions to avoid secondary sanctions. Moraes said he was confident that the sanctions against him would be reversed via diplomatic channels or an eventual challenge in U.S. courts. But he acknowledged that for now they had put financial institutions in a bind. "This misuse of legal enforcement places financial institutions in a difficult position — not only Brazilian banks, but also their American partners," he said. "That is precisely why, I repeat, the diplomatic channel is important so this can be resolved quickly - to prevent misuse of a law that is important to fight terrorism, criminal organizations, international drug trafficking and human trafficking," he added. The U.S. State Department did not immediately respond to request for comment. Moraes had "engaged in serious human rights abuse," said a Treasury Department spokesperson. "Rather than concocting a fantasy fiction, de Moraes should stop carrying out arbitrary detentions and politicized prosecutions." NO CHOICE The clash could have serious consequences for Brazilian financial institutions, said two bankers in Brazil, who requested anonymity to discuss the matter candidly. Most large banks are supervised by the U.S. government in some way due to their international presence or exposure, either through a foreign branch or issuance of foreign securities, said the former director of an international bank in Brazil. The choice for these banks, under pressure from the U.S., may be to invite sanctioned clients to seek a different institution to keep their assets, the banker added. The director of a major Brazilian bank said that, in practice, Monday's court ruling means any action taken by Brazilian banks based on rules involving the U.S. Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, which oversees U.S. sanctions, will need approval from Brazil's Supreme Court. At the same time, he added, failing to comply with an OFAC decision could cut a bank off from the international financial system. "Brazil doesn't really have a choice," said the banker. "Given how interconnected everything is, and the disparity in economic power between the U.S. and Brazil, we're left in a position of subordination. There's not much we can do." He stressed that the court would need to come up with a solution "that doesn't put the financial system at risk." Shares of state-run lender Banco do Brasil, where most federal officials including judges receive salaries, fell 6% on Tuesday, the largest drop among Brazil's three biggest banks. The bank said in a Tuesday statement it was prepared to deal with "complex, sensitive" issues involving global regulations. Sign in to access your portfolio
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US sanctions more ICC judges, prosecutors for probes into alleged American, Israeli war crimes
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration is ramping up pressure on the International Criminal Court for pursuing investigations into U.S. and Israeli officials for alleged war crimes. The State Department on Wednesday announced new sanctions on four ICC officials, including two judges and two prosecutors, who it said had been instrumental in efforts to prosecute Americans and Israelis. As a result of the sanctions, any assets the targets hold in U.S. jurisdictions are frozen. The sanctions are just the latest in a series of steps the administration has taken against The Hague-based court, the world's first international war crimes tribunal. The U.S. has already imposed penalties on the ICC's former chief prosecutor, Karim Khan, who stepped aside in May pending an investigation into alleged sexual misconduct, and four other tribunal judges. In a statement, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he had taken action against ICC judges Kimberly Proust of Canada and Nicolas Guillou of France and prosecutors Nazhat Shameem Khan of Fiji and Mame Mandiaye Niang of Senegal. 'These individuals are foreign persons who directly engaged in efforts by the International Criminal Court to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute nationals of the United States or Israel, without the consent of either nation,' Rubio said. He added that the administration would continue 'to take whatever actions we deem necessary to protect our troops, our sovereignty, and our allies from the ICC's illegitimate and baseless actions.' In a separate statement, the State Department said Prost was hit for ruling to authorize an ICC investigation into U.S. personnel in Afghanistan, which was later dropped. Guillou was sanctioned for ruling to authorize the ICC's issuance of arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant related to Israel's war against Hamas in Gaza. Khan and Niang were penalized for continuing Karim Khan's investigation into Israel's actions in Gaza, including upholding the ICC's arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, according to the statement. Wednesday's move carries on a history of Trump administration actions against the ICC, of which the U.S. is not a member, dating back to his first term in office. During Trump's first term, the U.S. hit the ICC with sanctions, but those were rescinded by President Joe Biden's administration in early 2021.
New York Post
12 minutes ago
- New York Post
Democrats facing crisis as more than 2M voters leave party in four years: analysis
The Democratic Party is bleeding registered voters, suffering a 4.5 million swing against it that could take years to recover from, according to a new report. Between the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections, Democrats lost about 2.1 million voters across the 30 states that track registration by political party, according to a New York Times analysis of data gathered by the L2 tracking firm. Over the same period, the Republican Party gained 2.4 million registered voters. Officially, there are still more registered Democrats than Republicans nationwide, but that number is incomplete because blue states like California and New York allow voters to register by party — as does the District of Columbia — while reliably red states like Texas, Missouri and Ohio do not. Most alarmingly for Democrats, the decline is nationwide, with the US seeing more new voters registering with the GOP in 2024 for the first time in six years. Democrats also saw their registered voter advantage dwindle in four 2024 battleground states — Arizona, Nevada, North Carolina and Pennsylvania — all of which President Trump carried this past Nov. 5. Democrats lost about 2.1 million registered voters in the 30 states that track registration by political party. AP Michael Pruser, who tracks voter registration closely as the director of data science for Decision Desk HQ, warned that the numbers not only help explain Trump's victory last year — in which he became the first Republican presidential candidate to win the popular vote in 20 years — but also forecast significant headwinds for Democrats in next year's midterm elections as well as the 2028 presidential vote. 'I don't want to say, 'The death cycle of the Democratic Party,'' Pruser told the Times, 'but there seems to be no end to this.' 'There is no silver lining or cavalry coming across the hill. This is month after month, year after year,' he added. In North Carolina, Democrats lost 115,523 voters between the 2020 and 2024 election, with Republicans gaining more than 140,000 members and erasing the Dems' registration advantage, according to the L2 data. More new voters registered to be Republican than Democrat last year, the first time since 2018. Michael Nagle Democrats suffered similar losses in Arizona and Pennsylvania, while in Nevada — a state whose politics were long dominated by the Las Vegas-based Culinary Workers Union — the share of registered Democrats suffered the second-steepest plunge of those states measured between 2020 and 2024. (Only deep-red West Virginia saw more precipitous losses.). Even Democratic bastions like New York and California were not safe from voter erosion, with Dems losing 305,922 registered voters in the Empire State in between the two elections. In California, Democrats lost 680,556 voters between 2020 and 2024. All in all, Democrats went from enjoying an advantage of nearly 11 percentage points over Republicans in registered voter numbers in 2020 to just over six percentage points across the 30 states and DC in 2024, the Times found. Experts believe that the fall of new Democratic registrations can be linked to the growing number of voters choosing to be independents or unaffiliated, a trend that is sapping both parties' rolls. In 2018, more than one-third (34%) of new voter registrations nationwide were Democrats, while registered Republicans made up just 20% of new voters. As of last year, however, Republicans had erased that gap, with party supporters making up 29% of new voters, while Democrats made up 26% of new voters.
