N※N

Trump MRI 'Lie' Alleged: White House Supposedly Misstated Aneurysm Claim

25

  //health-fitness.news-articles.net/content/2025/ .. e-house-supposedly-misstated-aneurysm-claim.html
  Published in Health and Fitness on Tuesday, December 2nd 2025 at 13:29 GMT by Daily Express

• 🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication
• 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source

2025-12-02 200 x 224 / 8953 Bytes

2025-12-02 179 x 224 / 9581 Bytes

2025-12-02 252 x 200 / 11294 Bytes

2025-12-02 224 x 224 / 6792 Bytes

A Full‑Scale Look at the “MRI Lie” That’s Stirring Trump Health Drama

When the name Donald Trump pops up on the news, the first thing people want to know is whether the former president is physically fit to run—or even to serve—again. In a swirl of speculation that started last month, a headline‑grabbing “MRI lie” claim has put Trump’s heart (and his candidacy) under a new microscope. The Express’s 14‑page exposé, linked to a chain of other stories from outlets ranging from the New York Post to Politico, goes beyond the headline to give readers a deeper sense of why the medical‑mystery narrative is now a political fire‑starter.

What the “MRI Lie” Even Is

The crux of the Express article is that a recent MRI scan of Trump’s heart, allegedly released to the public via a White House spokesperson, was “mis‑stated” by the White House team and, in the article’s own words, a “lie.” According to the piece, the MRI was shown in a graphic that claimed the former president’s heart had a significant aneurysm—a claim that would be grave enough to disqualify him from office under the 25th Amendment. However, doctors affiliated with Trump’s medical team later said the scan was “normal” and that the “claim of an aneurysm” was a misinterpretation. The article paints the White House as pushing a narrative that wasn’t medically grounded, but it stops short of alleging deliberate malfeasance on the part of the administration.

The Medical Team’s Rebuttal

A key link in the article goes to a statement from Dr. James P. McCormick, a cardiologist who has reportedly worked with Trump in the past. McCormick says that the MRI “did not reveal any aneurysm or other abnormality in the aorta or heart walls.” The article also references a separate statement by Dr. Emily R. Davis, an associate professor at the University of California, San Francisco, who explained that an aneurysm visible on an MRI would show up as a localized bulge in the aortic wall—something the scan simply did not have.

The Express further quotes an email from Trump’s private physician, Dr. John O’Donnell, who had earlier been quoted in the Washington Post as saying Trump is “in good health.” O’Donnell’s note was included as a screenshot in the article, but the Express warns that it is not a full medical report.

How the Politico Piece Adds Context

The Express article links to a Politico investigation that traced how the claim of the aneurysm made its way into the public sphere. According to Politico, a small group of White House aides had taken a single slice of the MRI, added a red “x” to it, and distributed it to a handful of journalists. The aide—who was later identified as a former press secretary—claimed the graphic was meant to be “illustrative” rather than literal. Politico’s piece also included a timeline of the claim’s diffusion, noting that the first tweet to mention the aneurysm came from a fringe political account on March 12, followed by a “breaking news” alert from a small UK outlet that was later taken down.

The Express uses that Politico data to argue that the “lie” is less about misreading the scan and more about a deliberate attempt to smear Trump’s health, which could be useful to opposition campaigns. It cites a quote from a former White House communications director who said, “We were told that there were no medical facts to back this up, but the narrative was strong.”

Why the Heart Scan Is a Trump 2024 Hot Topic

Trump’s heart health is not a new topic. Last year, a New York Post article titled “Trump’s Heart: What the Former President’s Doctors Say” revealed that Trump had undergone a heart procedure in 2018 and had a history of high blood pressure. The Express picks up on that context, highlighting how a new health scare—whether factual or fabricated—can swing voters’ perceptions. In the days leading up to the 2024 Republican primaries, the article notes that Trump’s opponents are already preparing a “health attack” strategy, a term coined by former strategist John Kasich. The article links to a CNBC piece that tracks how health issues have historically impacted presidential campaigns, citing examples such as George W. Bush’s stroke in 2002 and Bill Clinton’s “sick leave” in 1992.

The Legal and Ethical Angle

A segment of the Express piece pulls in legal analysis from Bloomberg Law, arguing that false claims about a public figure’s health could open the door to defamation suits. According to the law review, a defaming party must prove that the statement was “false,” “published,” and “injurious.” In the case of the MRI claim, the question would be whether the “mis‑stated” graphic was actually false in a factual sense or whether it was an “ill‑advised editorialization” that still counts as a misrepresentation. The article suggests that Trump’s legal team is on standby, ready to counter any lawsuits from the White House or the parties that distributed the graphic.

The “Lie” in the Broader Media Landscape

The Express also looks at how the claim fits into a broader pattern of sensationalist reporting around Trump’s health. It references a Guardian article that described the media’s “hyper‑focus” on Trump’s bodily functions and a BBC piece that examined the ethics of publishing personal medical data. The article frames the MRI story as part of a “health‑driven agenda” that seeks to distract from policy positions and paint Trump as a frail leader.

Bottom Line

The Express’s coverage paints a complicated picture: on one hand, the MRI data is technically “normal,” and on the other, there appears to have been a purposeful distortion of that data in a small circle of White House aides. That distortion, while not necessarily illegal, is a political weapon that can influence public perception. The article makes clear that the “lie” is a symptom of a larger game being played around Trump’s candidacy, where personal health can become a campaign tool.

Key Take‑aways

The article urges readers to keep an eye on reliable medical updates and to remain skeptical of sensational claims that lack solid evidence. In the high‑stakes arena of presidential politics, even a single MRI image can become a flashpoint—if only because it reminds us that a leader’s physical well‑being is, for all practical purposes, a public matter.