By John Q. Hosedrinker 
During recent public appearances, President Trump has been observed using cosmetics to conceal severe bruising on his right hand, a practice also noted the previous day. This application of makeup, visible to photographers at Fort Bragg, follows a pattern of attempting to cover discoloration on his extremities. While the White House has previously attributed such bruising to frequent handshaking and aspirin use, a prior incident with bruising on his left hand was explained by him clipping it on a table, contradicting earlier statements. The use of makeup to mask this apparent bruising has become a recurring detail in reports on the president’s health.
Read the original article here
The recent observation of Donald Trump, at 79, appearing with what seems to be more makeup on his chronically bruised hand has certainly sparked a noticeable amount of discussion and speculation. It’s an image that catches the eye, especially when juxtaposed with the usual public presentation of a former president. This particular detail, the accentuated covering on his hand, has led many to ponder the underlying reasons and implications.
The appearance of the hand itself, described as tiny and ancient, seems to have become a focal point for those watching his public appearances. The contrast between the perceived fragility of the hand and the more robust public persona often projected can be quite striking. For some, this visual detail serves as a stark reminder of his age and the passage of time, prompting reflections on the eventual end of a particular political era.
The notion that the hand might require its own dedicated makeup artist speaks to the extent of the perceived coverage. It suggests a level of attention being paid to this specific physical characteristic that goes beyond a simple quick fix. The idea of it having its own “makeup room” is a humorous, albeit pointed, way of expressing how prominent and seemingly deliberate this cosmetic effort has become.
There’s a recurring sentiment that this visual aspect is tied to a broader narrative of decay, both physical and mental. Even with what’s described as the best medical treatment, some observers feel that his decline is evident. This perceived deterioration fuels a strong desire among some for a definitive conclusion to his public life, with some even anticipating celebrations should that day arrive.
The discussion also touches on the possibility of underlying health issues that might necessitate such cosmetic interventions. Speculation ranges from treatments for heart failure, with intravenous injections being mentioned, to concerns about peripheral artery disease (PAD) making IV access difficult. The repeated use of his hand for such procedures, despite the visible bruising, is seen as a sign of the challenges faced in administering medical care.
Furthermore, the effectiveness and intent behind the makeup itself are questioned. The observation that the makeup color doesn’t even match the skin tone suggests that the coverage, while present, might not be entirely seamless. This leads to the feeling that the effort, while visible, isn’t quite achieving a completely natural appearance, raising further questions about why it’s being presented in such a noticeable way.
Some commentators draw parallels between his current condition and historical figures, suggesting a similarly prolonged and potentially ignominious end. The idea of “embalming in real time” is a vivid metaphor used to describe the perceived ongoing efforts to maintain his public functionality.
The longevity of these observations about his hand also stands out. The fact that this story has been circulating for years suggests a consistent and persistent physical characteristic that continues to draw attention. This long-standing nature of the bruised hand, coupled with the repeated use of makeup to conceal it, fuels the sense that this is not a new or isolated issue.
The question of why he doesn’t simply wear gloves to conceal the hand is frequently raised. This is seen as a more straightforward solution that would eliminate the need for visible makeup application. The fact that this simpler option is seemingly not pursued leads to speculation about his motives and the overall presentation strategy.
There’s also a critique of the medical professionals involved, with suggestions that glowing bills of health are incongruous with the visible evidence. The idea that doctors might be deliberately misrepresenting his condition is a serious accusation that reflects a deep-seated distrust among some observers.
The discussion about his hand also veers into more disturbing territory, with some linking the bruising to allegations of past misconduct. These comments, while graphic, reflect a deep-seated anger and a desire for accountability. The idea of cover-ups, whether related to his physical health or past actions, is a recurring theme.
The political implications of his age and perceived frailty are also implicitly present. For those who wish to see a change in leadership, his physical condition becomes a proxy for his ability to govern. The idea that his mental faculties might be failing, as suggested by some, adds another layer to these concerns, with calls for him to be out of power due to these perceived limitations.
Ultimately, the discussion surrounding Trump’s makeup-covered, bruised hand is a microcosm of broader public sentiment. It’s a focal point for anxieties about aging, health, political legacy, and the perceived transparency of public figures. The ongoing nature of these observations suggests that this particular detail will likely continue to be a subject of discussion and scrutiny for as long as it remains visible.