It’s Sunday and We Still Know Basically Nothing About the Lead Up to Trump’s Diagnosis

That’s a major scandal.

Jim Watson/AFP/Getty

The coronavirus is a rapidly developing news story, so some of the content in this article might be out of date. Check out our most recent coverage of the coronavirus crisis, and subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.

It’s been a little more than two days since President Donald Trump said that he had tested positive for COVID-19. We now know that a White House event last month celebrating the Supreme Court nomination of Amy Coney Barrett turned into a likely super-spreader event for Trump and his inner circle, many of whom did not properly distance or wear masks, but we know much less about the timing of the positive tests and how early they were known before being announced to the public.

On Saturday, after Trump was moved to Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, his physician Sean Conley said the president was “doing very well” and “just 72 hours into the diagnosis now,” which suggested that he tested positive on Wednesday, despite Trump tweeting that he learned of his diagnosis on Thursday night. 

Hours later, Conley released a statement saying he misspoke. “I incorrectly used the term ‘seventy two hours’ instead of ‘day three’ and ‘forty-eight hours’ instead of ‘day two’ with regards to his diagnosis,” Conley said, even though, as Axios noted, the “forty-eight hours” comment was made by a different doctor at the press conference, not Conley. That means two different physicians working for Trump managed to confuse the timing of his diagnosis by more than a full day. 

To make things even more confusing, an anonymous White House official—later revealed to be Chief of Staff Mark Meadows—told reporters following Conley’s briefing that Trump was not actually doing as well as his doctors claimed. “The president’s vitals over the last 24 hours were very concerning and the next 48 hours will be critical in terms of his care,” Meadows told a White House pool reporter. “We’re still not on a clear path to a full recovery.” 

The only thing clear right now is how much is being kept secret about Trump’s health. We still don’t know when he tested positive for the virus or when he had his most recent negative test. We don’t know whether he was tested before the debate in Cleveland on Tuesday night against Joe Biden, who said Friday he tested negative for the virus and pledged to disclose the result from his future coronavirus tests. 

If his doctors’ original comments were true—that he tested positive as early as Wednesday—it makes for an absolute scandal that Trump attended a large outdoor rally in Minnesota on Wednesday night and went to a fundraiser at his New Jersey golf club on Thursday night. At the event, where Trump took photos with guests, most people did not wear masks, CNN reported. Before attending the fundraiser, Trump knew he either had the coronavirus or was aware he had been in close contact with someone who was infected. Trump was informed earlier that day that one of his advisers, Hope Hicks, had tested positive. Maggie Haberman, the New York Times White House correspondent, told the New Yorker that the “White House had tried keeping secret” news of Hicks’ diagnosis, but eventually was forced to confirm it after Bloomberg broke the news after 8 p.m. on Thursday.

The timeline is key to any assessment of how reckless Trump and his advisers were with his health (and their own—not to mention the hundreds of people they likely encountered, and their families). “It is really important for voters to drill down on the question of the seventy-two hours,” Haberman said. “It raises questions about what they would have told the public if we hadn’t found out about Hope Hicks.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate