In documenting the presidency, I've personally covered numerous incidents where President Biden's cognitive abilities appeared to falter, his brain seeming to 'freeze' during public appearances, interviews, and the presidential debate.
These episodes were not subtle; they were visibly clear and often unsettling to observe. However, rather than acknowledging these signs, both the media and Democratic leaders consistently urged the public to disregard what they were witnessing, often labeling such observations as misinformation or politically motivated attacks.
This directive to "not believe our lying eyes" has significantly contributed to skepticism about the integrity of political discourse and corporate media reporting during Biden's term.
The Wall Street Journal, detailed accounts from nearly 50 individuals familiar with the inner workings of the Biden administration paint a picture of a presidency marked by a quiet, yet significant, management of President Joe Biden's declining cognitive abilities.
From the outset of his presidency, Biden's aides seemed to recognize the challenge his age and mental acuity posed.
According to the Journal, as early as the first few months of his term, aides noticed Biden's fatigue during extended meetings and his propensity for making mistakes. This led to a strategy where interactions were kept short, and meetings were strategically scheduled around his "good days and bad days." A national security official was quoted saying, "He has good days and bad days, and today was a bad day so we’re going to address this tomorrow."
The White House, under the stewardship of Biden's closest advisors, reportedly operated like a protective shell, managing his engagements and limiting access to him. This included rescheduling or canceling meetings based on his daily condition.
The report suggests a system where even cabinet members and lawmakers felt disconnected from the President, with Representative Adam Smith of the House Armed Services Committee noting he had more personal interaction with former President Barack Obama despite being less senior at the time.
Policy-making and decision processes might have been influenced or even controlled by a select group of advisors, raising questions about the true center of executive power.
The Journal's piece has also cast a shadow over media credibility. For years, reports questioning Biden's fitness for office were met with aggressive rebuttals from the White House, often branded as partisan attacks or conspiracy theories.
Critics argue that the media, particularly those with a left-leaning bias, might have shied away from aggressive reporting due to political fears or an unwillingness to acknowledge the situation, thus impacting public trust in media narratives.
The initial reaction from the White House and Biden's allies was to dismiss the Journal's report as a political hit job, especially given that prominent Republicans like former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy were quoted.
The handling of Biden's cognitive decline is a cautionary tale about the lengths to which political entities will go to maintain power.
Commentaires