Tag: joe biden

“How the F*** Are You Going to Put All These White People Ahead of Kamala?” Donna Brazile Plays Race Card in Warning to Democrats About Replacing Biden

Donna Brazile, the former interim Democratic National Committee chair, issued a blunt warning to Democrats thinking about passing over Kamala Harris as a replacement for Joe Biden should he withdraw from the Democrat presidential nomination, “How the f*** are you going to put all these white people ahead of Kamala?”

Brazile made the comment in an interview with CNN about the nightmare scenarios facing Democrats since Biden’s presidency ending debate performance against President Trump Thursday night in Atlanta.

CNN laid out what ‘terrified’ Democrats and Brazile were saying about the party’s options (excerpt):

More than two dozen top Democratic officials, political operatives and donors tied to Biden and to many of the people most discussed as potential substitutes – many of whom asked for anonymity to discuss the most politically fraught situation most have ever encountered – say they’re terrified by nearly every scenario: Going forward with Biden, a Kamala Harris nomination, a nomination of someone else who would in that case have beaten the first Black female vice president, long nights of multiple ballots spilling ideological and personal feuds on national television, even just revelations of embarrassing details about people who have never been vetted by a national campaign.

“It would be a Category 5 hurricane,” said one top Democratic official nervous about Biden considering what would happen if the president stepped aside. “People don’t understand the sheer destruction that would be unleashed.”

…Even as minds turn to a list that includes Harris, Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker, Whitmer, Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly, Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and even relatively new Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro and Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, none have gone public with anything but words of support for Biden. They worry about being called traitors. They worry that it might make Biden dig in more.

A debate watch party in Los Angeles on Thursday night happened to feature Harris’ husband Doug Emhoff, Pritzker, Whitmer and Beshear. There were other high-profile attendees – by a few answers in, Rob Reiner was screaming about losing and Jane Fonda had tears in her eyes, according to people in the room.

…In an interview, Brazile said that her reaction to the calls that she has been getting since the debate with people inquiring about other candidates is: “How the f**k are you going to put all these white people ahead of Kamala?”

Backers of other possible candidates acknowledge that the internal feelings of deference toward her would be widespread and hard to overcome, and fears about the backlash among Black and women voters from ditching her would run extremely high.

The Trump campaign has released videos reminding voters that a vote for Biden is a vote for Harris.

Keep reading

Here Are The 20 Biggest Whoppers Biden Told During His Debate With Trump

President Joe Biden isn’t known for telling the truth. So, it came as no surprise when the Delaware Democrat got up on stage to tell some pretty tall tales during Thursday’s debate with former President Donald Trump.

From the crisis he created at the U.S.-Mexico border to manufactured hoaxes about his opponent, there was almost no subject Biden didn’t lie about. Here are the 20 biggest whoppers he told during Thursday night’s matchup with the Orange Man.

1. Border Patrol Endorsement

Biden claimed he was endorsed by America’s Border Patrol union. That is not true. In fact, the Border Patrol Union issued a real-time fact-check Thursday night stating: “To be clear, we never have and never will endorse Biden.”

2. Trump Bleach Lie

Biden claimed Trump told people infected with Covid to inject themselves with “bleach.” Trump did not tell people to do that.

Keep reading

Top 9 ‘CornPop’ Sized Whoppers Biden Told During First Debate

The organized efforts by media to disparage, censor, and “fact check” the president in real time apparently came to an end with Joe Biden’s presidency.

As president, Donald Trump was frequently challenged, beleaguered, and cancelled by news media and social media outlets in real time, even when he was giving opinions or stating true facts. He remains largely censored, today. But Biden has had free rein to forward false information and misinformation without serious challenge or the same repercussions.

For example, unlike what happened with Trump, there are no visible calls among the news media or social media to censor Biden, cancel his White House account, or stop carrying his statements and events live, even though he has said many provably false things.

After the first 2024 presidential debate, some media outlets were finally compelled to (begrudgingly, perhaps) address Biden’s colossal errors and misstatements, along with Trump’s (although sometimes the “fact checks” are factually questionable). It’s easy to find those analyses online.

Not so easy to find is a concise summary of some of the top whoppers Biden told during his first debate against Trump. So here it is!

Keep reading

Officials Across Europe Express Concerns Over Biden’s Deteriorating Cognitive Health

With President Joe Biden facing calls to step aside from fellow Democrats, European officials recently came out and indicated that they’ve noticed the president’s cognitive health declining since before Thursday’s debate against former President Donald Trump.

Multiple officials in countries like Poland, Germany and Slovenia have expressed concerns about the 81-year-old president’s age and his ability to serve another four years in the White House, per the Wall Street Journal.

Such concerns come after Biden performed poorly in the debate against his predecessor, former President Donald Trump.

The president would oftentimes freeze while speaking and appear confused.

On X, European officials slammed Biden over his performance and urged the Democratic Party to replace the aging president.

Keep reading

‘They lie about what’s happening at the border’: Border Patrol Union leaders reiterate they never endorsed Biden

Following President Joe Biden’s claims during the first presidential debate that border patrol had endorsed him for president, the Border Patrol Union has clarified that they have not endorsed Biden and never will. 

During the debate, President Biden spoke about immigration where he claimed that his administration had significantly increased the number of asylum officers. He went on to say that the Border Patrol endorsed him and endorsed his position on border security.  

This statement prompted a strong reaction from the Border Patrol Union, which immediately posted, “To be clear, we never have and never will endorse Biden.” Brandon Judd, president of the Border Patrol Union, appeared on Fox News to set the record straight on Biden’s debate claim and border policies. 

“The border can be secured tomorrow if we would go back, and we would look at the policies that were in place that President Trump built. They were great policies,” Judd said. 

Keep reading

Free Speech Legislation Gains Attention Following Supreme Court Siding with Biden in Social Media Censorship Case

US House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan has reacted to Wednesday’s ruling by the Supreme Court (SCOTUS) in the Murthy v. Missouri case, to call for new legislation that would, going forward, reinforce the rules, already contained in the First Amendment, meant to protect citizens from government-orchestrated censorship.

Jordan, whose Committee is probing alleged government-Big Tech collusion in violation of the First Amendment through the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, noted that the US Constitution’s First Amendment is “first for a reason.”

According to the Republican congressman, free speech that this amendment protects (from government intervention) should extend to any government infringement – be it in Congress, or online.

Jordan said that while respectfully disagreeing with the SCOTUS ruling the Committee’s own oversight “has shown the need for legislative reforms.”

“While we respectfully disagree with the Court’s decision, our investigation has shown the need for legislative reforms, such as the Censorship Accountability Act, to better protect Americans harmed by the unconstitutional censorship-industrial complex,” Jordan wrote in a statement.

In other words, the increasingly pressing issue of how the government “interacts” with social platforms (because of their massive reach and therefore influence among the electorate) should be put into the hands of courts and their interpretations based on new and clear legislation to guide those decisions.

The Judiciary Committee chairman mentioned the Censorship Accountability Act – a bill that would let citizens launch legal action against federal employees suspected of colluding to suppress free speech.

Regardless of the SCOTUS decision, Jordan pledged that the Committee’s “important work will continue” – stating that the Subcommittee’s thus far “uncovered how and the extent to which the Biden Administration engaged in a censorship campaign in violation of the First Amendment.”

Keep reading

Jim Jordan Investigates Stanford Internet Observatory Monitoring Election Speech for 2024

Recently the news arrived that what opponents see as a key linchpin in the government-Big Tech censorship collusion, the Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO), was winding back its operations.

But before it does, the House Judiciary Committee and the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government want to gain access to information requested through a previous subpoena.

On Monday, Chairman Jim Jordan sent a letter to SIO’s legal representative, the main point being the Committee’s desire to make sure that neither SIO, other groups operating as part of the university, nor any group that might succeed SIO will continue with their “disinformation studies” ahead of the 2024 presidential election.

We obtained a copy of the letter for you here.

Keep reading

DOD Reluctantly Fact-Checks Joe Biden’s Insult to the Military Heroes Killed Under His Watch: “We Have Certainly Had Service Members Pass During This Administration”

During Thursday’s Presidential debate, Joe Biden insulted the families of the military heroes and killed Afghanistan and Syria under his watch.

Biden bizarrely responded to a question by claiming that no troops have died “anywhere in the world” during his presidency.

During a terrorist attack at the Kabul airport during Biden’s botched withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021, thirteen U.S. troops were killed.

Perhaps Biden does not remember when their bodies returned home because he was too busy checking his watch.

Three U.S. troops from a guard unit in Georgia were killed in a terrorist attack in Syria just six months ago.

Biden said at the debate, “The notion that we were this safe country. The truth is I’m the only president this century that doesn’t have any, this, this decade, that doesn’t (have) any troops dying anywhere in the world like he did.”

Of all of Biden’s lies and bizarre behavior Thursday night, this comment is unforgivable.

Reporters pressed Department of Defense deputy press secretary Sabrina Singh about the blantant lie and, after pressure, reluctantly fact-checked Biden.

Singh was asked by a reporter if “the Pentagon stands by those remarks.”

Singh replied, “Thank you for the question. For more on the president’s comments and on the debate itself, I’d refer you to the White House.”

“But in terms of our service members who have been killed in some tragic events around the world … you’ve seen the president call these families to express condolences. This is someone that has intimately experienced the commitment and dedication of what our military does.”

Another reporter pressed Singh for a clear non-answer and asked, “Just to be clear, was the president’s statement incorrect?”

“Again, not trying to get involved in that,” Singh said.

Keep reading

Joe Biden: The Latest Elderly Politician Who Refuses To Retire

By now, any interested person with an internet connection has seen President Joe Biden’s uncomfortably poor showing in his first debate against former President Donald Trump for the 2024 presidential campaign season. Contrary to assurances that, behind closed doors, Biden is as sharp and lucid as ever, the president appeared frail and struggled to even make his most basic points for most of the 90-minute debate, renewing concerns about his age and mental fitness. Much of the ensuing news coverage involves the possibility of Democrats replacing Biden on the ticket in November.

But whatever ultimately happens between now and the election—or even between now and the Democratic National Convention in August—Biden had every opportunity to avoid this outcome and declined to do so. It’s indicative of a trend among lawmakers that he instead opted to cling to power for a little longer.

In March 2020, as he sought the Democratic Party’s nomination, Biden campaigned in Michigan with Sens. Kamala Harris (D–Calif.) and Cory Booker (D–N.J.). Each had recently exited the primary and endorsed Biden, and at a Detroit campaign rally, he delivered a message both to them and to voters.

“Look, I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else,” he said. “There’s an entire generation of leaders you saw stand behind me. They are the future of this country.” Weeks later, he said, “I view myself as a transition candidate” for other “people on the bench that are ready to go in.”

In each case, Biden seemed to indicate that he only intended to serve one term. There had been murmurs for some time that this was his plan: Politico reported in December 2019 that privately, Biden was “indicating that he will almost certainly not run for a second term while declining to make a promise that he and his advisers fear could turn him into a lame duck and sap him of his political capital.” (Later the same day, Biden denied making any such determination.) Carl Bernstein even said in 2015 that Biden was considering a one-term run in 2016, due to concerns about his age.

But if it were ever Biden’s intention to win in 2020, evict Trump from the White House, and step aside to make way for the next generation of leaders, that’s not what happened. Biden announced his bid for reelection on April 25, 2023; the same day, FiveThirtyEight had Biden’s approval numbers nearly 11 points underwater, and he has not been net positive since August 2021.

Why not step aside and make way for Biden’s vaunted bench, whom he called “the future of this country?” Democrats have seemingly spent no time even considering other candidates. The most obvious contender, literally waiting in the wings, would be Vice President Kamala Harris—who, as Reason‘s Elizabeth Nolan Brown has detailed, would be a different sort of disaster, both as a candidate and as a potential president. Before he announced his bid for reelection, Semafor‘s David Weigel wrote of “the great paradox of 2024: Most Democrats say they want an alternative to Biden, but no alternative they’re happy with wants to run.”

Keep reading

They Knew

Rarely are so many lies dispelled in a single moment. Rarely are so many people exposed as liars and sycophants. Last night’s debate was a watershed on both counts.

The debate was not just a catastrophe for President Biden. And boy—oy—was it ever.

But it was more than that. It was a catastrophe for an entire class of experts, journalists, and pundits, who have, since 2020, insisted that Biden was sharp as a tack, on top of his game, basically doing handstands while peppering his staff with tough questions about care for migrant children and aid to Ukraine.

Anyone who committed the sin of using their own eyes on the 46th president was accused, variously, of being Trumpers; MAGA cult members who don’t want American democracy to survive; ageists; or just dummies easily duped by “disinformation,” “misinformation,” “fake news,” and, most recently, “cheapfakes.”

Cast your mind back to February, when Robert Hur, the special counsel appointed by the Department of Justice to look into Biden’s handling of classified documents, came out with his report that included details about Biden’s health, which explained why he would not prosecute the president.

“We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” Hur wrote. “It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him—by then a former president well into his eighties—of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

Can anyone doubt that characterization after watching Biden’s debate performance? 

Yet Eric Holder told us that Hur’s remarks were “gratuitous.” The former attorney general tweeted: “Had this report been subject to a normal DOJ review these remarks would undoubtedly have been excised.” Dan Pfeiffer, a former Obama adviser, said Hur’s report was a “partisan hit job.” Vice President Kamala Harris argued: “The way that the president’s demeanor in that report was characterized could not be more wrong on the facts, and clearly politically motivated, gratuitous.” The report does not “live in reality,” said White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, stressing that the president was “sharp” and “on top of things.” 

Shall I go on? Okay.

Keep reading