#46 President Joe Biden

Ledbetterman10

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

mace1229 said:

brianlux said:

mace1229 said:

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Here's another....Biden just pardoned the notorious Kids-For-Cash judge Michael Conahan from Pennsylvania. If you're not familiar with him, in the 2000's, he was putting juveniles away for years for minor offenses because he was getting kickbacks from the detention centers. I WAS ALMOST ONE OF THEM after I was cited for underage drinking at a Red Hot Chili Pepper concert. Thankfully my parents got me a lawyer and I got off with just community service. But other juveniles weren't even given public defenders for some of their cases, and put away for years. He was convicted of multiple crimes in 2010 as a result. 

Here's PA Governor Josh Shapiro slamming the move by Biden...

“Governors and presidents have unique power to grant pardons and clemency and commute sentences. It is an absolute power, and it is a power that should be used incredibly carefully. I study every single case that comes across my desk where there’s a request for a pardon, or clemency, or a reduction of sentence – and I take it very seriously. I weigh the merits of the case, I weigh what occurred in the court proceedings, I think about public safety and victims and all of those issues factor into my decision.

I recognize that those on the outside can question those decisions, as you are here today, and posing a question to me as to the clemency granted by President Biden. So I’ll offer these thoughts as an outsider, not privy to all the information he looked at, but I do feel strongly that President Biden got it absolutely wrong and created a lot of pain here in Northeastern Pennsylvania.

This was not only a black eye on the community, the kids for cash scandal, but it also affected families in really deep and profound and sad ways. Some children took their lives because of this. Families were torn apart. There was all kind of mental health issues and anguish that came as a result of these corrupt judges deciding they wanted to make a buck off a kid’s back. Frankly, I thought the sentence that the judge got was too light, and the fact that he’s been allowed out over the last years because of COVID, was on house arrest and now has been granted clemency, I think, is absolutely wrong. He should have been in prison for at least the 17 years that he was sentenced to by a jury of his peers. He deserves to be behind bars, not walking as a free man.”

Shapiro on Conahan: 'Biden got it absolutely wrong' | 28/22 News

That sucks, man.  I don't disagree with Biden's move all together- we have way too people incarcerated for non-violent crimes (worth doing a little research on penal labor and exploitation of incarcerated workers), but he would have done well to have had a team do a better job of screening who gets a pass and who doesn't. 

And as we all know, a much worse scenario of this type will be happening soon.  Perhaps you will be at least as critical of that as well.

If you’re referring to potential ridiculous pardons by Trump, I think all the other regulars here will make so many posts about them that you won’t need me to bring them up. 

That's not what I was asking/ wondering about.  Read again. 

Well I read it again. I have no idea what the “worse scenario of this type” is that you’re talking about. 

Freeing insurgents from 1/6/21.

Which would fall under “potential ridiculous pardons by Trump” wouldn’t it? Jesus Christ.  

You don't think he'll do it?  Watch. 
Buddha!

I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying this forum will be flooded with criticism, there will be no need for him to discuss it.
Which I agree with. I'm not always critical of trump because there may be multiple pages on one thing he does, no need to add my 2 cents when its just repeating what been said 100 times.

I'm not sure what he is saying.

As for not wanting to add you comment on that issue, your prerogative, of course, but I don't think we can overstate how terrible Trump will (is already) going to handle things as POTIS again, starting with the release of those convicted insurgents.  Say it 1,000 time.  Make your voices heard.  This coming administration is going to be a catastrophe (and that's no hyperbole).

I agree out in the real world, more is better. But as for here on this forum, I often don't see the point in posting when it aligns with the majority and will get drowned out. We can sometimes go through several pages in a single day on a topic and it's impossible to follow along when everyone is just repeating each other. 
Anyway, pretty sure that's what Ledbetterman was referring to. I probably won't comment much if/when trump pardons the J6'ers for that reason. There will be 500 comments in a day here. Silence doesn't mean I agree with what happened, it just means I have nothing new to add. On the flip side, not much is being said about Biden's pardons. So makes sense to comment on those.

Obviously. 

This "conversation" is actually a good example of how I find it nearly impossible to conversate on this board.....

1) I comment on Biden's pardon of the Kids-For-Cash judge.

2) Brian has to bring up Trump even though this is the Biden thread and we're talking about Biden's pardons, but he doesn't even bring up Trump by name. He says "a much worse scenario of this type will be happening soon. Perhaps you will be at least as critical of that as well." 

3) Of course I assume he's referring to potential Trump pardons, but I can't be sure because he didn't just say it. So I say, "If you’re referring to potential ridiculous pardons by Trump, I think all the other regulars here will make so many posts about them that you won’t need me to bring them up." 

4) But he can't just say that he is talking about Trump pardons. Instead he says, "That's not what I was asking/wondering about.  Read again." 

5) I read it again but can't think of anything other than Trump pardons.

6) He replies "Freeing insurgents from 1/6/21."  So he was talking about Trump pardons, like I suggested. But I'm the one that needs to "read again." 

Sorry, I meant to edit that and include him by name (my name for him anyway: The Felon).  But did you really have to sweat over figuring that out?  I doubt it. 

Pretty much everything I say bothers you anyway and that's a bummer for you.  Maybe try the ignore feature.  You and I arguing with each other isn't going to change anything anyway.

I can't even recall the last interaction we've had, so no, nothing you say "bothers me." You're just comic relief here to me. Especially your emotional posts when you say you're going to leave the board, or when you whine to moderators. You're a caricature. A caricature of what?  Can't say. You'll be calling for the mods and I'm not looking to get banned. 

Gern Blansten

mickeyrat said:

Gern Blansten said:

mickeyrat said:

Michael Conahan now 72

served 9 years IN prison then furloughed to home confinement in 2020 due to covid.

was scheduled to be released in aug if 2026

what I wonder is generally what criteria is used to grant clemency. and if biden added or subtracted from that.

Yeah I'm seeing a lot of outrage about some of these but weren't they all like this and were on home confinement?

In this case it does seem odd to pardon him but the state already made it much easier on him.

pulled from an article from the 2020 time period in the times leader?

Attorney General William Barr issued memos in March and April prioritizing home confinement as a response to the pandemic, where appropriate, for at-risk, non-violent inmates to protect the health and safety of prison personnel and the incarcerated.

Barr’s March memo spelled out some of the discretionary factors, which included priority to inmates residing in low and minimum security facilities with a record of good behavior who are more vulnerable to coronavirus under Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines.

Inmates also must have a sound re-entry plan, and prisons must look at the crime that prompted incarceration and assess the danger inmates would pose to the community, the memo said.

Since the release of Barr’s March memo, the bureau has placed 4,413 inmates on home confinement, a 155% increase, the bureau website says.

yeah good point...Biden couldn't pardon a state crime...hilarious that it was trump's guy that sent him home.

Still seems like he should have served out his sentence. Not sure what Biden was thinking here.

HughFreakingDillon

Ledbetterman10 said:

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

mace1229 said:

brianlux said:

mace1229 said:

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

brianlux said:

Ledbetterman10 said:

Here's another....Biden just pardoned the notorious Kids-For-Cash judge Michael Conahan from Pennsylvania. If you're not familiar with him, in the 2000's, he was putting juveniles away for years for minor offenses because he was getting kickbacks from the detention centers. I WAS ALMOST ONE OF THEM after I was cited for underage drinking at a Red Hot Chili Pepper concert. Thankfully my parents got me a lawyer and I got off with just community service. But other juveniles weren't even given public defenders for some of their cases, and put away for years. He was convicted of multiple crimes in 2010 as a result. 

Here's PA Governor Josh Shapiro slamming the move by Biden...

“Governors and presidents have unique power to grant pardons and clemency and commute sentences. It is an absolute power, and it is a power that should be used incredibly carefully. I study every single case that comes across my desk where there’s a request for a pardon, or clemency, or a reduction of sentence – and I take it very seriously. I weigh the merits of the case, I weigh what occurred in the court proceedings, I think about public safety and victims and all of those issues factor into my decision.

I recognize that those on the outside can question those decisions, as you are here today, and posing a question to me as to the clemency granted by President Biden. So I’ll offer these thoughts as an outsider, not privy to all the information he looked at, but I do feel strongly that President Biden got it absolutely wrong and created a lot of pain here in Northeastern Pennsylvania.

This was not only a black eye on the community, the kids for cash scandal, but it also affected families in really deep and profound and sad ways. Some children took their lives because of this. Families were torn apart. There was all kind of mental health issues and anguish that came as a result of these corrupt judges deciding they wanted to make a buck off a kid’s back. Frankly, I thought the sentence that the judge got was too light, and the fact that he’s been allowed out over the last years because of COVID, was on house arrest and now has been granted clemency, I think, is absolutely wrong. He should have been in prison for at least the 17 years that he was sentenced to by a jury of his peers. He deserves to be behind bars, not walking as a free man.”

Shapiro on Conahan: 'Biden got it absolutely wrong' | 28/22 News

That sucks, man.  I don't disagree with Biden's move all together- we have way too people incarcerated for non-violent crimes (worth doing a little research on penal labor and exploitation of incarcerated workers), but he would have done well to have had a team do a better job of screening who gets a pass and who doesn't. 

And as we all know, a much worse scenario of this type will be happening soon.  Perhaps you will be at least as critical of that as well.

If you’re referring to potential ridiculous pardons by Trump, I think all the other regulars here will make so many posts about them that you won’t need me to bring them up. 

That's not what I was asking/ wondering about.  Read again. 

Well I read it again. I have no idea what the “worse scenario of this type” is that you’re talking about. 

Freeing insurgents from 1/6/21.

Which would fall under “potential ridiculous pardons by Trump” wouldn’t it? Jesus Christ.  

You don't think he'll do it?  Watch. 
Buddha!

I don't think that's what he's saying. He's saying this forum will be flooded with criticism, there will be no need for him to discuss it.
Which I agree with. I'm not always critical of trump because there may be multiple pages on one thing he does, no need to add my 2 cents when its just repeating what been said 100 times.

I'm not sure what he is saying.

As for not wanting to add you comment on that issue, your prerogative, of course, but I don't think we can overstate how terrible Trump will (is already) going to handle things as POTIS again, starting with the release of those convicted insurgents.  Say it 1,000 time.  Make your voices heard.  This coming administration is going to be a catastrophe (and that's no hyperbole).

I agree out in the real world, more is better. But as for here on this forum, I often don't see the point in posting when it aligns with the majority and will get drowned out. We can sometimes go through several pages in a single day on a topic and it's impossible to follow along when everyone is just repeating each other. 
Anyway, pretty sure that's what Ledbetterman was referring to. I probably won't comment much if/when trump pardons the J6'ers for that reason. There will be 500 comments in a day here. Silence doesn't mean I agree with what happened, it just means I have nothing new to add. On the flip side, not much is being said about Biden's pardons. So makes sense to comment on those.

Obviously. 

This "conversation" is actually a good example of how I find it nearly impossible to conversate on this board.....

1) I comment on Biden's pardon of the Kids-For-Cash judge.

2) Brian has to bring up Trump even though this is the Biden thread and we're talking about Biden's pardons, but he doesn't even bring up Trump by name. He says "a much worse scenario of this type will be happening soon. Perhaps you will be at least as critical of that as well." 

3) Of course I assume he's referring to potential Trump pardons, but I can't be sure because he didn't just say it. So I say, "If you’re referring to potential ridiculous pardons by Trump, I think all the other regulars here will make so many posts about them that you won’t need me to bring them up." 

4) But he can't just say that he is talking about Trump pardons. Instead he says, "That's not what I was asking/wondering about.  Read again." 

5) I read it again but can't think of anything other than Trump pardons.

6) He replies "Freeing insurgents from 1/6/21."  So he was talking about Trump pardons, like I suggested. But I'm the one that needs to "read again." 

Sorry, I meant to edit that and include him by name (my name for him anyway: The Felon).  But did you really have to sweat over figuring that out?  I doubt it. 

Pretty much everything I say bothers you anyway and that's a bummer for you.  Maybe try the ignore feature.  You and I arguing with each other isn't going to change anything anyway.

I can't even recall the last interaction we've had, so no, nothing you say "bothers me." You're just comic relief here to me. Especially your emotional posts when you say you're going to leave the board, or when you whine to moderators. You're a caricature. A caricature of what?  Can't say. You'll be calling for the mods and I'm not looking to get banned. 

brianlux

meh, sticks and stones. 

Halifax2TheMax

Guess Brandon really fucked up the economy and people are hurting, eh? What with the busiest thanksgiving travel weekend having just passed and now this, people are really struggling.

Americans rush to buy cars and appliances before Trump’s new tariffs

Americans are scrambling to stock up on cars, appliances and other big-ticket imports in anticipation of new Trump administration tariffs — a spending spree that could reignite the very inflation that buyers are hoping to avoid.

President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to enact widespread tariffs as soon as he takes office in January, a move that economists say could lift prices for just about every type of import, including food, cars, computers and gas.

President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to enact widespread tariffs as soon as he takes office in January, a move that economists say could lift prices for just about every type of import, including food, cars, computers and gas. Although Trump has offered few specifics, he has said his planned policies would take aim at America’s three largest trading partners, with 60 percent tariffs on all Chinese imports and 25 percent tariffs on goods from Mexico and Canada.

There are signs that price-sensitive households and businesses already are shifting their spending behavior to guard against further cost increases. New data this week showed that Americans spent $3.6 billion more on vehicles and auto parts in November than they did the month before — a notable bump in an otherwise lackluster retail sales reading. Spending on electronics and appliances also rose last month, which economists attributed to a combination of Hurricane Helene-related repairs and households preparing for new tariffs.

And although it’s not clear whether that increased demand is driving higher prices just yet, economists say it’s notable that both appliances and new vehicles got costlier in November even as inflation eased in other areas.

“It is clear that people are buying ahead,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at KPMG. “It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy: The more you buy, the more you push up prices in anticipation of price increases.”

Near Orlando, Deena Pryor fast-forwarded her car-buying plans after Trump’s win, figuring an early purchase could end up saving tens of thousands of dollars. She and her husband bought a Ford Explorer a few weeks ago and are planning to purchase a dishwasher and stove before the year ends.

“It just kind of clicked after the election,” said Pryor, 42, an analyst for a software firm. “I was like, ‘Whoa, hold on, he’s talking about tariffs. We should go ahead and buy now.’”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2024/12/19/tariffs-consumers-appliances-cars/

shecky

The Wall Street Journal published a lengthy deep dive into President Joe Biden’s decline and how the White House has managed it on Thursday.

“Presidents always have gatekeepers. But in Biden’s case, the walls around him were higher and the controls greater, according to Democratic lawmakers, donors and aides who worked for Biden and other administrations,” reported the Journal. “There were limits over who Biden spoke with, limits on what they said to him and limits around the sources of information he consumed.”

Her are the five biggest bombshells from the story:

CONCERNS STRETCHED BACK TO ‘THE FIRST FEW MONTHS’ OF HIS PRESIDENCY

While many members of Biden World continue to deny that Biden has declined at all — spokesman Andrew Bates commented on the story by rejecting “the notion that Biden has declined” — the Journal claims that staff recognized his limitations early on.

“A sign that the bruising presidential schedule needed to be adjusted for Biden’s advanced age had arisen early on—in just the first few months of his term,” it reported. “Administration officials noticed that the president became tired if meetings went long and would make mistakes.”

They issued a directive to some powerful lawmakers and allies seeking one-on-one time: The exchanges should be short and focused, according to people who received the message directly from White House aides.

Ideally, the meetings would start later in the day, since Biden has never been at his best first thing in the morning, some of the people said. His staff made these adjustments to limit potential missteps by Biden, the people said. The president, known for long and rambling sessions, at times pushed in the opposite direction, wanting or just taking more time.

“If the president was having an off day, meetings could be scrapped altogether,” noted the Journal. “On one such occasion, in the spring of 2021, a national security official explained to another aide why a meeting needed to be rescheduled. ‘He has good days and bad days, and today was a bad day so we’re going to address this tomorrow,’ the former aide recalled the official saying.”

DEMOCRATIC LEADERS NOTICED LEADERSHIP VACUUM

Two Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives went on the record to make note of Biden’s inaccessibility.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA) was the chairman of the Armed Services Committee in 2021 and repeatedly tried to speak with Biden ahead of the administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan to express concerns.

The president never took his call, and the disastrous withdrawal ended up dragging Biden’s approval rating underwater, where it stayed for the rest of his presidency.

“The Biden White House was more insulated than most,” Smith said. “I spoke with Barack Obama on a number of occasions when he was president and I wasn’t even chairman of the committee.”

Another top Democrat had a similar experience:

Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said his interactions with the White House in the past two years were primarily focused on the reauthorization of a vital section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that authorizes broad national security surveillance powers. Biden’s senior advisers and other top administration officials worked with Himes on the issue, and he praised the collaboration.

But Biden wasn’t part of the conversation. “I really had no personal contact with this president. I had more personal contact with Obama, which is sort of strange because I was a lot more junior,” said Himes, who took office in 2009. Congress extended the surveillance authority for two years instead of the administration’s goal of five years.

‘INFREQUENT’ AND ‘TIGHTLY SCRIPTED’ MEETINGS WITH CABINET MEMBERS

“Interactions between Biden and many of his cabinet members were relatively infrequent and often tightly scripted. At least one cabinet member stopped requesting calls with the president, because it was clear that such requests wouldn’t be welcome, a former senior cabinet aide said,” according to the Journal. “One top cabinet member met one-on-one with the president at most twice in the first year and rarely in small groups, another former senior cabinet aide said.”

Biden held just nine full Cabinet meetings during his first terms. His two immediate predecessors, Obama and Donald Trump, held 19 and 25, respectively.

“Former administration officials said it often didn’t seem like Biden had his finger on the pulse,” reported the Journal.

BIDEN STRUGGLED THROUGH PREP FOR ROBERT HUR INTERVIEW

Before Biden’s catastrophic performance in his debate with Trump, Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report raised eyebrows over Biden’s ability to continue to serve as commander-in-chief.

Hur wrote that Biden was “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” who “did not remember when he was vice president” or “when his son Beau died,” prompting the president’s staff and allies to strenuously object.

But as it turns out his staff were well aware that he was struggling going into the interview:

In the fall of 2023, Biden faced a major test when Hur, the special counsel, wanted to interview him. The president wanted to do it, and his top aides felt that his willingness to sit down with investigators set up a favorable contrast with Trump, who stonewalled the probe into why classified documents appeared at Mar-a-Lago, according to people familiar with the sessions.

The prep sessions took about three hours a day for about a week ahead of the interview, according to a person familiar with the preparation. During these sessions, Biden’s energy levels were up and down. He couldn’t recall lines that his team had previously discussed with him, the person said.

A White House official pushed back on the notion that Biden’s age showed in prep, saying that the concerns that arose during those sessions were related to Biden’s tendency to over-share.

The actual interview didn’t go well. Transcripts showed multiple blunders, including that Biden didn’t initially recall that in prep sessions he had been shown his own handwritten memo arguing against a surge of troops in Afghanistan.

REELECTION CAMPAIGN DONORS ‘SHOCKED’ BY HIS PERFOMANCE IN CALLS

Biden required campaign donors to send in pre-screened questions ahead of his calls with them, and then struggled to answer them despite having time to prepare, per the Journal.

One donor was “as shocked when a campaign official told him that attendees shouldn’t expect to have a free ranging question-and-answer session with the president.”

“At some events, the Biden campaign printed the pre-approved questions on notecards and then gave donors the cards to read the questions. Even with all these steps, Biden made flubs, which confounded the donors who knew that Biden had the questions ahead of time,” noted the Journal. “Some donors said they noticed how staff stepped in to mask other signs of decline. Throughout his presidency—and especially later in the term—Biden was assisted by a small group of aides who were laser focused on him in a far different way than when he was vice president, or how former presidents Bill Clinton or Obama were staffed during their presidencies, people who have witnessed their interactions said.”

mickeyrat

snippet of a video interview.....

https://www.threads.net/@acynig/post/DDw0LlUp80B?xmt=AQGzk1S4XrRu3GXNjwghARNhBUp5E6Y_-ObQLvwaQm96UQ

Halifax2TheMax

Halifax2TheMax said:

shecky said:

How much? What determines the winner? Pictures of cash changing hands? Recordings of quid pro quo? Tax returns? Whistle blower at a bank? Contents of Hunter’s laptop? How much?

Never did get a “bet.” Flapping lips sink great ships. Looking at you Z.

Bok bok bok baaaacock!

Suckers.

Choccoloccotide

shecky said:

The Wall Street Journal published a lengthy deep dive into President Joe Biden’s decline and how the White House has managed it on Thursday.

“Presidents always have gatekeepers. But in Biden’s case, the walls around him were higher and the controls greater, according to Democratic lawmakers, donors and aides who worked for Biden and other administrations,” reported the Journal. “There were limits over who Biden spoke with, limits on what they said to him and limits around the sources of information he consumed.”

Her are the five biggest bombshells from the story:

CONCERNS STRETCHED BACK TO ‘THE FIRST FEW MONTHS’ OF HIS PRESIDENCY

While many members of Biden World continue to deny that Biden has declined at all — spokesman Andrew Bates commented on the story by rejecting “the notion that Biden has declined” — the Journal claims that staff recognized his limitations early on.

“A sign that the bruising presidential schedule needed to be adjusted for Biden’s advanced age had arisen early on—in just the first few months of his term,” it reported. “Administration officials noticed that the president became tired if meetings went long and would make mistakes.”

They issued a directive to some powerful lawmakers and allies seeking one-on-one time: The exchanges should be short and focused, according to people who received the message directly from White House aides.

Ideally, the meetings would start later in the day, since Biden has never been at his best first thing in the morning, some of the people said. His staff made these adjustments to limit potential missteps by Biden, the people said. The president, known for long and rambling sessions, at times pushed in the opposite direction, wanting or just taking more time.

“If the president was having an off day, meetings could be scrapped altogether,” noted the Journal. “On one such occasion, in the spring of 2021, a national security official explained to another aide why a meeting needed to be rescheduled. ‘He has good days and bad days, and today was a bad day so we’re going to address this tomorrow,’ the former aide recalled the official saying.”

DEMOCRATIC LEADERS NOTICED LEADERSHIP VACUUM

Two Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives went on the record to make note of Biden’s inaccessibility.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA) was the chairman of the Armed Services Committee in 2021 and repeatedly tried to speak with Biden ahead of the administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan to express concerns.

The president never took his call, and the disastrous withdrawal ended up dragging Biden’s approval rating underwater, where it stayed for the rest of his presidency.

“The Biden White House was more insulated than most,” Smith said. “I spoke with Barack Obama on a number of occasions when he was president and I wasn’t even chairman of the committee.”

Another top Democrat had a similar experience:

Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said his interactions with the White House in the past two years were primarily focused on the reauthorization of a vital section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that authorizes broad national security surveillance powers. Biden’s senior advisers and other top administration officials worked with Himes on the issue, and he praised the collaboration.

But Biden wasn’t part of the conversation. “I really had no personal contact with this president. I had more personal contact with Obama, which is sort of strange because I was a lot more junior,” said Himes, who took office in 2009. Congress extended the surveillance authority for two years instead of the administration’s goal of five years.

‘INFREQUENT’ AND ‘TIGHTLY SCRIPTED’ MEETINGS WITH CABINET MEMBERS

“Interactions between Biden and many of his cabinet members were relatively infrequent and often tightly scripted. At least one cabinet member stopped requesting calls with the president, because it was clear that such requests wouldn’t be welcome, a former senior cabinet aide said,” according to the Journal. “One top cabinet member met one-on-one with the president at most twice in the first year and rarely in small groups, another former senior cabinet aide said.”

Biden held just nine full Cabinet meetings during his first terms. His two immediate predecessors, Obama and Donald Trump, held 19 and 25, respectively.

“Former administration officials said it often didn’t seem like Biden had his finger on the pulse,” reported the Journal.

BIDEN STRUGGLED THROUGH PREP FOR ROBERT HUR INTERVIEW

Before Biden’s catastrophic performance in his debate with Trump, Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report raised eyebrows over Biden’s ability to continue to serve as commander-in-chief.

Hur wrote that Biden was “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” who “did not remember when he was vice president” or “when his son Beau died,” prompting the president’s staff and allies to strenuously object.

But as it turns out his staff were well aware that he was struggling going into the interview:

In the fall of 2023, Biden faced a major test when Hur, the special counsel, wanted to interview him. The president wanted to do it, and his top aides felt that his willingness to sit down with investigators set up a favorable contrast with Trump, who stonewalled the probe into why classified documents appeared at Mar-a-Lago, according to people familiar with the sessions.

The prep sessions took about three hours a day for about a week ahead of the interview, according to a person familiar with the preparation. During these sessions, Biden’s energy levels were up and down. He couldn’t recall lines that his team had previously discussed with him, the person said.

A White House official pushed back on the notion that Biden’s age showed in prep, saying that the concerns that arose during those sessions were related to Biden’s tendency to over-share.

The actual interview didn’t go well. Transcripts showed multiple blunders, including that Biden didn’t initially recall that in prep sessions he had been shown his own handwritten memo arguing against a surge of troops in Afghanistan.

REELECTION CAMPAIGN DONORS ‘SHOCKED’ BY HIS PERFOMANCE IN CALLS

Biden required campaign donors to send in pre-screened questions ahead of his calls with them, and then struggled to answer them despite having time to prepare, per the Journal.

One donor was “as shocked when a campaign official told him that attendees shouldn’t expect to have a free ranging question-and-answer session with the president.”

“At some events, the Biden campaign printed the pre-approved questions on notecards and then gave donors the cards to read the questions. Even with all these steps, Biden made flubs, which confounded the donors who knew that Biden had the questions ahead of time,” noted the Journal. “Some donors said they noticed how staff stepped in to mask other signs of decline. Throughout his presidency—and especially later in the term—Biden was assisted by a small group of aides who were laser focused on him in a far different way than when he was vice president, or how former presidents Bill Clinton or Obama were staffed during their presidencies, people who have witnessed their interactions said.”

Biden is a career politician who sold out his country to the highest bidder and liked to take showers with his daughter Ashley.  Disgusting

josevolution

Ignore is best for above 

Halifax2TheMax

Choccoloccotide said:

shecky said:

The Wall Street Journal published a lengthy deep dive into President Joe Biden’s decline and how the White House has managed it on Thursday.

“Presidents always have gatekeepers. But in Biden’s case, the walls around him were higher and the controls greater, according to Democratic lawmakers, donors and aides who worked for Biden and other administrations,” reported the Journal. “There were limits over who Biden spoke with, limits on what they said to him and limits around the sources of information he consumed.”

Her are the five biggest bombshells from the story:

CONCERNS STRETCHED BACK TO ‘THE FIRST FEW MONTHS’ OF HIS PRESIDENCY

While many members of Biden World continue to deny that Biden has declined at all — spokesman Andrew Bates commented on the story by rejecting “the notion that Biden has declined” — the Journal claims that staff recognized his limitations early on.

“A sign that the bruising presidential schedule needed to be adjusted for Biden’s advanced age had arisen early on—in just the first few months of his term,” it reported. “Administration officials noticed that the president became tired if meetings went long and would make mistakes.”

They issued a directive to some powerful lawmakers and allies seeking one-on-one time: The exchanges should be short and focused, according to people who received the message directly from White House aides.

Ideally, the meetings would start later in the day, since Biden has never been at his best first thing in the morning, some of the people said. His staff made these adjustments to limit potential missteps by Biden, the people said. The president, known for long and rambling sessions, at times pushed in the opposite direction, wanting or just taking more time.

“If the president was having an off day, meetings could be scrapped altogether,” noted the Journal. “On one such occasion, in the spring of 2021, a national security official explained to another aide why a meeting needed to be rescheduled. ‘He has good days and bad days, and today was a bad day so we’re going to address this tomorrow,’ the former aide recalled the official saying.”

DEMOCRATIC LEADERS NOTICED LEADERSHIP VACUUM

Two Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives went on the record to make note of Biden’s inaccessibility.

Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA) was the chairman of the Armed Services Committee in 2021 and repeatedly tried to speak with Biden ahead of the administration’s withdrawal from Afghanistan to express concerns.

The president never took his call, and the disastrous withdrawal ended up dragging Biden’s approval rating underwater, where it stayed for the rest of his presidency.

“The Biden White House was more insulated than most,” Smith said. “I spoke with Barack Obama on a number of occasions when he was president and I wasn’t even chairman of the committee.”

Another top Democrat had a similar experience:

Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said his interactions with the White House in the past two years were primarily focused on the reauthorization of a vital section of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act that authorizes broad national security surveillance powers. Biden’s senior advisers and other top administration officials worked with Himes on the issue, and he praised the collaboration.

But Biden wasn’t part of the conversation. “I really had no personal contact with this president. I had more personal contact with Obama, which is sort of strange because I was a lot more junior,” said Himes, who took office in 2009. Congress extended the surveillance authority for two years instead of the administration’s goal of five years.

‘INFREQUENT’ AND ‘TIGHTLY SCRIPTED’ MEETINGS WITH CABINET MEMBERS

“Interactions between Biden and many of his cabinet members were relatively infrequent and often tightly scripted. At least one cabinet member stopped requesting calls with the president, because it was clear that such requests wouldn’t be welcome, a former senior cabinet aide said,” according to the Journal. “One top cabinet member met one-on-one with the president at most twice in the first year and rarely in small groups, another former senior cabinet aide said.”

Biden held just nine full Cabinet meetings during his first terms. His two immediate predecessors, Obama and Donald Trump, held 19 and 25, respectively.

“Former administration officials said it often didn’t seem like Biden had his finger on the pulse,” reported the Journal.

BIDEN STRUGGLED THROUGH PREP FOR ROBERT HUR INTERVIEW

Before Biden’s catastrophic performance in his debate with Trump, Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report raised eyebrows over Biden’s ability to continue to serve as commander-in-chief.

Hur wrote that Biden was “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” who “did not remember when he was vice president” or “when his son Beau died,” prompting the president’s staff and allies to strenuously object.

But as it turns out his staff were well aware that he was struggling going into the interview:

In the fall of 2023, Biden faced a major test when Hur, the special counsel, wanted to interview him. The president wanted to do it, and his top aides felt that his willingness to sit down with investigators set up a favorable contrast with Trump, who stonewalled the probe into why classified documents appeared at Mar-a-Lago, according to people familiar with the sessions.

The prep sessions took about three hours a day for about a week ahead of the interview, according to a person familiar with the preparation. During these sessions, Biden’s energy levels were up and down. He couldn’t recall lines that his team had previously discussed with him, the person said.

A White House official pushed back on the notion that Biden’s age showed in prep, saying that the concerns that arose during those sessions were related to Biden’s tendency to over-share.

The actual interview didn’t go well. Transcripts showed multiple blunders, including that Biden didn’t initially recall that in prep sessions he had been shown his own handwritten memo arguing against a surge of troops in Afghanistan.

REELECTION CAMPAIGN DONORS ‘SHOCKED’ BY HIS PERFOMANCE IN CALLS

Biden required campaign donors to send in pre-screened questions ahead of his calls with them, and then struggled to answer them despite having time to prepare, per the Journal.

One donor was “as shocked when a campaign official told him that attendees shouldn’t expect to have a free ranging question-and-answer session with the president.”

“At some events, the Biden campaign printed the pre-approved questions on notecards and then gave donors the cards to read the questions. Even with all these steps, Biden made flubs, which confounded the donors who knew that Biden had the questions ahead of time,” noted the Journal. “Some donors said they noticed how staff stepped in to mask other signs of decline. Throughout his presidency—and especially later in the term—Biden was assisted by a small group of aides who were laser focused on him in a far different way than when he was vice president, or how former presidents Bill Clinton or Obama were staffed during their presidencies, people who have witnessed their interactions said.”

Biden is a career politician who sold out his country to the highest bidder and liked to take showers with his daughter Ashley.  Disgusting

Really? Sold his country out? To the highest bidder? Really? By what basis of fact? Well, if true, why hasn’t he been indicted? Charged? Arrested? Jailed? Is Brandon like Putin on the ritz? Or a cop? Immune? Really?

Halifax2TheMax

Guessing someone had their hair sniffed.

shecky

The biggest scandle in American history. They can't hide the truth any longer.

shecky

CNN's Scott Jennings criticized the White House for hiding President Biden's health and age issues from the public in a segment on Thursday. 

"This is the biggest scandal in America," Jennings said on CNN. "And the level and volume of people who dedicated themselves to lying to everyone at home about this man’s condition for four-straight years up through this summer is breathtaking." 

A Wall Street Journal report from Thursday that includes interviews with nearly 50 people, including current and former White House staffers who interacted directly with the president, revealed that Biden's stamina issues were apparent even during his first few months in office. 

"It‘s a scandal of epic proportions and it’s a fair question to ask, who is running the country?" Jennings said. "Who has been running the country?"

Jennings argued that Biden's staffers lied about his health and age concerns for the entirety of his presidency. 

"If you‘re worried about Donald Trump‘s advisers having influence — for the last four years, apparently, this president, duly elected, this president was not capable of fulfilling the duties of the office. And his staff and the White House lied about it and kept it from the American people," Jennings said. "It‘s an absolute scandal."

Some news outlets, including The New York Times, are reporting that Biden appears even "older and a little slower" in the final days of his presidency. 

The NYT report revealed: "[Biden] looks a little older and a little slower with each passing day. Aides say he remains plenty sharp in the Situation Room, calling world leaders to broker a cease-fire in Lebanon or deal with the chaos of Syria’s rebellion. But it is hard to imagine that he seriously thought he could do the world’s most stressful job for another four years."

tbergs

shecky said:

CNN's Scott Jennings criticized the White House for hiding President Biden's health and age issues from the public in a segment on Thursday. 

"This is the biggest scandal in America," Jennings said on CNN. "And the level and volume of people who dedicated themselves to lying to everyone at home about this man’s condition for four-straight years up through this summer is breathtaking." 

A Wall Street Journal report from Thursday that includes interviews with nearly 50 people, including current and former White House staffers who interacted directly with the president, revealed that Biden's stamina issues were apparent even during his first few months in office. 

"It‘s a scandal of epic proportions and it’s a fair question to ask, who is running the country?" Jennings said. "Who has been running the country?"

Jennings argued that Biden's staffers lied about his health and age concerns for the entirety of his presidency. 

"If you‘re worried about Donald Trump‘s advisers having influence — for the last four years, apparently, this president, duly elected, this president was not capable of fulfilling the duties of the office. And his staff and the White House lied about it and kept it from the American people," Jennings said. "It‘s an absolute scandal."

Some news outlets, including The New York Times, are reporting that Biden appears even "older and a little slower" in the final days of his presidency. 

The NYT report revealed: "[Biden] looks a little older and a little slower with each passing day. Aides say he remains plenty sharp in the Situation Room, calling world leaders to broker a cease-fire in Lebanon or deal with the chaos of Syria’s rebellion. But it is hard to imagine that he seriously thought he could do the world’s most stressful job for another four years."

Thanks, Scott. Glad your hypocrisy isn't being impacted. The guy who helped elect Bush and has been a key to McConnell's political career is really someone I look to for unbiased opinions and speculation about their "concerns" as to who's been running the country. Well, that'd be the Biden admin and people he appointed to support him who weren't chosen based on how much money they donated or fealty they showed. In reality, no president solely runs the country because we're not a dictatorship, but drum up the base while praising the incoming plutocracy.

I can be concerned about Biden's health and still see that what's happening with Trump is a 100x worse. Don the Con for the win. 

bootlegger10

The article is just more confirmation of what was already known.  Yet, the Dems on this board will still say he was fit and they weren't being lied to for four years.  I don't understand why folks on here can't be honest with themselves and say that Biden and his team did the nation a disservice by lying about his capabilities and ultimately forced them into taking on an unqualified candidate at the last minute.  

Kamala should be pissed too because she was there for his decline and was forced to lie about it too, which damaged her credibility.  Instead of gracefully be a one term president, he forced her to go out and campaign for him and lie.  

Gern Blansten

bootlegger10 said:

The article is just more confirmation of what was already known.  Yet, the Dems on this board will still say he was fit and they weren't being lied to for four years.  I don't understand why folks on here can't be honest with themselves and say that Biden and his team did the nation a disservice by lying about his capabilities and ultimately forced them into taking on an unqualified candidate at the last minute.  

Kamala should be pissed too because she was there for his decline and was forced to lie about it too, which damaged her credibility.  Instead of gracefully be a one term president, he forced her to go out and campaign for him and lie.  

I don't care what any stupid biased article says or what anyone here says that disagrees. Biden is an old man...he's still capable. Yes he stutters, yes he is slower to respond, slower to walk, etc., but no one in their right mind can listen to the guy talk about important subjects the way he STILL DOES and prove any disservice.

You are entitled to your opinion and I'm entitled to disagree.

I personally don't think he should have run again. But that doesn't change the fact that he's still capable. As someone dealing with a parent with early onset Alzheimer's I do have some experience with this. 

lindamarie73

bootlegger10 said:

The article is just more confirmation of what was already known.  Yet, the Dems on this board will still say he was fit and they weren't being lied to for four years.  I don't understand why folks on here can't be honest with themselves and say that Biden and his team did the nation a disservice by lying about his capabilities and ultimately forced them into taking on an unqualified candidate at the last minute.  

Kamala should be pissed too because she was there for his decline and was forced to lie about it too, which damaged her credibility.  Instead of gracefully be a one term president, he forced her to go out and campaign for him and lie.  

 Happy days are almost here again!!

Kat

I enjoyed this interview today. 
Also....have a wonderful holiday season, everyone. May you all have a great time with those you love and who love you....and a great new year!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJfOAjUleTc

Go Beavers

lindamarie73 said:

bootlegger10 said:

The article is just more confirmation of what was already known.  Yet, the Dems on this board will still say he was fit and they weren't being lied to for four years.  I don't understand why folks on here can't be honest with themselves and say that Biden and his team did the nation a disservice by lying about his capabilities and ultimately forced them into taking on an unqualified candidate at the last minute.  

Kamala should be pissed too because she was there for his decline and was forced to lie about it too, which damaged her credibility.  Instead of gracefully be a one term president, he forced her to go out and campaign for him and lie.  

 Happy days are almost here again!!

Okay, so it wasn’t because of his policies.