International
Too feeble to indict: Joe Biden’s disastrous press conference confirms diminished mental capacity
Biden delivers remarks at the White House on February 8, 2024
From LifeSiteNews
‘This is becoming a five-alarm fire for the White House’
Joe Biden attempted to do damage control at a hastily-arranged White House press conference after the Department of Justice (DOJ) published a lengthy investigative report which concluded that Biden is a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and “diminished faculties.”
Much to the dismay of D.C. Democrats, Biden’s performance at the conference served only to confirm the report’s findings, opening the door for liberal and conservative pundits alike to question whether Biden is fit to continue as President of the United States.
The DOJ’s damning 388-page report — issued by special counsel Robert Hur on the “investigation into unauthorized removal, retention, and disclosure of classified documents”— found that Biden had willfully mishandled classified documents and had disclosed classified military and national security information, but that because of his diminished mental capacity, no criminal charges would be filed against the 81-year-old.
“In essence, the special counsel presents evidence that Biden should be removed under the 25th amendment,” noted conservative commentator Mark Levin.
The issue of Biden’s national security breaches faded into the background after he stood behind an East Room podium to dispel the report’s assertions about his increasing feeble mindedness. Even far-left national media outlets couldn’t ignore last night’s train wreck at the White House.
Biden angrily proclaimed “I am an elderly man. I know what the hell I’m doing!” during the evening presser, but few if any were buying it.
“This is becoming a five-alarm fire for the White House,” declared a panelist on CNN’s 360 with Anderson Cooper, alarmed at both the DOJ report and Biden’s performance at the press conference. “I don’t think the president did himself any favors in that speech. He undercut two of his biggest messages.”
Stunned CNN Panel Delivers Brutal Review of Biden Press Conference
“I don’t think the president did himself any favors in that speech. He undercut two of his biggest messages.”
“This is becoming a five-alarm fire for the White House.”
“Mexico? Mexico?! Where did that come… pic.twitter.com/poAUwX0v6P
— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) February 9, 2024
A U.S. House Democrat called Biden’s verbal slip-ups “awful” and a former Biden White House official said the White House press conference was “brutal,” according to an Axios report.
Former ABC and CNN personality Chris Cuomo asked Robert F. Kennedy Jr. a question that would’ve been anathema for liberal media up until now: “Do you believe that Joe Biden is fit to be President of the United States?”
Kennedy responded:
I think we’ve reached a time where it’s no longer character assassination to ask legitimate questions about the President’s competency.
There are so many decisions that require nuance, that require complex levels of thinking and that those kinds of issues are coming at you many times a day.
The American people have a right to understand whether their President is capable of making those decisions.
There are entrenched interests and special interests in government that actually benefit from having a president who is not completely competent.
My complaint about what’s happening in the White House is that it’s become the sock puppet for these large industries, the big hedge funds, BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard, who give equally to the Republican and Democratic Party, and now are just comfortable calling the shots.
I think we’ve reached a time where it’s no longer character assassination to ask legitimate questions about the President’s competency.
There are so many decisions that require nuance, that require complex levels of thinking and that those kind of issues are coming at you many… pic.twitter.com/nCtJkAtZRd
— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) February 9, 2024
Conservatives pulled no punches
“This is the most catastrophic presidential press conference I’ve ever seen in my lifetime,” said the Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh.
“Not lucid enough to be charged for a crime but still running for President are not a complementary set of facts,” noted Andrew T. Walker, Ethics & Public Theology Professor at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.
“I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again in a spirit of non-partisan Christian charity and a concern for human dignity: A man in Joe Biden’s condition should not be President nor running for President. It is an indignity to him and the office for him to endure a job he cannot do,” added Walker.
Many were moved to compare and contrast Biden’s press conference performance with that of Russian President Vladimir Putin whose lengthy interview with Tucker Carlson had been published on X earlier in the evening.
“One of these world leaders sat attentive for a 2 hour interview and expertly gave a 30 minute history lesson in detail,” wrote Libs of TikTok. “The other confused his colors and mixed up the Presidents of 2 countries.”
One of these world leaders sat attentive for a 2 hour interview and expertly gave a 30 minute history lesson in detail.
The other confused his colors and mixed up the Presidents of 2 countries.
Absolutely terrifying and embarrassing. pic.twitter.com/Tkai20FNWp
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) February 9, 2024
“Absolutely terrifying and embarrassing.”
“Tonight as Putin gave intelligent, scholarly answers that delved into a thousand years of Russian history, President Biden was babbling incoherently about how the president of Egypt is actually the president of Mexico,” said Matt Walsh in a subsequent X post.
When former Obama White House political advisor Jim Messina attempted to dismiss the significance of the special counsel’s report, American Principles Project President Terry Schilling called him out:
It’s just all propaganda all the time from these people.
We see the decrepit and senile old man in the White House!
We hear him mumbling and stumbling.
You all are evil idiots destroying a great country.
Let's be clear–the special counsel isn't a dummy and we should be very careful not to take the bait after Comey pulled this in 2016. Hur, a lifelong Republican and creature of DC, didn't have a case against Biden, but he knew exactly how his swipes could hurt Biden politically.
— Jim Messina (@Messina2012) February 8, 2024
NYT: Maybe it’s time to stop pretending that Biden’s age is not an issue
The New York Times journalists offered remarkably honest, measured commentary amid the White House’s very bad day yesterday.
“The decision on Thursday not to file criminal charges against President Biden for mishandling classified documents should have been an unequivocal legal exoneration,” wrote the Times’ Michael D. Shear. “Instead, it was a political disaster.”
“Biden’s age is very clearly the most important non-Trump issue in this election,” said The New York Times politics reporter Astead Herndon. “Polling says so. Voters say so.”
“It’s just the WH/DC have had a sorta gentleman’s agreement for the last year to pretend like it’s not. Maybe that ends now,” wondered Herndon.
Biden’s age is very clearly the most impt non-Trump issue in this elec. polling says so. Voters say so. It’s just the WH/DC have had a sorta gentleman’s agreement for the last year to pretend like it’s not. Maybe that ends now https://t.co/W7d6BPK9SW
— Astead (@AsteadWH) February 8, 2024
Daily Caller
US Supreme Court Has Chance To End Climate Lawfare

From the Daily Caller News Foundation
All eyes will be on the Supreme Court later this week when the justices conference on Friday to decide whether to grant a petition for writ of certiorari on a high-stakes climate lawsuit out of Colorado. The case is a part of the long-running lawfare campaign seeking to extract billions of dollars in jury awards from oil companies on claims of nebulous damages caused by carbon emissions.
In Suncor Energy (U.S.A.) Inc., et al. v. County Commissioners of Boulder County, major American energy companies are asking the Supreme Court to decide whether federal law precludes state law nuisance claims targeting interstate and global emissions. This comes as the City and County of Boulder, Colo. sued a long list of energy companies under Colorado state nuisance law for alleged impacts from global climate change.
The Colorado Supreme Court allowed a lower state trial court decision to go through, improbably finding that federal law did not preempt state law claims. The central question hangs on whether the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) preempts state common law public nuisance claims related to the regulation of carbon emissions. In this case, as in at least 10 other cases that have been decided in favor of the defendant companies, the CAA clearly does preempt Colorado law. It seems inevitable that the Supreme Court, if it grants the cert petition, would make the same ruling.
Dear Readers:
As a nonprofit, we are dependent on the generosity of our readers.
Please consider making a small donation of any amount here.
Thank you!
Such a finding by the Supreme Court would reinforce a 2021 ruling by the Second Circuit Appeals Court that also upheld this longstanding principle of federal law. In City of New York v. Chevron Corp. (2021), the Second Circuit ruled that municipalities may not use state tort law to hold multinational companies liable for climate damages, since global warming is a uniquely international concern that touches upon issues of federalism and foreign policy. Consequently, the court called for the explicit application of federal common law, with the CAA granting the Environmental Protection Agency – not federal courts – the authority to regulate domestic greenhouse gas emissions. This Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, should weigh in here and find in the same way.
Boulder-associated attorneys have become increasingly open to acknowledging the judicial lawfare inherent in their case, as they try to supplant federal regulatory jurisdiction with litigation meant to force higher energy prices rise for consumers. David Bookbinder, an environmental lawyer associated with the Boulder legal team, said the quiet part out loud in a recent Federalist Society webinar titled “Can State Courts Set Global Climate Policy. “Tort liability is an indirect carbon tax,” Bookbinder stated plainly. “You sue an oil company, an oil company is liable. The oil company then passes that liability on to the people who are buying its products … The people who buy those products are now going to be paying for the cost imposed by those products.”
Oh.
While Bookbinder recently distanced himself from the case, no notice of withdrawal had appeared in the court’s records as of this writing. Bookbinder also writes that “Gas prices and climate change policy have become political footballs because neither party in Congress has had the courage to stand up to the oil and gas lobby. Both sides fear the spin machine, so consumers get stuck paying the bill.”
Let’s be honest: The “spin machine” works in all directions. Make no mistake about it, consumers are already getting stuck paying the bill related to this long running lawfare campaign even though the defendants have repeatedly been found not to be liable in case after case. The many millions of dollars in needless legal costs sustained by the dozens of defendants named in these cases ultimately get passed to consumers via higher energy costs. This isn’t some evil conspiracy by the oil companies: It is Business Management 101.
Because the climate alarm lobby hasn’t been able to force its long-sought national carbon tax through the legislative process, sympathetic activists and plaintiff firms now pursue this backdoor effort in the nation’s courts. But their problem is that the law on this is crystal clear, and it is long past time for the Supreme Court to step in and put a stop to this serial abuse of the system.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
Crime
U.S. seizes Cuba-bound ship with illicit Iranian oil history
President Trump revealed Wednesday afternoon that U.S. authorities intercepted a Cuba-bound oil tanker off the Venezuelan coast, a dramatic move aimed at tightening the squeeze on illicit oil networks operating throughout the region. Speaking to reporters at the White House, Trump described the vessel as “a very large tanker — the largest one ever seized in action,” hinting that more developments are coming. He declined to get into specifics, saying only that the operation happened “for a very good reason.” When asked about the tanker’s crude, Trump didn’t overcomplicate it. “Well, we keep it, I guess,” he said.
According to a U.S. official familiar with the operation, the seizure was executed by the Coast Guard with support from the U.S. Navy after a federal judge green-lit the warrant roughly two weeks ago. Another official told the New York Times the ship — identified as the Skipper — had been sailing under a falsified flag and has a documented history of trafficking illicit Iranian oil. The vessel, although carrying Venezuelan crude at the time, was seized because of those Iranian smuggling ties, not because of any direct connection to Nicolás Maduro’s regime.
Today, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Homeland Security Investigations, and the United States Coast Guard, with support from the Department of War, executed a seizure warrant for a crude oil tanker used to transport sanctioned oil from Venezuela and Iran. For multiple… pic.twitter.com/dNr0oAGl5x
— Attorney General Pamela Bondi (@AGPamBondi) December 10, 2025
Vanguard, a UK-based maritime risk firm, confirmed Wednesday that the Skipper fits the profile of a tanker previously sanctioned by the United States for operating under the alias Adisa while moving banned Iranian oil. A source speaking to Politico said the ship was on its way to Cuba, where state-run Cubametales intended to flip the cargo to Asian brokers — an increasingly common workaround as U.S. sanctions isolate both Havana and Caracas from traditional buyers. With most Venezuelan product now flowing to China under the sanctions regime, oil traders began recalibrating almost immediately after the news broke. Prices ticked upward modestly as markets waited to learn whether any Venezuelan crude was on board and how much would be effectively taken off the table.
Maduro, for his part, avoided directly mentioning the seizure during a speech later Wednesday, instead railing against the United States and claiming Venezuela’s military stands ready “to break the teeth of the North American empire, if necessary.” His bluster did little to obscure the reality: the Trump administration just disrupted yet another shadowy oil operation linking Caracas, Havana, and Tehran — and sent a clear signal that these networks will be confronted, tanker by tanker.
-
Crime2 days agoInside the Fortified Sinaloa-Linked Compound Canada Still Can’t Seize After 12 Years of Legal War
-
Automotive16 hours agoThe $50 Billion Question: EVs Never Delivered What Ottawa Promised
-
Great Reset1 day agoProposed ban on euthanasia for mental illness sparks passionate debate in Canada’s Parliament
-
Censorship Industrial Complex1 day agoLiberals gain support for ‘hate speech’ bill targeting Bible passages against homosexuality
-
Business1 day agoStorm clouds of uncertainty as BC courts deal another blow to industry and investment
-
National2 days agoLiberal bill “targets Christians” by removing religious exemption in hate-speech law
-
C2C Journal15 hours agoWisdom of Our Elders: The Contempt for Memory in Canadian Indigenous Policy
-
Business2 days agoCanada Can Finally Profit From LNG If Ottawa Stops Dragging Its Feet


