Connect with us

International

Too feeble to indict: Joe Biden’s disastrous press conference confirms diminished mental capacity

Published

1 year ago

8 minute read

Biden delivers remarks at the White House on February 8, 2024

From LifeSiteNews

By Doug Mainwaring

‘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.”  

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.

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.    

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.”  

“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.

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.  

Related Topics:

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

More from this author
Business / 2 hours ago

Carney should rethink ‘carbon capture’ climate cure

Alberta / 2 hours ago

World’s first direct air capture test centre to open doors in Innisfail

Energy / 2 hours ago

Is Carney ‘All Hat And No Cattle’?

Great Reset

U.S. rejects WHO pandemic amendments, citing threat to sovereignty

Published on July 18, 2025

By

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

The U.S. has officially rejected the WHO’s 2024 pandemic rule changes. In a joint statement, Secretaries Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Marco Rubio said the amendments threaten American sovereignty, free speech, and privacy—handing too much power to unelected global bureaucrats.

Key Details:

  • The U.S. State Department and HHS transmitted the official rejection of the 2024 amendments to the WHO’s IHR.
  • Officials cited threats to national sovereignty, vague terminology, and the WHO’s political susceptibility—particularly to China—as grounds for rejection.
  • The amendments would have mandated WHO-led responses, digital health documentation, and “equitable access” initiatives regardless of U.S. withdrawal from the WHO.

Diving Deeper:

The rejection represents a sharp rebuke of the World Health Assembly’s 2024 amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005), which sought to centralize global pandemic decision-making power within the WHO. Kennedy and Rubio emphasized the amendments’ “vague and broad” language and their potential to create policy rooted in politics and global “solidarity” rather than science and national interest.

Among the most controversial changes were new authorities for the WHO to unilaterally declare health emergencies, coordinate international responses, and guide member states toward “equitable access” to vaccines and other health commodities. The amendments also encouraged countries to implement digital health documents—raising red flags for privacy and surveillance concerns.

“The amendments risk unwarranted interference with our national sovereign right to make health policy,” the joint statement read. Kennedy and Rubio specifically criticized the lack of public input in drafting the new rules and warned that WHO directives could suppress legitimate scientific debate and restrict Americans’ freedom of speech under the guise of “controlling misinformation.”

The officials pointed to the WHO’s well-documented failures during the COVID-19 pandemic, including its deference to the Chinese Communist Party, as a stark example of why international bodies should not be granted binding authority over U.S. domestic policy. “These amendments… fail to adequately address the WHO’s susceptibility to political influence and censorship—most notably from China—during outbreaks,” the statement noted.

Even more alarming, the statement highlighted that the amended rules would have bound the U.S. regardless of its current status in the WHO, essentially imposing obligations on a nation that is no longer part of the organization. This drew particular concern from Rubio, who has long warned against ceding U.S. autonomy to global institutions.

In reaffirming their commitment to “put Americans first,” Kennedy and Rubio vowed to continue resisting international encroachments on U.S. freedoms. “We will not tolerate international policies that infringe on Americans’ speech, privacy, or personal liberties,” they declared.

This formal rejection marks a victory for critics of globalism and top-down health mandates, signaling that under the current administration, American decision-makers are prioritizing sovereignty, transparency, and constitutional protections over global consensus driven by unelected bureaucrats.

Continue Reading

Crime

Former Epstein lawyer: There was never a client list

Published on July 18, 2025

By

MXM logo MxM News

Quick Hit:

Jeffrey Epstein’s former attorney Alan Dershowitz says there was never a “client list,” calling the claim fiction in a Wall Street Journal op-ed. He also defended President Trump, saying there’s no evidence of any improper or questionable behavior.

Key Details:

  • Dershowitz wrote that Epstein “never created a ‘client list,’” and clarified that the FBI only documented names brought up by alleged victims in interviews, which were redacted in released files.
  • He stressed that none of the redacted names are current officeholders and added that the veracity of the accusations remains unknown.
  • Dismissing rumors of hidden cameras used to entrap guests, Dershowitz said surveillance tapes existed only in public areas and were installed by law enforcement—not Epstein.

Diving Deeper:

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed this week, constitutional attorney Alan Dershowitz addressed lingering speculation surrounding the late Jeffrey Epstein, his alleged surveillance operation, and his reported ties to public figures. Dershowitz, who represented Epstein years ago and has consistently challenged many media narratives surrounding the case, said the facts don’t support the sensational claims.

“Epstein never created a ‘client list,’” Dershowitz wrote, pushing back on the widely circulated notion that Epstein maintained a record of high-profile individuals for the purpose of blackmail. He clarified that the FBI had compiled names mentioned by alleged victims during interviews, but that those names were redacted in publicly released documents. “We don’t know whether the accusations are true,” he added. “The names mentioned don’t include any current officeholders.”

Dershowitz also sought to debunk claims that Epstein maintained a secret camera system in his guest bedrooms to entrap powerful visitors. “There are videotapes, but they are of public areas of his Palm Beach, Fla., home,” he wrote. According to Dershowitz, those surveillance cameras were installed by police after Epstein reported that money and a firearm were stolen from the property. “I am not aware of video cameras in guest bedrooms,” he added.

Turning to President Donald Trump, Dershowitz flatly denied that any evidence exists linking him to wrongdoing. “Open records show an acquaintance between Epstein and President Trump many years ago,” he wrote, before emphasizing that the relationship ended long ago. “That relationship ended when President Trump reportedly banned Epstein from Mar-a-Lago, long before becoming president the first time.”

“I have seen nothing that would suggest anything improper or even questionable by President Trump,” Dershowitz concluded.

His remarks arrive amid a resurgence of political and media interest in Epstein’s associations. But Dershowitz’s message is clear: much of the speculation is unsupported by evidence, and President Trump’s name should not be dragged into narratives that have no basis in fact.

Continue Reading

Trending

X