Biden Insiders Confess He Was Severely Cognitively Impaired

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

In any state of cognitive powers (which is totally Trumper bunk), Biden always upheld the Constitution and didn't act like the other 2 branches of government didn't exist.

You don't remember that he signed an order to forgive student loans--while admitting it was unconstitutional?

Also, Trump seems to be reclaiming Article II powers seized by the other branches. This has been done before by past presidents. That's upholding the Constitution. It will be up to the Supreme Court to decide if he's right or wrong. In the case of Biden claiming the power to forgive student loans, he never had it in the first place, but was casting about aimlessly to try and keep a campaign promise.

Tell us these great Presidents

I know you'll pull out some names but your side always leaves out something.

Try to keep it in the 20th century if you can

Certainly.

President Biden (successful) - Collins v. Yellen - The Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 violated the separation of powers by creating a single director for the Federal Housing Finance Agency, removable by the President only “for cause.” On the day of the decision, President Joe Biden moved forward with replacing FHFA director, Mark A. Calabria, who had been appointed under Donald Trump, "with an appointee who reflects the Administration's values".

President Obama (successful) - Zivotofsky v. Kerry - Under the Reception Clause in Article II of the U.S. Constitution, only the President may grant formal recognition to a foreign sovereign, and Congress may not pass a law under its own authority to grant formal recognition or require the President to override a prior official determination of recognition. It was an improper act for Congress to “aggrandiz[e] its power at the expense of another branch” by requiring the President to contradict an earlier recognition determination in an official document issued by the Executive Branch. Freytag v. Commissioner, 501 U. S. 868, 878 (1991) . To allow Congress to control the President’s communication in the context of a formal recognition determination is to allow Congress to exercise that exclusive power itself. As a result, the statute is unconstitutional. Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Breyer, J., filed a concurring opinion.

President Obama (failed) - NLRB v. Canning - The Recess Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution empowers the President to fill any existing vacancy during any recess—intra-session or inter-session—of sufficient length, but three days is not sufficient length. Justice Breyer wrote the opinion of the Court, joined by Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Breyer, writing for the Court, stated, "We hold that, for purposes of the Recess Appointments Clause, the Senate is in session when it says it is, provided that, under its own rules, it retains the capacity to transact Senate business."

President Reagan (successful) - Bowsher v. Synar - The court held that the Comptroller General's role in exercising executive functions under the Act's deficit reduction process violated the constitutionally imposed doctrine of separation of powers because the Comptroller General is removable only by a congressional joint resolution or by impeachment, and Congress may not retain the power of removal over an officer performing executive powers. To permit the execution of the laws to be vested in an officer answerable only to Congress would, in practical terms, reserve in Congress control of the execution of the laws. The structure of the Constitution does not permit Congress to execute the laws; it follows that Congress cannot grant to an officer under its control what it does not possess.

Which one of those involves completely disrupting the rule of law?

What does "disrupting the rule of law" mean? The President believes he is properly exercising his Article II powers, which would seem to be upholding the rule of law. It is up to the Supreme Court to decide whether he is right.

Nobody who has even a sliver of knowledge of the U.S. Constitution will believe this completely specious argument.

What specious argument? You mean the same argument that past Presidents have used to reclaim their Article II powers from the Legislative Branch? Please provide your 100% infallible argument that President Trump is acting outside his constitutional authority. If this were the case, impeachment and removal from office would be a slam dunk. But it's not, and you know it.

lol please give us your “100% infallible argument” that Trump is not trampling on fundamental constitutional principles.

I didn't make the assertion that what Trump is blatantly unconstitutional. Pp did, so I'm sure you would like to hear the rationale for it as well.

[Anonymous]

Same thing happened when ol’ Ronnie Reagan was in office, OP (and currently with Orange Nightmare, IMO).

I’m not saying I love that it happened/is happening but don’t make it seem like this is the first time the gov has covered up for a POTUS and their cognitive issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No less than 4 books are coming out confirming everything that was alleged about Biden's deteriorating cognitive abilities and making it clear things were even worse.

So, what do we make of the fact that the Democrats flagrantly lied for over a year about Biden's mental degeneration, even going as far as to claiming it was Russian disinformation?

At this point, I think we can safely say that it is true that an unelected cabal took over Biden's presidency because he was not able to govern.

How do we square this kind of power-hungry betrayal of voters and America with the claim that Democrats are defending democracy?

Links:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2025/apr/02/biden-ron-klain-trump-debate-prep-book-chris-whipple

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/columnist/2025/04/06/books-biden-health-fight-uncharted/82791100007/

The books:

“Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again” by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson

“Fight: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House” by Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes

“2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America” by Josh Dawsey, Tyler Pager and Isaac Arnsdorf

“Uncharted: How Trump Beat Biden, Harris, and the Odds in the Wildest Campaign in History” by Chris

Revelations:

Vice President Kamala Harris' aides were so concerned about the president's health that they "strategized around the possibility that Biden might die in office." The authors report that Jamal Simmons, the vice president's communications director, drew up a “death-pool roster” of federal judges who could swear in Harris as president if Biden died.

Ron Klain, a longtime aide to Biden and his former White House chief of staff, helped the president prepare for his fateful debate with Trump last year. Klain told Whipple that Biden “didn’t know what Trump had been saying and couldn’t grasp what the back and forth was.”

Klain also described how Biden “didn’t really understand what his argument was on inflation” and “had nothing to say about a second term other than finish the job.”

Klain viewed Biden, then 81, as “out of it” and even “half-seriously” worried that Biden thought he was “president of NATO.”

I can't roll my eyes loud enough. What moron posted this....hmm someone who wants to DISTRACT from the destruction of America by elon and trump. Shut it!!! No one cares. We could all sleep at night with Biden. now we worry about everything-specifically our rights. Just stop OP.

[Anonymous]

Do not care.

You know what's amazing? The fact that Trump is far worse than a severely cognitively impaired Biden.

[Anonymous]

Black Monday tomorrow is a self-inflicted wound from the guy who went golfing at his resort with the Saudis all weekend. What a guy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll take Biden and my old 401k back in a heartbeat.

+1000! It is not even a close.

But but but...what about what about!!!???

Trump BAD, Dems GOOD.

Are you capable of anything else? Do you really think the Biden Administration is the best we can do? Do you really believe there can be no legitimate criticism of Democrats just because Trump sucks?

Yes, Trump sucks. We get it. But Democrats are going to have to come with something better than "Trump sucks" if they intend to keep him from destroying everything. For whatever reason, people chose that guy over our candidate. Maybe let's stop being childish and consider the many legitimate reasons why people are rejecting our party.

Not really. He can just keep tanking 401(k)s, denying old people social security payments and calling them frauds when they complain, and letting children die of measles.

Enjoy that bed you made republicans.
Sorry you didn’t like her laugh.
No ones job to save you from yourself, aren’t you the party of individual responsibility?

I'm telling you, as a reluctant Dem voter, I will not continue to support this party if they do not come with something better than "Trump sucks." If their strategy continues to be, let's sit back and wait until this super bad so no one has any choice but us, I will not be giving this party my vote. You will lose and many others to the socialists. I will not continue to be bullied into voting the lesser evil for a party that does not care to represent me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do not care.

You know what's amazing? The fact that Trump is far worse than a severely cognitively impaired Biden.

Yep. Do not care. That's exactly what Trumpers say at his very obvious issues.

If both sides voters do not care, no matter what their party does, who does the party answer to? Not their voters.

[Anonymous]

If we were presently in good hands with a sage and stable president in the WH, I’d want more answers from the people who propped up Biden, but the disastrous presidency that is currently unfolding requires our urgent attention, so for now, I’m putting any scrutiny of Biden on the back burner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, no one give a f*ck. Seriously. Even if this is true, he is gone from politics and we now have a madman in office.

Get over it. There are much bigger issues to focus on right now.

lol bad take. This is a huge scandal. Trump being a bad dude doesn't sanitize this anymore then Trump's bankruptcies pay my cellphone bill

[Anonymous]

Call me when a Democratic President "jokes" about staying in office for a third term and Congressional Democrats start introducing legislation to make it happen.

(that's one of a gajillion "call me whens...")

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Black Monday tomorrow is a self-inflicted wound from the guy who went golfing at his resort with the Saudis all weekend. What a guy.

It's painful to get a country back on track after all the stealing of taxpayer dollars, flooding the nation with people on the taxpayer's dime and letting China control our well-being. Covid was a shining example of what was down the pike for us in a worse scenario.

If Trump had a track record of fixing ANYTHING, you could have a point. But his track record is of bankruptcy after bankruptcy after shady loan after stiffing workers. It isn’t going to be different this time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, no one give a f*ck. Seriously. Even if this is true, he is gone from politics and we now have a madman in office.

Get over it. There are much bigger issues to focus on right now.

lol bad take. This is a huge scandal. Trump being a bad dude doesn't sanitize this anymore then Trump's bankruptcies pay my cellphone bill

It’s a big scandal, but so what with Trump in office? He and his administration churn out multiple scandals per day, every day. We have outrage fatigue. We just can’t get worked up too much over any one scandal when there are so many. This is just another one in an ocean of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Same thing happened when ol’ Ronnie Reagan was in office, OP (and currently with Orange Nightmare, IMO).

I’m not saying I love that it happened/is happening but don’t make it seem like this is the first time the gov has covered up for a POTUS and their cognitive issues.

a year or so out of office Reagan joked to an interviewer that with staff turning lights on and off for him for 8 years he and Nancy had forgotten how light switches worked. I was pretty sure at the time he was the only one who couldn't figure out light switches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll take Biden and my old 401k back in a heartbeat.

+1000! It is not even a close.

But but but...what about what about!!!???

Trump BAD, Dems GOOD.

Are you capable of anything else? Do you really think the Biden Administration is the best we can do? Do you really believe there can be no legitimate criticism of Democrats just because Trump sucks?

Yes, Trump sucks. We get it. But Democrats are going to have to come with something better than "Trump sucks" if they intend to keep him from destroying everything. For whatever reason, people chose that guy over our candidate. Maybe let's stop being childish and consider the many legitimate reasons why people are rejecting our party.

Not really. He can just keep tanking 401(k)s, denying old people social security payments and calling them frauds when they complain, and letting children die of measles.

Enjoy that bed you made republicans.
Sorry you didn’t like her laugh.
No ones job to save you from yourself, aren’t you the party of individual responsibility?

I'm telling you, as a reluctant Dem voter, I will not continue to support this party if they do not come with something better than "Trump sucks." If their strategy continues to be, let's sit back and wait until this super bad so no one has any choice but us, I will not be giving this party my vote. You will lose and many others to the socialists. I will not continue to be bullied into voting the lesser evil for a party that does not care to represent me.

Bro I won’t lose anyone.

Just like everyone else on this forum I didn’t vote for Biden in November. The guy who got elected is tanking the country. If you need people to wring their hands about a dude who didn’t even run, that’s cool, but that’s a you problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, no one give a f*ck. Seriously. Even if this is true, he is gone from politics and we now have a madman in office.

Get over it. There are much bigger issues to focus on right now.

lol bad take. This is a huge scandal. Trump being a bad dude doesn't sanitize this anymore then Trump's bankruptcies pay my cellphone bill

It’s a big scandal, but so what with Trump in office? He and his administration churn out multiple scandals per day, every day. We have outrage fatigue. We just can’t get worked up too much over any one scandal when there are so many. This is just another one in an ocean of them.

174 cases so far.

For the heck of it I spent some time today looking at the judges who have ruled favorably and unfavorably regarding the admin. Of course a GOP-nominated judge is more likely to side with the GOP (that's what the Federalist Society expects) and Dem-nominated judges the opposite, but judges that have ruled in Trump's favor include Biden and Obama appointees and those ruling AGAINST him include judges appointed by Bush, Reagan, and Trump himself.
The unfavorable: favorable ratio is roughly 2:1 (these are preliminary injunctions and TROs).