Seymour Hersh, one of the best investigative journalists of the past 50 years, reports that Biden’s performance in the debate isn’t the worst problem, Biden’s befuddlement has been seen repeatedly in the White House over the past 6 months; there’s a full cover up in process.
Seymour Hersh, one of the best investigative journalists of the past 50 years, reports that Biden’s performance in the debate isn’t the worst problem, Biden’s befuddlement has been seen repeatedly in the White House over the past 6 months; there’s a full cover up in process.
on The Hill, Becket Adams wrote a year ago about repeated gaffes: “one can’t help but feel as if the news industry as a whole is avoiding the …question. Namely, ’Is Biden OK?’”
thing is, most of those sources either tilt right or are proudly so. so their opinions mean nothing. I like a thought experiment I dreamt up, which is "let's say Biden has NOT been running things and it's a bunch of advisors. are they doing it well?" it seems to me they have in. and that scenario isn't really that different in the best of times. presidents (unless they're completely dysfunctional and crazy, much like, say, TFF) don'r run things by themselves. they have cabinets and experts (how many experts there will be after this fucking Chevron decision is uhhh...) advising them who actually know about the shit they're talking about. an unrelated point is that those advisors and experts tend NOT to be criminals and morons.
Hersch has been "out to lunch" for the past 10 years. The Hill is a right wing magazine and anti-Biden. The National Review has had its head up its ass since Buckley founded it. If you're going to support "sources" like these, you might have come to the Wong Foo King Substack.
Seymour Hersh, one of the best investigative journalists of the past 50 years, reports that Biden’s performance in the debate isn’t the worst problem, Biden’s befuddlement has been seen repeatedly in the White House over the past 6 months; there’s a full cover up in process.
https://open.substack.com/pub/seymourhersh/p/who-is-running-the-country?r=dw1an&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
a search on the subject finds related articles.
on The Hill, Becket Adams wrote a year ago about repeated gaffes: “one can’t help but feel as if the news industry as a whole is avoiding the …question. Namely, ’Is Biden OK?’”
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/4075227-we-need-a-serious-conversation-about-joe-bidens-brain/
Three weeks ago, Luther Ray Abel wrote in
the National Review of repeated instances: “…(there’s) evidence before one’s eyes that Biden is, at the very least, cognitively inconsistent…”
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/bidens-befuddled-genius/
Michael Graham of InsideSources.com predicted Biden’s debate performance two days before the debate:
https://www.reviewjournal.com/opinion/commentary-bidens-debate-blunder-showing-up-at-all-3075136/
thing is, most of those sources either tilt right or are proudly so. so their opinions mean nothing. I like a thought experiment I dreamt up, which is "let's say Biden has NOT been running things and it's a bunch of advisors. are they doing it well?" it seems to me they have in. and that scenario isn't really that different in the best of times. presidents (unless they're completely dysfunctional and crazy, much like, say, TFF) don'r run things by themselves. they have cabinets and experts (how many experts there will be after this fucking Chevron decision is uhhh...) advising them who actually know about the shit they're talking about. an unrelated point is that those advisors and experts tend NOT to be criminals and morons.
Hersch has been "out to lunch" for the past 10 years. The Hill is a right wing magazine and anti-Biden. The National Review has had its head up its ass since Buckley founded it. If you're going to support "sources" like these, you might have come to the Wong Foo King Substack.