In an unusual turn of events, President Joe Biden's latest State of the Union speech has ignited a flurry of speculation and controversy.
A psychiatrist has raised eyebrows by suggesting that President Biden's energetic demeanor during his State of the Union address might indicate stimulant use, aimed at concealing cognitive decline.
At the ripe age of 81, President Biden delivered his speech in a manner that was not only rapid but also louder than his usual tone. This deviation from his characteristic speaking style has fueled discussions about his cognitive health and whether it played a role in the apparent change.
Dr. Carole Lieberman, a forensic psychiatrist, observed that the speed and volume with which Biden spoke could be indicative of Adderall or amphetamine use. It's important to note, however, that Dr. Lieberman has not personally examined the President but based her observations on his public appearances and the mannerisms he displayed during the speech.
During his address, Biden was seen gesturing more frequently and moving his hands at a pace that is uncharacteristic of his usual podium-hand-resting posture. Dr. Lieberman pointed out that this, along with Biden's rapid speech delivery and occasional slurring of words, could suggest the assistance of psychopharmacological substances.
Biden's performance, which was notably more energetic than usual, quickly became a topic of discussion across social media platforms and among political commentators. This shift in behavior has raised questions about the broader implications for his cognitive health.
The White House was quick to dismiss the criticisms and insinuations regarding potential drug use. Official spokespeople and allies of the President defended his performance, suggesting that the energetic delivery was merely a sign of his commitment and passion for the topics discussed.
It's noteworthy that some scientific evidence suggests that Adderall can assist with cognitive diseases such as Alzheimer's or dementia. A 2022 study highlighted that ADHD medications might improve cognitive performance in Alzheimer's patients, lending some credence to the idea that stimulants could have been used to enhance Biden's focus during the speech.
Dr. Lieberman further observed signs of cognitive decline in President Biden, particularly noting two gaffes during his address. These errors, along with his heightened anger and shouting, were interpreted by her as potential signs of dementia, possibly exacerbated by stimulant use.
This is not the first time that public figures have speculated about Biden's cognitive health and potential use of performance-enhancing drugs. Former President Donald Trump had previously accused Biden of using drugs to enhance his performance during debates.
The ongoing discussions about Biden's cognitive abilities have been a significant aspect of his reelection efforts. A recent report describing Biden's memory in negative terms has only intensified these debates, despite Biden's insistence that his memory is fine. Notably, he did not take a cognitive test during his last physical examination.
Quotes from Dr. Lieberman and others in the public eye, such as Ari Fleischer and Frank Luntz, have further fueled the discussion. Fleischer's comment on X (formerly Twitter) about Biden's speech being "weirdly amped up" and Luntz's remark about it being the "loudest State of the Union speech" he can remember have added to the chorus of voices weighing in on the President's performance.
The debate over President Biden's State of the Union speech and his cognitive health underscores the deeply polarized nature of current American politics. While some see the President's energetic delivery as a positive sign, others interpret it through a lens of suspicion and concern for his well-being.
Dr. Lieberman's comments about the potential for Adderall to focus someone's attention before a significant event like the State of the Union address highlight the complex interplay between public perception, political strategy, and personal health.
Despite the White House's dismissal of the speculation, the conversation around Biden's cognitive health and potential stimulant use persists, with political opponents and some members of the public remaining skeptical of the official narrative.
While former President Donald Trump has recently been on a winning streak politically, his track record in his multiple ongoing legal battles has been more balanced between losses and wins.
Trump just suffered another setback on the legal front when a British judge ruled Thursday that the former president needed to pay the six-figure legal costs incurred by former British spy Christopher Steele following the dismissal of a lawsuit filed by Trump, the Associated Press reported.
That lawsuit claiming reputational damage was filed against Steele, the author of the debunked and unproven anti-Trump "Steele Dossier" in 2016, and his consulting firm, Orbis Business Intelligence, but was dismissed by the London judge last month as being "bound to fail."
Axios reported last month that former President Trump filed his lawsuit in British court against Steele and Orbis on the claims that Steele's unverified anti-Trump dossier, which was full of unproven claims of Russian collusion and other salacious assertions, not only caused Trump substantial reputational damage but also violated data protection laws in the U.K.
British Judge Karen Steyn disagreed, however, and ruled on Feb. 1 that there were "no compelling reasons" to let the lawsuit proceed, as Trump had "chosen to allow many years to elapse -- without any attempt to vindicate his reputation in this jurisdiction -- since he was first made aware of the dossier."
Though she acknowledged that she did not "consider or determine the accuracy or inaccuracy of the memoranda," she nonetheless concluded that Trump's "claim for compensation and/or damages ... is bound to fail."
At that time, Steele and Orbis said they were "delighted" by the dismissal of the "vexatious litigation" against them, and argued that Trump "brought this claim in an attempt to exact revenge on Orbis and to chill free speech and legitimate investigations."
They also asserted, according to the AP, that the lawsuit deserved to be dismissed since Steele had never intended the dossier to be made public -- it was published by Buzzfeed without any requests for approval -- and because he'd never attested to the veracity of the false claims made therein.
Now more than a month after that lawsuit was dismissed, CNN reported that the same British judge has ordered former President Trump to pay the legal costs racked up by Steele and Orbis in defending against that litigation, which equates to roughly $385,000.
Steele and Orbis had initially asked the court to force Trump to pay upwards of $816,000 in claimed legal costs, though that request was later lowered to around $569,000.
Trump's legal team balked at the exorbitant ask, especially given the fact the lawsuit had been summarily dismissed so quickly, even before the defense attorneys had to really do anything, which appears to have led the judge to reduce the initially requested amount in legal fees by more than half in her decision.
The dismissal of Trump's lawsuit against Steele and Orbis, who were hired by Democratic operatives aligned with Hillary Clinton's campaign and tasked with digging up dirt against the 2016 GOP nominee, was already bad enough, but that has now been compounded with the order to pay the outrageous legal costs of the former British spy and his company.
That false and uncorroborated dossier, full of unproven "shocking and scandalous claims" about Trump and Russia and alleged sexual proclivities, did indeed cause reputational and political damage to the former president, as it was used as the basis for an FBI and special counsel investigation, for countless partisan media attacks, and is still believed wholeheartedly by some despite being significantly debunked over the years.
Unfortunately, the British court is not the only realm to deny Trump the justice and recompense he deserves, as the AP noted that a U.S. court in 2022 had likewise dismissed a similar lawsuit Trump filed in Florida against Steele, Hillary Clinton, and former FBI officials over their production and use of the fake dossier against him.
Near the end of March, former President Donald Trump will face a criminal trial in New York on charges that he feloniously falsified business records in 2017 to cover up reimbursement payments to his then-personal lawyer for an alleged "hush money" payment in 2016 to keep an accuser quiet about an alleged extramarital affair a decade earlier.
In a pre-trial motion filed on Wednesday, Trump's attorneys accused DA Bragg of pursuing a "fantasy" case against Trump that had no basis in reality, CNN reported.
The motion doesn't seek the dismissal of the charges -- presiding Judge Juan Merchan already rejected Trump's prior requests to drop the charges -- but rather served as a reply to a recent brief from Bragg and was largely focused on what should and shouldn't be allowed to be introduced as evidence during the trial.
"The People must attempt to try the case they charged, not the case the District Attorney fantasized about when he was on the campaign trial," Trump's attorneys wrote to begin the 33-page motion.
"The case the People charged is a lawless 34-count indictment relating to record entries reflecting monthly retainer payments President Trump made to his personal attorney Michael Cohen in 2017," the filing continued. "The People’s motions in limine, on the other hand, describe a fantasy: an uncharged 'underlying conspiracy' to 'influence the 2016 election' that the District Attorney wishes President Trump had not won."
The attorneys argued, "This deluded fantasy comes complete with a dreamy wish list that includes (1) hiding from the jury the particulars of the regulatory and legal frameworks the People want to argue President Trump and others intended to violate; (2) offering evidence relating to discrete and dissimilar episodes concerning individuals other than Stephanie Clifford to bolster a fanciful and elaborate narrative that does not exist."
They added, "(3) precluding President Trump from cross-examining witnesses with established histories of lying, and worse, asking them about their obvious motivations and biases, which would be a relevant line of inquiry in any trial, much less one where the defendant is a leading presidential candidate; and (4) obscuring the absence of evidence by accusing President Trump of uncharged, alleged, nonexistent misconduct based on fabricated hearsay accounts relating to events that supposedly happened on unspecified days during vague timeframes dating back to the late 1970s."
At issue here, per CNN, are the criminal allegations from DA Bragg that then-President Trump in 2017 falsified business records to hide monthly payments to Trump's then-personal attorney and fixer Michael Cohen to reimburse him for an alleged Oct. 2016 "hush money" payment to former porn star Stormy Daniels, real name Stephanie Clifford, to buy her silence about an alleged affair with Trump roughly 10 years earlier.
Those business records falsification charges are typically misdemeanors, for which the statute of limitations expired long ago, but Bragg elevated them to felonies on an untested theory that they were used to conceal a more serious but unspecified election-related crime, presumably federal campaign finance law violations, based on the idea that silencing the affair allegations just weeks before the 2016 election benefited Trump's presidential campaign.
That untested theory, in conjunction with the fact that federal prosecutors and even Bragg's predecessor had declined multiple opportunities to pursue the same case, are just some of the reasons why Bragg's case has been described as the "weakest" and least likely of the criminal prosecutions Trump faces to result in serious punishment, according to the Washington Examiner.
Other elements of the case that render it weak include multiple charges for each monthly payment, which could violate Trump's Sixth Amendment rights, as well as the overt appearance of political motivations for progressive Democrat Bragg and his "selective prosecution" against Republican Trump.
As for Wednesday's motion from Trump's attorneys, it argued that a campaign finance law expert it contracted, whom DA Bragg has attempted to block from testifying, should be permitted to speak and share his views on electoral laws during the trial.
They also called out the prosecutors for trying to prematurely block them from raising certain defense arguments during the trial, and argued that the prosecution's star witness, the disgruntled former employee Cohen, was unreliable and lacked credibility since he had a documented history of dishonestly perjuring himself in other prior legal matters.
Finally, Trump's attorneys urged the judge to not allow the prosecution to raise as supporting evidence other unrelated and unproven allegations of sexual assault from other women or supposed conspiracies that could be prejudicial and confusing to members of the jury.
There have been rumors that President Joe Biden's White House team, out of concern for his age and health and propensity for gaffes, were keeping him on a relatively short leash in his re-election campaign, more or less in a bid to protect the president from himself.
Now comes a report of some pushback against that effort, led by Biden himself, and a desire by some to let "Joe be Joe" on the campaign trail, according to the Daily Caller.
How that ultimately plays out with the voting public, letting the president be himself instead of a carefully controlled candidate, is a question that likely won't be fully answered until the aftermath of Election Day in November.
The New York Times reported this week that President Biden's White House and campaign team have begun to roll out a new strategy in his re-election bid that involves getting him out of his "protective bubble" in Washington D.C. more often.
That includes getting more active on social media, teaming up with influential online figures to bolster his support, and engaging more with regular voters at campaign-related and official events.
"I have been saying for several months to the campaign, 'Please, let him be Joe Biden,' and so have many others," Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), a staunch Biden ally, told The Times. "It is not only good for the campaign. It is good for him and it’s good for the country when Joe Biden gets a chance to get out from behind the podium and be less President Joe Biden and more Joe."
One rather significant aspect of this new strategy, per The Times, is addressing head-on the legitimate concerns of a substantial portion of the general public about President Biden's advanced age and health, which previously had been studiously avoided or downplayed as no big deal.
Now, Biden and his team are attempting to highlight his age and decades-long political career in D.C. as an asset rather than a liability, with the argument being that his age and experience are what led to his claimed achievements and are necessary at this point to attain more accomplishments.
Relatedly, Team Biden is also increasingly attempting to flip the script on the age and health questions by highlighting the fact that likely opponent former President Donald Trump is only a few years younger and is showing signs of mental health decline -- a tough sell given that polling consistently shows that Trump's age and health are far less of a concern for voters than it is for Biden's age and health.
Another aspect of the new strategy is allowing Biden to interact more with the supporters he meets at various events, him becoming more personally active on social media -- he supposedly rewrites some of the planned posts and ad-libs some of the scripted videos -- and enlisting the aid of certain influential online figures to help boost his overall support, particularly among younger voters.
White House spokesman Andrew Bates told The Times, "We have always known that the most effective way to reach the American people is when they can hear President Biden make his case directly and authentically."
Of course, The Times acknowledged that this new campaign strategy is a risky one, given how the combination of Biden's tendency to utter serious gaffes and misstatements with his leaning in toward the questions about his age and health, not to mention any comparisons drawn in that regard between him and Trump, could definitely backfire.
Currently, the RealClearPolling average of national general election polls shows Trump with a marginal 2.2 point lead over Biden, 47.5% to 45.3% -- a constantly fluctuating lead that the former president has nonetheless largely maintained over the incumbent since September of last year.
It will be interesting to see if this new strategy of letting "Joe be Joe" serves to alter that current status quo and vault Biden back into the lead or whether it ends up hurting him even more in the polls and compels the campaign to revert to its prior strategy of carefully managing the president's appearances and interactions and largely keeping him hidden away from the general voting public.
President Joe Biden, despite his professed devout Catholic faith, has often and repeatedly expressed his staunch support for the "right" to kill unborn babies via abortion procedures, and has been just as frequently joined in that stance by Vice President Kamala Harris.
First lady Jill Biden, unsurprisingly, has also shown herself to be complicit in the killing of unborn babies, as she confirmed once again this past weekend at a pro-abortion event in Tucson, Arizona, according to local outlet KJZZ.
As part of her nationwide "Women for Biden-Harris" tour in support of President Biden's re-election campaign, First Lady Biden delivered remarks at a "pro-choice" rally in Tucson on Saturday that was sponsored by an organization known as Arizona List.
Much of her speech was centered on "women's rights" and supposed efforts by Republican lawmakers, both federally and at the state level, to infringe upon and undermine those rights -- including the purported right to kill unborn babies via abortion.
"Too often, we still ask women to choose between different parts of themselves. And all around us, there are extremists working harder than ever to drag us back to a past that we thought was long over," the first lady said at one point in her remarks.
The Washington Post reported in January that President Biden and VP Harris had made the protection and restoration of abortion rights, both at the federal and state levels, an integral part of their re-election campaign.
That comes as a response to the U.S. Supreme Court's 2022 Dobbs ruling that overturned the precedent set decades earlier by Roe v. Wade and permitted the individual states to, once again, craft their own laws and regulations on abortion procedures.
The high court's ruling resulted in numerous Republican-led states implementing pro-life restrictions on the fatal procedures for unborn babies and the full-court press from the Biden administration and Democrat-led states to halt any further erosion of the supposed right of abortion, if not broadly reimpose and even expand it nationwide at the federal level.
Of course, in the eyes of the pro-life crowd, abortion procedures equate to the brutal murder of a defenseless unborn human life, and some have gone so far as to further equate the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of legal abortions that have occurred in the U.S. over the decades to a "new Holocaust" and generational genocide.
With Jill Biden forcefully inserting herself into the conversation on abortion rights -- again, in direct repudiation of the Catholic Church's teachings that she and her husband otherwise profess to adhere to -- she has shown herself to be complicit in the mass murder of innocent unborn babies.
Interestingly enough, NBC News reported that First Lady Biden was accused of being complicit in "genocide" during that speech in Tucson, albeit not because of her stance in support of abortion rights.
Rather, the first lady was disrupted in her remarks by no less than four different pro-Palestinian protesters who've taken issue with the Biden administration's support for Israel as it retaliates in Gaza for the murderous Oct. 7 invasion of Hamas terrorists into southern Israel last year.
President Biden himself, along with other prominent Democrats and administration officials, have similarly been accosted by anti-Israel activists who conveniently overlook the atrocities committed by Hamas and seek to hold the Jewish nation solely accountable for everything that has occurred since Oct. 8 last year.
That includes demanding a cessation of all U.S. government support for Israel and an immediate ceasefire to end the fighting -- though few, if any, of those protesters have made similar demands for Hamas to halt its attacks or release the Israeli -- and American -- hostages they have held in captivity for months.
It has now been discovered that a member of President Joe Biden's reelection team is the business partner of Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis's deputy.
Breitbart News broke this story after reviewing some financial disclosure forms.
"Chris Huttman, the business partner of Fulton County’s Deputy District Attorney Jeff DiSantis, works with President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign, financial disclosures reviewed by Breitbart News show," the outlet reports.
Many are taking this as further confirmation that Biden has played some role in Willis's prosecution of former President Donald Trump.
Before we get to Breitbart's latest discovery, it will be helpful to provide some context.
Willis is prosecuting Trump and several of his allies, alleging that they committed various crimes when they attempted to challenge Georgia's results in the 2020 presidential election.
In recent months, it has come to light that Willis hired her lover, Nathan Wade, to prosecute Trump and that Willis awarded Wade a lucrative contract that Wade then used, in part, to take Willis on trips. Both have testified in court and have denied wrongdoing, but their testimony has been contradicted. And, it is looking likely that Willis is going to be removed from Trump's case.
In the meantime, Breitbart has discovered that Willis' deputy - Jeff DiSantis - is a "Biden plant." The outlet previously reported:
The Biden administration planted a Democrat operative [DiSantis] inside a Fulton County office to target former President Donald Trump, multiple sources familiar with the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office exclusively told Breitbart News.
Now, another connection has been made between DiSantis and Biden.
It turns out that Huttman, DiSantis's business partner, has direct ties to Biden's 2024 reelection campaign.
"Huttman is the 'head media buyer and strategist' at 'Media Buying and Analytics, LLC,' according to multiple press reports and a candidate advertisement agreement signed in 2023 with the Biden campaign," the outlet reports.
It continues, "Media Buying and Analytics is the top vendor for Biden’s 2024 reelection campaign . . . Huttman’s history with Biden goes back to the 2020 cycle, according to Federal Election Commission records."
Trump and many others have insisted that Willis, with her prosecution of Trump, has essentially been following Biden's marching orders - that she is running "election interference" for Biden's reelection campaign, considering that it is now a virtual certainty that Trump will face Biden in the general election.
Breitbart's reporting would suggest that that is no conspiracy theory - that Willis really is following Biden's orders.
Leftist pro-Palestinian protesters -- some would argue they are antisemitic Hamas sympathizers -- have increasingly taken to disrupting speeches and public appearances by prominent Democratic and government officials to demand an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hamas terrorists in Gaza and the cessation of all U.S. support for the embattled Jewish nation.
That apparently includes first lady Jill Biden, who was interrupted at least twice by pro-Palestinian protesters while delivering a campaign speech on behalf of her husband, President Joe Biden, in Arizona on Saturday, The Hill reported.
The first lady was not harmed by either disruptive demonstrator and both were quickly removed by event security as Biden continued to deliver her remarks.
The first lady was in Tucson, Arizona on Saturday to give a speech on women's issues as part of her ongoing nationwide "Women for Biden-Harris" tour in support of President Biden's re-election campaign.
Shortly after she began to deliver her remarks, a young woman in the crowd stood up and yelled, "Jill, when are you and the president going to call for a ceasefire in Gaza?"
The protester continued to yell incoherently as others in the crowd shouted her down and grabbed at her to stop the disruption until a tall man wearing a blue shirt that said "Security" on the back gathered her up and led her away.
“Jill, when are you and the President going to call for a ceasefire in Gaza?”
Protestors in Arizona disrupt Jill Biden’s speaking event to #ShutItDown4Palestine 🇵🇸 pic.twitter.com/BuZNYwKvqX
— ANSWER Coalition (@answercoalition) March 2, 2024
A short time later, another protester reportedly stood up and yelled at the first lady, "This is a genocide being committed by our tax dollars -- women and girls that matter," but they too were shouted down by others and escorted out of the event by security.
The Hill noted that President Biden and other officials have faced similar disruptions from pro-Palestinian protesters demanding a ceasefire and end to aid to Israel during campaign speeches and other events over the past several months since Israel responded with military force in Gaza following Hamas' murderous Oct. 7 rampage of coordinated attacks and kidnappings last year.
Biden initially stood staunchly in support of Israel's right of self-defense and retaliation but has increasingly begun to waver under the constant pressure from his political left flank, as he has become more critical of the Jewish nation's actions while his administration has engaged in regional negotiations to halt the ongoing fighting.
Last week, while in New York City for a taped interview with "Late Night" comedian Seth Myers, Biden was asked by reporters about the prospects of a negotiated ceasefire agreement and replied, "Well, I hope by the beginning of the weekend -- I mean the end of the weekend," and added, "At least, my --my National Security Advisor tells me that we’re close. We’re close. It’s not done yet. And my hope is by next Monday, we’ll have a ceasefire."
A few days later on Thursday, Biden spoke briefly with reporters again at the White House and was asked if he still expected there to be a ceasefire agreement in place in the coming days. "Hope springs eternal," the president replied, but added, "I was on the telephone with the people in the region. I’m still -- probably not by Monday, but I’m hopeful."
The Hill reported that the U.S. has been involved in talks with regional allies like Egypt and Qatar, along with representatives of Israel and Hamas, to reach an agreement on a temporary ceasefire and exchange of hostages and prisoners between the two combatant sides.
Israel has reportedly agreed to the framework of such an agreement but Hamas has rejected all proposals thus far, so the fighting seems likely to remain ongoing for the time being as Israel continues its efforts to root out the terrorist group by force from its network of underground bunkers and tunnels throughout Gaza.
A former career diplomat who rose to prominence during President Bill Clinton's tenure was criminally indicted in December on charges that he secretly served as a spy for the communist Cuban regime for several decades.
Victor Manuel Rocha, 73, who served as the U.S. Ambassador to Bolivia at the end of Clinton's presidency, informed a federal judge on Thursday that he intended to plead guilty to a charge of conspiring to act as an agent of a foreign government, according to the Associated Press.
That plea, which will be finalized during an April 12 court hearing, came as part of a deal reached with prosecutors for his cooperation in exposing the extent of Cuba's surreptitious intelligence-gathering inside the U.S. in exchange for the dismissal of more than a dozen other serious criminal charges Rocha faced.
In a Dec. 4 press release from the Justice Department, it was first revealed that former Ambassador Rocha had been a clandestine spy on behalf of the Cuban regime within the U.S. government for decades, and was only caught after he confessed his lengthy record of espionage to an undercover FBI agent that he believed was a member of the Cuban intelligence services.
"This action exposes one of the highest-reaching and longest-lasting infiltrations of the United States government by a foreign agent," Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement at that time. "We allege that for over 40 years, Victor Manuel Rocha served as an agent of the Cuban government and sought out and obtained positions within the United States government that would provide him with access to non-public information and the ability to affect U.S. foreign policy."
"Those who have the privilege of serving in the government of the United States are given an enormous amount of trust by the public we serve," Garland added. "To betray that trust by falsely pledging loyalty to the United States while serving a foreign power is a crime that will be met with the full force of the Justice Department."
The attorney general was echoed by FBI Director Chris Wray, who said in a statement, "Like all federal officials, U.S. diplomats swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. Acting as an agent for Cuba -- a hostile foreign power -- is a blatant violation of that oath and betrays the trust of the American people."
According to that DOJ press release, Rocha, a naturalized U.S. citizen from Columbia, first began working for the U.S. State Department in 1981 and, over the years, climbed the ranks to serve in a variety of increasingly important and critical diplomatic positions that had an impact of U.S. foreign policies.
That included several posts throughout Central and South America, including at least two that had direct influence over Cuba policies, as he served on the National Security Council specializing in Cuba from 1994-1995 and was the deputy principal officer at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Havana from 1995-1997.
Following his service as the ambassador to Bolivia from late 1999 until 2002, Rocha served as an outside adviser to the Defense Department's U.S. Southern Command based in Florida, which covers Cuba, from 2006-2012.
According to CBS News, Rocha was first recruited to serve as a spy for the communist Cuban regime as early as 1973, when he lived in Chile, and he was encouraged to not only create a believable "cover story" to conceal his role as a double agent but to find a way to involve himself in the inner workings of the U.S. government.
It is unclear how much information Rocha may have shared with Cuban intelligence over the several decades he served as a spy, but it was noted that he enjoyed high-level security clearances in many of the positions he held and would have access to most classified materials.
Per the DOJ press release, Rocha was ultimately busted when he was approached several times in 2022 and 2023 by an undercover FBI agent posing as his new handler for Cuba's intelligence agency.
Rocha is said to have bragged repeatedly to that agent of the work he'd accomplished on behalf of Cuba, spoke of the U.S. as a shared "enemy" state, and praised the late Cuban dictator Fidel Castro while referring to other Cuban spies as his "comrades."
On Thursday, President Joe Biden paid a visit to the nation's southern border near Brownsville, Texas, that was almost certainly hastily planned in reaction to former President Donald Trump's planned visit to a separate, more consequential section of the U.S. border with Mexico in a different part of Texas.
Biden's border visit was described as "long overdue" by former U.S. Border Patrol Chief Raul Ortiz, who further revealed that he "never once met with" either the president or Vice President Kamala Harris during the two years he served in that leadership position from 2021 to 2023, Breitbart reported.
Meanwhile, the union that represents U.S. Border Patrol agents also made it unmistakably clear on Thursday which of the two presidents, Biden and Trump, they preferred working under and felt best supported them and their mission to secure the nation's borders.
Former Border Patrol Chief Ortiz, who led the entire agency from August 2021 until his resignation in June 2023, spent more than 30 years serving as a Border Patrol agent and previously led the Del Rio Sector of the border while former President Trump was in office.
In an interview Thursday with Fox News host Neil Cavuto, asked about the importance of Biden's belated border visit in the Brownsville area, said, "Well, certainly, I think it’s important that the President meet with Border Patrol officials to find out exactly what needs to be done to remedy the crisis that’s ongoing."
"And it’s not just in South Texas or West Texas. It’s happening in Tucson, San Diego, El Paso. Those are the three busiest areas along the southwest border right now," he continued. "And the only way you’re going to actually hear firsthand is by talking to those Border Patrol officials, by meeting with the chief of the Border Patrol."
"I’ve made it perfectly clear, when I was the Chief, I never once met with the President or the Vice President," Ortiz added. "And I think it’s long overdue that they sit down and roll up their sleeves and start coming up with some solutions."
Meanwhile, on Thursday, the Border Patrol union, formally known as the National Border Patrol Council, was active on its X social media account and left no doubt as to which of the two presidents making dueling border visits that same day its members preferred to work under.
In one post, the NBPC said, "Attention President Biden: Keep our name out of your mouth today."
Later, in response to critics who defended Biden, the union wrote in another post, "President Trump treats BP agents with respect, supports their mission and listens to their ideas. Biden falsely accuses agents of crimes, burned the border to the ground and only listens to his radical leftist base. See the difference?"
One day earlier, NBPC President Brandon Judd published an op-ed for Fox News that was titled, "Biden got suckered into border battle he can’t win," and outlined how the dueling border visits would only serve to highlight the great disparity in how the border was handled by the former president in comparison to the incumbent.
Of particular note was how Biden was headed to Brownsville, a rather quiet area that has been under control for several years due to Trump's actions while in office, while Trump was headed to the current hotspot of Eagle Pass, where Texas officials under Gov. Greg Abbott were recently compelled to seize control to try and stem the flood of illegal migrants being allowed in under Biden's open borders policies.
"Trump, and America, will see how walls of razor wire and shipping containers have made entering Shelby Park nearly impossible. He’ll be able to evaluate how the use of his policies while he was in office has helped Abbott. And he’ll be able to use the visit to expand upon his already successful policies when he’s re-elected," Judd wrote. "He’ll listen to ideas from opposing viewpoints, something I’ve seen him do many times in the past to come to the best decision. He’ll end his visit by explaining to the American people what he will do to protect them when back in office. Biden will end his visit by blaming everyone else, including Trump, for his miserable failings."
"But the men and women who are most cognizant of Biden’s failings are U.S. Border Patrol agents. Agents will scoff at Biden’s audacity in visiting the disaster zone he created to score cheap political points at a stage of the game you can only characterize as 'garbage time,'" he added. "The agents who have worked under both Trump and Biden have experienced first-hand the competent, caring leadership of Trump and the deadly, disastrous 'leadership' of Joe Biden."
Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) and her family have been dealing with the unfortunate upheaval of a divorce, a move to another congressional district, and now run-ins with law enforcement.
The congresswoman's eldest son, Tyler Boebert, 18, was arrested by local police in their hometown of Rifle, Colorado on Tuesday in connection with a string of property thefts and vehicle break-ins, Fox News reported.
He now faces five felony charges and at least 15 other misdemeanor counts for his alleged criminal behavior.
A Tuesday news release from the Rifle Police Department announced that Tyler Boebert was arrested that afternoon "after a recent string of vehicle trespass and property thefts in Rifle."
"Boebert is facing the following charges: four felony counts of Criminal Possession ID Document - Multiple Victims, one felony count of Conspiracy to Commit a Felony, and over 15 additional misdemeanor and petty offenses," the release stated. "This is an ongoing investigation, no further information will be released at this time."
Though unconfirmed, it would appear that Boebert is not alone in facing legal trouble, as a separate release from the RPD on Thursday revealed that "Three juveniles have been summoned to the Garfield County District Court in connection to a string of vehicle trespass and property thefts in Rifle."
Those three juveniles -- a 16-year-old white male and two white females ages 16 and 17 -- all face the exact same felony charges as the congresswoman's son.
Fox News noted that Rep. Boebert said in a statement, "I love my son Tyler, who has been through some very difficult, public challenges for a young man and the subject of attention that he didn't ask for."
"It breaks my heart to see my child struggling and, in this situation, especially when he has been provided multiple opportunities to get his life on track," she added. "I will never give up on him and I will continue to be there for him. As an adult and father, Tyler will take responsibility for his actions and should be held accountable for poor decisions just like any other citizen."
As noted in that statement, the 37-year-old congresswoman from Colorado -- who is currently moving from her 3rd District home in the western half of the state to live and run in the eastern 4th District while also dealing with the fallout of a bitter divorce from her ex-husband, Jayson, who himself was arrested in January following a fight with her and son Tyler -- was made a grandmother last year when Tyler fathered a baby boy with his girlfriend.
The Colorado Sun reported that Tyler Boebert was released from custody from custody Wednesday afternoon by a magistrate judge without having to post any bond following an agreement between prosecutors and his lawyer, Peyton Miller, who is with the state's public defender's office.
Per an arrest affidavit filed with the court, Boebert had been identified by police as a suspect in the string of vehicle break-ins and thefts after he was caught on camera wearing a distinctive sweatshirt with the logo for "Shooters Grill," the pro-gun restaurant that his parents previously owned and operated before it was shut down.
That surveillance camera footage purportedly shows Boebert and others using at least one stolen debit card. He stands accused of stealing cash, credit and debit cards, and a driver's license out of at least three vehicles.
Per the court documents, the misdemeanor and petty offense charges reportedly include the theft of less than $300 cash, the criminal possession of a financial device, and contributing to the delinquency of a minor, among other things.