This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Apparently, all that would be needed now, to bring to a conclusion the discussion over Joe Biden's mental decline and whether he should be in the race for the 2024 election, is to put a speech on a teleprompter and have him read it.
At least that's the suggestion that can be taken from the Washington Post, which posted a commentary titled, "What if Biden spoke these words?'
Speculation about Biden's ability to continue as a candidate, or president, has exploded in the last week after his catastrophic performance at a presidential debate where he stumbled, mumbled, slurred, lost focus, stared into space, and worse.
President Donald Trump, at one point, told the moderators that he didn't have any idea what Biden said, "And I don't think he does either."
The White House has insisted that Biden is the candidate and will win, and legacy media outlets like the AP, who long have been his supporters, described him as sharp and focused but sometimes confused.
The Post even gave Biden "the words to say in a concession speech."
The Examiner explains that Biden, in fact, is facing questions from those within his own party about withdrawing.
It explained the speech references Biden's decades in the Washington establishment and "cited George Washington’s decision to step down from office 'though the Constitution at the time did not require it.'"
The proposed speech said, "Between now and November, I will do all I can to support the next Democratic nominee — and to encourage Americans to rediscover the optimism and energetic spirit that built this nation."
Some Democrats already have conceded that they expect Trump to win the election in November, and they're all right with that.
The White House has dismissed discussion of any issues regarding Biden's capabilities.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Joe Biden has found himself in the embarrassing position of being schooled – publicly – on the U.S. Supreme Court after he made false claims about that body's recent ruling that President Donald Trump has immunity for his official acts in Congress.
Biden claimed that "for all practical purposes, today's decision almost certainly means that there are virtually no limits on what a president can do."
In fact, a long list of leftists have said Biden now should call out the military, or send assassins, to "take out" Trump and the conservative justices on the high court.
But, explained Jonathan Turley, a recognized constitutional expert, law professor at George Washington University, and popular commentator who has represented members of Congress in court, Biden's wasn't telling the truth.
"President Joe Biden delivered an address from the White House last night on the presidential immunity decision by the Supreme Court. While pledging that he will defend the rule of law, President Biden misrepresented what that law is in the aftermath of Trump v. United States," he wrote.
While Biden previously has made false claims about the Constitution, "an address of this kind is particularly concerning in misleading citizens on the meaning of one of the most important decisions in history," Turley wrote.
He pointed out that the court took the "middle road" on Trump's claim to immunity, and Biden's claims simply are "not true."
"The court found that there was absolute immunity for actions that fall within their 'exclusive sphere of constitutional authority' while they enjoy presumptive immunity for other official acts. They do not enjoy immunity for unofficial, or private, actions," he said.
In fact, the court "separated cases into actions taken in core areas of executive authority, official actions taken outside those core areas, and unofficial actions. Actions deemed personal or unofficial are not protected under this ruling," he explained.
He continued, "President Biden’s hyper-ventilated response is crushingly ironic. He was vice president when President Barack Obama killed an American citizen without a trial or a charge. When former Attorney General Eric Holder announced the 'kill list' policy (that included the right to kill any American citizen), he was met with applause, not condemnation. The Obama-Biden administration then fought every effort by the family to sue the government. President Biden would have been outraged by any attempt of a Republican district attorney to charge him or President Obama with murder."
He said Biden's claim that "the law would no longer" define "the limits of the presidency" also was "untrue."
But Turley said, "What was most glaring for many civil libertarians was President Biden’s portrayal of himself as a paragon of constitutional fealty. He declared that 'I know I will respect the limits of the presidential powers as I have for the last three-and-a-half years.' That was also untrue. President Biden has racked up an impressive array of losses in federal courts where he was found to have violated the Constitution."
Those include issues of his racial discrimination in federal programs, the nationwide eviction moratorium through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and his campaign to "forgive roughly half a trillion dollars in student debt."
Actually, Biden didn't "forgive" those loans, he simply transferred the indebtedness from borrowers to taxpayers.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Joe Biden's vice president, Kamala Harris, has established a stunning record of nonaccomplishment.
Assigned to root out the causes of the flood of illegal aliens under Biden's open borders policy, she didn't.
Her speeches have been best known for her word salads, sometimes even more abstract than Biden's, such as her observation, multiple times in one paragraph, that the "passage of time" is significant, and her cackling laugh, unleashed at the most inopportune times.
Her approval ratings constantly have been underwater, sometimes by far.
But as vice president, her name clearly is a subject of discussion as more and more evidence is revealed about the exact nature of Joe Biden's mental and physical decline, which resulted in his recent "disastrous" debate performance.
But one former adviser to Bill Clinton noted that as unattractive as Biden has become to independent voters – those who are ready to swing back and forth and frequently are the deciders in an election, Harris is less attractive.
"Kamala Harris is more threatening to those swing voters than a dead Joe Biden or a comatose Joe Biden," former Clinton adviser Paul Begala said. "So if Joe has to go, it's gonna be Kamala and if it's Kamala, it's gonna be harder."
Analysts already have confirmed that if Biden is taken off the top of the Democrat ticket, election finance rules make it almost impossible to transfer the tens of millions of campaign dollars to another candidate, unless it would be Harris.
The Washington Examiner reported, "While top Democratic consultants debate the proper course of action for the party following President Joe Biden’s poor debate performance, many donors are skeptical of Vice President Kamala Harris’s appeal should she be tapped to replace Biden at the top of the ticket."