This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
With Joe Biden dropping out of the 2024 presidential hunt on Sunday, former President Donald Trump is now weighing in with his own reaction.
"Crooked Joe Biden was not fit to run for President, and is certainly not fit to serve – And never was!" Trump said on Truth Social.
"He only attained the position of President by lies, Fake News, and not leaving his Basement.
"All those around him, including his Doctor and the Media, knew that he wasn't capable of being President, and he wasn't – And now, look what he's done to our Country, with millions of people coming across our Border, totally unchecked and unvetted, many from prisons, mental institutions, and record numbers of terrorists.
"We will suffer greatly because of his presidency, but we will remedy the damage he has done very quickly. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!"
In a separate message, Trump indicated:
"Crooked Joe just got knocked out, so now I'll have to do it a FOURTH TIME!!!"
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
In recent weeks, U.S. authorities were alerted that Donald Trump was the target of an assassination plot by Iran. With heightened Secret Service security around Trump the result, many wondered how would-be assassin Thomas Matthew Crooks was able to take a shot at the former president on July 13.
But the Iranian plot to assassinate Trump is not new. WND spoke to Middle East expert and terrorism scholar Adrian Calamel, who noted that ever since the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps-Quds Force, Qasem Soleimani, as well as Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, Iraqi commander of the Popular Mobilization Forces, was killed by a drone strike ordered by President Trump in January 2020 near a Baghdad airport, "several active assassination plots have been on the books."
The "kill list" includes Donald Trump, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former national security adviser John Bolton, former U.S. special representative for Iran Brian Hook, as well as other current and former officials of the U.S. government.
"Once you get on that list," Calamel, a senior fellow at the Washington, D.C.-based Arabian Peninsula Institute, told WND, "You don't get off that list. You're marked for death." According to Calamel, "[The Iranian regime's] goal is to drop one of these people on American soil to show us that they can hit us in our own country, just like we hit Soleimani and Muhandis on their soil, in Iraq."
"While we can talk about Biden's open border policies and who might be coming across," Calamel said, "I am more concerned about MOIS agents who have already infiltrated the country." For example, he pointed to the FBI's ongoing search for Majid Dastjani Farahani, who is suspected of "[recruiting] individuals for surveillance activities focused on religious sites, businesses and other facilities in the United States, [and he may acting or is] purported to act for or on behalf of, directly or indirectly, Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS)."
"That story went completely dead," Calamel told WND. "No follow-up. No arrests." All the while, he added, Farahani and others like him continue to recruit others for their nefarious plots around the country, whether it be gathering intel, planning a future attack, or attempting to assassinate a high-profile government official.
"When they finally pull the trigger, they'll be looking for some form of plausible deniability," Calamel cautioned. "Iran cannot face the wrath of the United States, so they'll blame ISIS, al-Qaida, or another bad actor."
A strong U.S. response to sanctions against Iran would be catastrophic for the Middle Eastern country, Calamel insists. "Considering this, if Trump gets elected, things are going to change and the regime could topple." Iran's threats against Israel and the United States would come with a heavy price, as Calamel suspects Trump would put "maximum pressure on [Iran] the first day he comes into office."
In his first term as president, Trump "clamped down and drained them" of their foreign currency reserves to $4 billion, said Calamel. "Under the Biden administration," however, as Calamel pointed out, "through oil sales to China, they've been able to grow that to more than $100 billion."
And while Iranians continue to struggle with a broken economy, Calamel noted that the regime is still funding Hamas to Israel's south, Hezbollah to Israel's north, the Houthis in Yemen, various other terrorist organizations and proxies around the world, pursuing their nuclear program, building an alliance with China, and more. "That's over $100 million that goes to increasing their war capacity," he emphasized. "Iran doesn't want to lose that," he explained, adding that "it likely increases their motivation to take Trump out now more than ever."
To that end, he said, "I suspect they flipped the switch after they saw Biden's debate performance and realized Trump may win." He argued, "Tehran is probably screaming that Trump is an existential threat and someone they need to take care of sooner than later."
"Until this past weekend," Calamel told WorldNetDaily, "I thought that Trump was going to be nearly impossible to get, so [the Iranian regime] would continue their focus on the low-hanging fruit like Pompeo, Bolton, Hook, or someone else."
"But if you're [Iranian supreme leader] Sayyid Ali Khamenei, what's going on through your mind right now is that Trump is not an untouchable target," Calamel asserted. Considering that Trump is a target of both domestic and foreign threats, Calamel said the Secret Service must increase security around the former president as he continues to pursue a second term in the White House.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A judge in Rhode Island has determined that the state is not allowed to simply change a law and take away beach property belonging to homeowners with waterfront properties.
The state earlier had simply changed its law and moved the demarcation line between public beach and private land 10 feet further inland.
That meant that that land was being taken away from homeowners without compensation even as they were required to continue to pay taxes on it.
That scheme apparently now is at an end.
The Pacific Legal Foundation revealed Superior Court Judge Sarah Taft-Carter said that state's "novel" beach access law violates the property rights of homeowners.
It's being called a major victory for those landowners.
The foundation explained, "In an order denying the state's motion for summary judgment, Judge Taft-Carter wrote that the law results in an unconstitutional taking of private property."
"Our clients are gratified that the court agreed with what they have said from the start—the beach access law violates their rights," explained foundation lawyer J. David Breemer. "As the court recognized, the beach access law infringed on our client's property rights by moving the existing public beach boundary line 10 feet landward, effectively confiscating our client's property, which is an unconstitutional taking."
The judge, whose final order will come later, said, "The act reduced the plaintiff's 'bundle of rights' inherent in the ownership of property by expanding the preexisting boundary line to 10 feet landward of the recognizable high tide line and confiscated the plaintiff's property resulting in an unconstitutional taking."
WND reported when the case was developing it was launched on behalf of the Rhode Island Association of Coastal Taxpayers.
Lawmakers simply voted to move the demarcation line for "public beach" property inland 10 feet, confiscating that same land from landowners in the state.
"Historically, the 'mean high tide line' served as the boundary between the public beach area and private property in Rhode Island," the legal team explained. The new law simply by fiat changes that by 10 feet, "giving the public an extra strip of land at the expense of private property owners."
The case accused the state of violating the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Georgia prosecutor Fani Willis, whose "organized crime" case against President Donald Trump is in disarray after she hired her paramour, at a cost to taxpayers of nearly $700,000, to work on it, then took luxury vacations with him, has learned that it is at a standstill now at least until December.
Willis brought a long list of charges against Trump and more than a dozen others over their statements regarding the 2020 presidential election. She tried to push the case through quickly, meaning that her intended trial would take place before the election.
However, because of her scandalous behavior regarding her hired boyfriend, a trial judge ordered him off the case, but allowed Willis to stay. Trump's lawyers and others interested in the case then filed an appeal, insisting that Willis, too, be booted.
The appeals court will at that time review the decision from Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee that allowed Willis to remain.
The report said the decision means Willis' claims "will remain on hold into the new year."
The report said Trump faces 10 counts in Georgia over what Willis has claimed was a scheme to overturn the state's results from the 2020 election. All defendants have pleaded not guilty, but four later took plea agreements.
"Proceedings were derailed earlier this year after one of those co-defendants, GOP operative Michael Roman, claimed Willis and Wade had an improper romantic relationship that Willis financially benefited from it. Roman claimed the relationship began before Wade was hired in November 2021 to work on the case involving Trump, and he sought to have Willis and her office disqualified and the charges dismissed. Trump and several others joined Roman's motion claiming the prosecution was invalid and unconstitutional," the report explained.
In fact, they both admitted to the romantic involvement, and McAfee eventually criticized Willis for her "tremendous lapse in judgment" and said an "odor of mendacity" hung over the case. But inexplicably based on the standard ethics code that even the "appearance" of conflict disqualifies a prosecutor, he let her stay.
One of the outside interests asking to join the case on behalf of Trump is the American Center for Law and Justice.
That organization announced it has filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the appeals court calling for Willis to be removed from the case entirely.
The organization explained, "As we told you when the trial judge's decision on Fani Willis first came out, the judge's ruling made simply no sense. The judge found as fact that Fani Willis' conduct had an 'appearance of impropriety,' based on her relationship with Nathan Wade. Nonetheless, the judge allowed Willis to proceed with the prosecution anyway. The facts are clear that Willis must be disqualified from overseeing the high-profile election interference case against President Trump."
The ACLJ listed the facts:
"Willis appointed her alleged romantic partner, Nathan Wade, as special prosecutor – paying him over $650,000 in taxpayer money.
"She appears to have benefited personally from this appointment, taking lavish vacations funded by Wade's earnings from the case.
"Willis and Wade seemingly attempted to conceal their relationship, only admitting to it after being cornered by evidence."
What's present in the situation appears to be "corruption, cronyism, and abuse of power," the ACLJ said.
"How can the people of Georgia – or indeed, all Americans – have any faith in the integrity and impartiality of this prosecution? The Constitution guarantees the right to a fair trial, free from conflicts of interest or impropriety. Willis' actions have irreparably tainted this case," the ACLJ argues.
The lawyers noted, "the mere appearance of such misconduct is sufficient grounds for disqualification under Georgia law and ethical standards. We emphasized that even an appearance of impropriety is inherently unacceptable and erodes the public's trust in the judicial process. In the present case, merely stopping the continuation of the 'repeatedly'-made 'bad choices' by removing Nathan Wade is not enough."
The taint that attaches to case through such conflicts cannot be corrected or remedied "after the fact," the brief argues.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Joe Biden, in what appears to be an effort to shore up and solidify his leftist voting base, is considering dramatic changes to the U.S. Supreme Court in the run-up to the 2024 presidential election.
Biden, trailing Republican nominee President Donald Trump in most polling these days, has a disorganized party behind him, following his displays of disorientation, confusion and worse in recent appearances, including where he called Ukraine's leader "President Putin" and his own vice president "Trump."
Reports explain he wants to interfere in the judiciary by demanding term limits for justices and imposing procedures where the executive or legislative branches could retaliate against justices for actions and opinions they dislike – under the guise of an "enforceable" code of ethics, actions considered to be aimed at undermining the independence of the judiciary.
One report pointed out, "Shaking up the Supreme Court may be Biden's way of trying to woo progressives back into his camp who are angry about some of the Supreme Court's recent decisions, including the immunity ruling and the change in federal abortion laws with the overturn of Roe v. Wade in 2022."
Extremists like U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., have repeatedly attacked the court for its ruling that the Roe v. Wade decision that originally created an abortion "right" in the Constitution was faulty, and its decision that presidents have immunity for most acts while in office.
It was the Washington Post that said its sources confirmed Biden's pre-election scheme to propose changes to the court as well as push for a constitutional amendment that would eliminate immunity for presidents.
Reports said Biden launched the agenda during an online discussion with members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus.
"I'm going to need your help on the Supreme Court … I'm about to come out with a major initiative on limiting the court."
Trump responded with a statement in which he accused Democrats of "illegal and unConstitutional attack on our SACRED United States Supreme Court."
He said, "The Radical Left Democrats are desperately trying to 'Play the Ref' by calling for an illegal and unConstitutional attack on our SACRED United States Supreme Court. The reason that these Communists are so despondent is that their unLawful Witch Hunts are failing everywhere. The Democrats are attempting to interfere in the Presidential Election, and destroy our Justice System, by attacking their Political Opponent, ME, and our Honorable Supreme Court. We have to fight for our Fair and Independent Courts, and protect our Country. MAGA2024!"
Democrats have taken to openly bashing individual justices who make decisions that don't align with the Democrat Party agenda. Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., for example, took a microphone at a pro-abortion rally on the steps of the court and individual threatened Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.
Democrats repeatedly have attacked conservative justices for their friendships, their travels, and more, even though when the late Ruth Ginsburg was a justice – and openly berated then-candidate Donald Trump – they ignored such political and ethical issues.
A report pointed out, "Biden's desire to take some action comes as he desperately tries to win back confidence from his own party in the wake of his disastrous debate performance last month. Since then, Democratic donors, lawmakers and famous figures have publicly called for him to step aside to allow another Democratic candidate to top the ticket."
Kelly Shackelford, chief of the influential First Liberty Institute, reminded Americans that Biden himself once called interfering with the court a "bonehead" idea.
"Transforming the Supreme Court into another partisan body would destroy the independence of the judiciary and threaten the civil liberties of all Americans. Joe Biden once said that changing the structure of the court was 'a bonehead idea' that would 'put in question … the independence of the … Supreme Court.' He was right. The last thing we need in this country right now is a Supreme Court coup that would threaten judicial independence and our democratic republic. This is a radical attempt by a desperate politician."
He reported polling shows 72% of Americans say the politicization of the Supreme Court threatens judicial independence and 69% do not want Congress taking over and setting rules for judicial ethics.
NBC News' chief political analyst Chuck Todd said the reports are signs of Biden's "desperation."
"Look at the desperation in the air for Joe Biden right now," Todd said. "All of the sudden, out of nowhere, he's trying to do a Supreme Court reform for another way of playing to the left, because right now his biggest supporters are progressives. Because those that are in swing districts, they want him off [the ticket]."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A Pittsburgh television station is reporting “dramatic new details” in connection with the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump on Saturday, with sources Monday saying law enforcement was made aware of gunman Thomas Crooks on the roof nearly half an hour before shots rang out.
WPXI-TV reports: “According to multiple law enforcement sources, Thomas Crooks was spotted by law enforcement on a roof nearly 30 minutes before shots were fired that injured Trump, killed a former fire chief, and injured two others in the crowd.”
Channel 11's Nicole Ford confirmed that Beaver County's ESU team had eight members at the rally, including snipers and spotters. According to Ford's sources, one of them noticed a suspicious man on a roof near the rally at 5:45 p.m., called it in and took a picture of the person. We have learned from our sources the person in that picture is Thomas Crooks. We're told it's not clear if Crooks had a gun with him at that point.
According to multiple sources, a law enforcement officer had also previously seen Crooks on the ground and called him in as a suspicious person with a picture prior to 5:45 p.m. Our sources tell us an officer checked the grounds for Crooks at that point, but did not see him where the first picture was taken.
26 minutes after the second picture of Crooks was taken by law enforcement and the information called in, shots were fired from the roof of the American Glass Research building. Seconds later, a Secret Service sniper returned fire and killed Crooks.
As WorldNetDaily previously reported, local police reportedly encountered Donald Trump’s would-be assassin Thomas Crooks just moments before he opened fire on the former president Saturday, but failed to stop the shooter despite the clear threat.
The New York Post reports: “After rallygoers spotted Crooks on the roof of a manufacturing plant just 130 yards from the stage where Trump was speaking just after 6 p.m. Tuesday, police were notified and one officer climbed a ladder to investigate, law enforcement officials said on the condition of anonymity.
"There the officer encountered Crooks, who pointed his AR-style rifle at them.
"The officer then backed down the ladder, and Crooks immediately took aim and loosed eight shots at the former president – grazing him in the ear, killing one bystander in the rally crowd, and gravely wounding two others.
"After that volley of shots, Secret Service snipers shot Crooks dead."
Meanwhile, another witness to the mayhem has been interviewed on camera, saying he saw the shooter "move from roof to roof" before shots were fired.
"I was up at the fence line, saw the guy [the attempted assassin] move from roof to roof. [I] told an officer he was on the roof," the man explained.
"I heard that there was somebody that could see the person, so I went back to where they were standing, saw the person, went back and told the officer again that if he goes back to that particular spot he can see the person, figuring that he would go and radio. An when I turned around to go back to where I was is when the gunshots started and then it was just chaos."
Earlier, another rally attendee told BBC News he tried to alert authorities to the gunman, to no avail.
"We're pointing at the guy crawling up the roof," the man explained.
"He had a rifle, we could clearly see him with a rifle absolutely. We're pointing at him. The police are down there running around on the ground. We're like. Hey man, there's a guy on the roof with a rifle. And the police were like, Huh, what? Like they didn't know what was going on. …
"I'm thinking to myself why is Trump still speaking? Why have they not pulled him off the stage?"
The witness added he was "100%" certain the shots fired came from the gunman to whom he was trying to alert authorities.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Former First Lady Melania Trump is breaking her silence on Saturday's attempted assassination of her husband, former President Donald Trump at a political rally in Butler, Pennsylvania.
Mrs. Trump issued a statement on X Sunday morning, indicating: "I am thinking of you, now, my fellow Americans. We have always been a unique union. America, the fabric of our gentle nation is tattered, but our courage and common sense must ascend and bring us back together as one."
"When I watched that violent bullet strike my husband, Donald, I realized my life, and Barron's life, were on the brink of devastating change."
"I am grateful to the brave Secret Service agents and law enforcement officials who risked their own lives to protect my husband."
"To the families of the innocent victims who are now suffering from this heinous act, I humbly offer my sincerest sympathy. Your need to summon your inner strength for such a terrible reason saddens me."
"A monster who recognized my husband as an inhuman political machine attempted to ring out Donald's passion – his laughter, ingenuity, love of music, and inspiration," she continued.
"The core facets of my husband's life – his human side – were buried below the political machine."
Melania described her husband as a "generous and caring man who I have been with through the best of times and the worst of times."
Melania urged Americans to transcend politics and stressed "love, compassion, kindness and empathy are necessities."
She said the world can return to a place that ascends "the hate, the vitriol, and the simple-minded ideas that ignite violence."
She also thanked Americans of all political views for supporting the Trump family in the aftermath of the incident.
"The winds of change have arrived. For those of you who cry in support, I thank you," she said.
"I commend those of you who have reached out beyond the political divide – thank you for remembering that every single politician is a man or a woman with a loving family."
Bret Baier of Fox News described Melania Trump's statement "as really, really powerful, and may be a template for what she might say" at the Republican National Convention, which begins Monday in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Regarding the actual assassination attempt, Baier said: "This is galvanizing more than anything I've seen in politics."
"People will walk across cut glass" now to support Trump, he added.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Female athletes are asking the Supreme Court to provide fairness in their competitions, by preventing more physical men from competing against them.
The announcement comes from the ADF, which is working on several cases involving the Biden administration's transgender agenda, in which Joe Biden and his bureaucrats are demanding that a man who says he is a woman is qualified to compete in women's sports.
The ADF explained, "The states of West Virginia and Idaho, together with attorneys from Alliance Defending Freedom, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the cases of female athletes who are seeking to protect women's sports."
One case is B.P.J. v West Virginia State Board of Education and there West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and ADF are asking the Supreme Court to hear their case after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit undermined West Virginia's ability to protect fairness in women's sports.
The other is Hecox v. Little, where Idaho Attorney General Raúl Labrador and ADF are asking the high court to uphold their state's Fairness in Women's Sports Act after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit acted to prevent enforcement.
"Back in April, the 4th Circuit handed down a 2-1 ruling that reversed an earlier decision upholding West Virginia's Save Women's Sports Act. I promised back then that I would keep fighting for the safety, well-being, and fairness in women's sports, and now I'm keeping that promise. We are confident in the merits of our defense of this constitutionally permissible law, which through and through complies with Title IX and the Constitution—that's why we are taking this to the Supreme Court. West Virginia's law protects fairness and safety for girls and women in sports. It's really that simple," Morrisey explained.
"Idaho is committed to ensuring that our women and girls get a fair shot on and off the field. While we've been fighting for fair and equal athletic competition, activists have been pushing a radical agenda that will ultimately sideline women and girls. Many athletic associations around the world have seen the obvious truth that men are naturally stronger and would create a dangerous, unfair environment for women to showcase their incredible talent in sports. We are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold our law and ensure that women and girls get the opportunities they deserve," added Labrador.
The B.P.J. petition charges, "Madison [Kenyon] and Mary [Marshall] are the tip of the iceberg. From 2017 through 2019, two Connecticut male high-school athletes who identify as female broke 17 track records, took 13 girls' state championship titles, and deprived girls of more than 68 opportunities to advance to higher-level competitions—opportunities that otherwise would have gone to females."
The Hecox case explains, "Last term, two justices said it would be appropriate for the court to get involved at the emergency-relief stage. The case for the court's involvement now is even more compelling. The 4th Circuit has set out its fractured analysis. And so long as this decision stands, 25 state laws on these issues are in doubt. That doubt irreparably damages safe and fair athletic competition. As each sports season comes and goes, more girls will lose the benefits of safe and fair play. But those girls shouldn't have to wait."
In B.P.J., a middle-school male athlete competing on a West Virginia girls' track team finished ahead of almost 300 girls in three years in cross-country and track-and-field events.
In the second case, Kenyon and Marshall, who ran track and cross-country at Idaho State University, are defending Idaho's women's sports law alongside the state. The two women are long-time athletes who are well familiar with the differences in strength, speed, and stamina between comparably gifted and trained male and female athletes.
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
A leftist jury in New York claimed that President Donald Trump violated campaign spending laws with his personal hush money payoff to a porn star, and returned guilty verdicts to 34 felonies.
A federal court decided Hillary Clinton violated essentially the same spending reporting requirements when her campaign coordinated, illegally, spending campaigns with a political action committee.
She gets a scolding.
It is the Washington Examiner that reported the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Clinton and the superpac called Correct the Record improperly used an “internet exemption” to get around restrictions they wanted to avoid to set up a “Benghazi Hearing War Room” and pursue a “witch hunt” of critics.
They wanted to do all this without reporting the work as a campaign expense, the report said.
But the court said the campaign, in 2016 when Clinton lost her second attempt to be elected to the White House, crossed election laws by flaunting their coordinated efforts.
The report said, "Neither Clinton nor Correct the Record founder David Brock will be punished under the 36-page decision that instead scolded the Federal Election Commission for not investigating a complaint about the spending. It sent the case to the FEC to fix the exemption."
"We hold that the Commission acted contrary to law in dismissing the complaint. Because we conclude that the internet exemption cannot be read to exempt from disclosure those expenditures that are only tangentially related to an eventual internet message or post, the commission's reading of the internet exemption stretches it beyond lawful limits," the court concluded.
FEC chief Sean Cooksey responded, "My colleagues and I will carefully review the court's opinion and consider next steps, including whether to seek review in the Supreme Court. Regardless, I will continue to fight for internet freedom at the FEC and a robust regulatory exemption for political activities online, consistent with the law."
The dispute dates to 2016 when Brock set up his group and announced his plans would be coordinated with the Clinton campaign, in apparent violation of rules barring PAC and candidates from scheming together, the report said.
The court found that Clinton's campaign was obligated to acknowledge the spending as a campaign donation.
"The court said that Brock's group spent $5.95 million and hid its spending behind the internet exception that was created to protect freewheeling online political commentary and low-dollar support for candidates," the report said.
"The amount in question is more than 45 times the $130,000 a Manhattan court convicted former President Donald Trump of misreporting in business records during the same 2016 campaign.
"It should be noted that the Federal Election Commission and the Justice Department looked at the payments Trump made through his personal attorney at the time, Michael Cohen, to adult film star Stormy Daniels as part of a nondisclosure agreement and declined to prosecute him," it said.
But in what is widely seen as part of the Democrats' "lawfare" against Trump, "Democrat Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg chose to bring the case under New York law, bootstrapping the alleged FEC violation as an underlying crime to the state business record violations."
The expenses were listed as legal expenses, as they were paid to a lawyer for a settlement issue.
The Clinton case involved neither organization reporting the campaign spending.
"In other words, Correct the Record committed FEC 'business record' violations, if you will, by failing to properly account for money spent to help the Clinton campaign," the report said.
Previously, the Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee agreed in 2022 to pay $113,000 in fines to resolve an FEC investigation into her campaign's decision to fund the infamous Steele dossier – opposition research documentation that actually was fabricated – and call it legal expenses.
The report continued, "That's interesting because that's exactly the violation Bragg said the Trump Organization committed in relation to paying Cohen."
This story was originally published by the WND News Center.
Joe Biden's mental faculties are headline news these days.
His cognitive status, decline, and all have been evident for years already. It was formally recognized by special counsel Robert Hur's finding that he did take and keep government documents, but there should not be any charges because of his diminishing mental capabilities.
Then it was on full display during the presidential debate, and was in the news again this week when he called Ukraine's president "Putin" and his own vice president "Trump."
Now members of Congress are demanding answers about what the American public doesn't yet know about that decline.
A report from Just the News explains it’s the House Oversight Committee that is demanding three White House staff members answer questions – about the “interference” they are running for Biden.
House Oversight Chairman James Comer has called for Special Assistant to the President Ashley Williams, Assistant to the President Anthony Bernal, and Deputy White House Chief of Staff Annie Tomasini to appear.
Comer explained, "The White House has shielded three key aides from testifying about President Biden's mishandling of classified documents and now we've learned through reporting these same aides are also seeking to cover up President Biden's declining cognitive state inside the White House.
"President Biden is clearly unfit for office, yet his staff are trying to hide the truth from the American people. Key White House staff must come before our committee so we can provide the transparency and accountability that Americans deserve," he said.
Comer accused the aides of actually doing chores that must be done by a president.
The report explained, "The letters containing the subpoenas also cited a former Biden aide who claimed the three employees formed a 'protective bubble' around the president to the point that he 'lost all independence.'"
Biden's recent public displays of cognitive failures have prompted multiple Democrats to call for him to step away from the 2024 presidential race – or for his removal.
Fox News said the subpoenas, sent this week, “voice the committee’s concerns that top aides are running the country while the president is unable to do so.”
Williams' subpoena states, "To be clear, the American people did not elect Ms. Williams or any White House staffer to do President Biden's job for him, and the committee seeks Ms. Williams testimony regarding the matters identified above."
Democrat activists in the White House claimed the subpoenas were a "baseless political stunt."