Friday, February 9, 2024

Who’s Going to Take the Keys Away from This Man?

By Jim Geraghty

Friday, February 09, 2024

 

President Joe Biden has not sat down for a formal television interview with any news outlet since October. He has not held a formal press conference since the Asia–Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in November. That day, he took four questionsAs noted yesterday, Biden didn’t make any televised address to the nation when the U.S. launched airstrikes against the Houthis in January, nor when he ordered airstrikes against other Iranian proxy groups in Iraq and Syria earlier this month. Biden didn’t give any Election Night remarks as he romped to a big win in the South Carolina Democratic primary. And Biden is skipping the traditional Super Bowl Sunday interview for the second straight year.

 

Biden has been strangely absent and unavailable for questions for almost his entire presidency, and this comes after the “basement campaign” of 2020.

 

You’ve heard a lot of statistics about Biden’s age, but here’s a really revealing one: The day Biden was sworn in as vice president in 2009, he was already the sixth-oldest vice president in U.S. history. By the time Biden left the role in 2017, he was the second oldest, behind Harry Truman’s veep, Alben Barkley. During the 1996 presidential election, Time magazine asked, on its cover, “Is [Bob] Dole too old for the job?” At the time, Dole was nine years younger than Biden is today.

 

We’ll get to the special counsel’s report and last night’s train wreck of a press conference in a moment, but let’s examine why just 23 percent of Americans think that Biden has the necessary mental and physical health to be president when compared to Donald Trump, according to that most recent NBC News poll. (Forty-six percent of Americans think Trump has the necessary mental and physical health to be president compared to Biden, 3 percent think both would be good, and 28 percent think neither would be good.)

 

Back on August 19, 2021, at the height of the Afghanistan crisis, I wrote one of my most-read editions of this newsletter, under the headline, “Something Is Wrong with the President.” It simply pointed out when and where Biden had appeared in public since the crisis began and what he had said. I concluded:

 

Biden is barely appearing in public, not saying much of anything when he does, not answering any questions outside of his lone scheduled interview, and sounding angry when he did face questions from [George] Stephanopoulos. . . . The president either does not remember what he said on July 8, or he is simply trying to gaslight everyone into believing that he did warn of the Afghan government’s collapsing.

 

That assessment was labeled “the sort of gross, lowest-common-denominator politics that drive people away from public life” by Chris Cillizza, then with CNN. That is a demonstration of how intensely some people wanted to declare the issue of Biden’s age, memory, and mental capacities off-limits for public discussion. A few months later, under oath before the Senate Armed Services Committee, U.S. Central Command general Frank McKenzie and Joint Chiefs chairman general Mark Milley both said they had recommended President Biden maintain 2,500 troops in Afghanistan. Biden had insisted during the Stephanopoulos interview that no one had made that recommendation — or, more specifically, “No one said that to me that I can recall.”

 

I think it is more than fair to ask what Biden remembers after his briefings end.

 

On June 20, 2022, I wrote:

 

I think the single most predictable “bombshell” of the coming years is that sometime in 2025, someone like Bob Woodward or Robert Costa will publish a book with a title like “Perpetual Crisis: Inside the Biden White House,” and we will “learn” something like:

 

The president’s official health report said he was in fine shape for his age. But behind the scenes, Jill Biden, Ron Klain, and Susan Rice were deeply concerned the president’s health was rapidly declining, and that he would soon be unable to perform his duties. 

 

Yesterday, we received something of a preview of that not-so-surprising revelation. Special counsel Robert Hur issued his final report on Biden’s handling of classified documents, concluding that he could not bring criminal charges because a jury would see the president “as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” The details are jaw-dropping:

 

In his interview with our office, Mr. Biden’s memory was worse. He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended (“if it was 2013 – when did I stop being Vice President?”), and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began (“in 2009, am I still Vice President?”). He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died. And his memory appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him. Among other things, he mistakenly said he “had a real difference” of opinion with General Karl Eikenberry, when, in fact, Eikenberry was an ally whom Mr. Biden cited approvingly in his Thanksgiving memo to President Obama.

 

In a case where the government must prove that Mr. Biden knew he had possession of the classified Afghanistan documents after the vice presidency and chose to keep those documents, knowing he was violating the law, we expect that at trial, his attorneys would emphasize these limitations in his recall.

 

The White House is insisting that Hur is a partisan hack making unfounded accusations and allegations against the president. No doubt, the president’s questioning and testimony was recorded. If Hur’s description is such an unfair characterization of Biden’s testimony, let’s see the transcript and recording.

 

No one withholds information that exonerates them.

 

Sensing that Hur’s report confirmed what many Americans feared — Biden has a severe case of CRS (“Can’t Remember Stuff”) — Biden did what he almost never does anymore: He addressed the country in the evening and took questions from reporters. It did not go well.

 

You don’t have to take it from our Noah Rothman when he says last night’s abruptly announced prime-time presidential statement and brief Q&A was “an unmitigated disaster.” Or the assessments of PhilRichCharlieLuther, or Jeff.

 

You can look at the assessment of Politico: “A day Biden world wishes it could forget.” Or any of the quotes from Axios:

 

“For years now, President Biden’s advisers have carefully choreographed his every move to avoid what exploded into view over six hours Thursday: a vivid display of an elderly, irritable man struggling on a public stage”. . . .

 

Another former Biden White House official simply said: “Brutal”. . . .

 

A former Biden aide described Democrats’ dilemma: “Taking the nomination away from Biden is like taking the car keys away from your parents.”

 

Discouraging our elderly parents from driving absolutely sucks, but we do it because of the high consequences of the risks. If we can do this to our own parents, why can those around Biden, and prominent Democrats, not do this for the country? What, the consequences of a bad decision aren’t severe enough?

 

Or peruse the assessment of Stephen Collinson of CNN:

 

Biden appeared fired up and passionate. But at the same time, his angry demeanor and an event which appeared to quickly spin out of his control, with reporters shouting questions as he struggled to interrupt, may have ended up exacerbating the very questions about his age that it was meant to dispel. . . .

 

The press event also raised new questions about his sharpness in a week in which he has twice confused the names of a serving and recent European leader with those with whom he interacted in the 1980s. . . . And even when he was much younger, Biden had a reputation as a gaffe machine and for verbal slips. But in the context of Biden’s declaration that his “memory is fine” his political liability over his age and coming as it did during an event meant to demonstrate vitality and accurate recall, it was an unwelcome trip-up to say the least.

 

Or ask Susan Glasser of the New Yorker: “Yeesh. ‘President of Mexico’ Sisi. Bad for Biden in an appearance meant to dispel concerns about his age. What a year this day has been.” This is the same Susan Glasser who wrote in September 2021 that I was being “wildly overstated” in “consign[ing] Biden to the ash heap of history.” (Yeah, I keep receipts on everybody.)

 

Or, hey, look who it is: Chris Cillizza! “That was a very bad idea to let Biden do that press conference. I assumed he insisted but: 1. He looked and sounded pissed off. 2. It affirms how worried he (and they) are about the age and competency issue. 3. Screwing up the El-Sisi thing will just feed the narrative.”

 

Why, Chris, comments like that are “the sort of gross, lowest-common-denominator politics that drive people away from public life”! Nah, not really. But let’s acknowledge that I and other Biden critics weren’t wrong; we were just ahead of the curve.

 

Joe Biden is too old to be an effective president, and he’s knocking on the door of being too old to be president, period. It was always absurd to believe that Biden would be able to handle one of the most challenging jobs in the world as an octogenarian, and the notion of him serving two full terms and remaining in the Oval Office until age 86 is ludicrous. Even Biden himself seemed to acknowledge this, back in 2019.

 

Perhaps Biden forgot that he once felt that way.

 

ADDENDUM: An intriguing assessment from our Henry Olsen, concluding that in the South Carolina Republican primary, Donald Trump is extremely likely to win but that Nikki Haley will likely perform better than the polls indicate: “There’s every reason, however, to think that the margin won’t be as large as 26 points if her efforts to get Democrats, independents, and nontraditional primary voters to polls succeeds at all.”

 

A while back, I characterized that state’s primary as winner-take-all, but the state rules actually allocate 29 delegates for winning statewide, and three for each of the seven congressional districts that is won. Trump will probably sweep all seven districts, and win all 50 delegates at stake, but . . . the state’s sixth district, Jim Clyburn’s district, scores a D+16 on the Cook Partisan Voting Index. And it includes Bamberg, where Haley grew up. Is there a shot that Haley wins that district through crossover votes?

No comments: