Kamala's Breathtaking Arrogance

For anyone who watches politics closely it was hardly a surprise that the nation rejected the candidacy of one Kamala Harris. Being the ultimate diversity hire, she was in no way qualified to occupy the office of the presidency.

If America had chosen a subliterate former courtesan as its leader it would have suffered four years of embarrassment. Between the giggles and the cackles, the nation would have felt serially mortified.

The president represents the nation. A great country does not allow itself to be led by Kamala Harris. A backwater, perhaps, but a great country, certainly not.

Among the leadership skills that Kamala did not possess lay her inability to articulate a coherent sentence in the English language. You cannot lead if you cannot articulate your policy. You cannot lead if you cannot explain why you have formulated this or that policy. 

Leaders should commend respect. They should show a clear command of the information at hand. They should show that they are in charge. Such was the case of Gov. Ron DeSantis when his state was threatened by hurricanes. You would never imagine Kamala organizing a hurricane response effort, or much of anything else.

Perhaps more telling was the fact that nearly every staff member who worked for Kamala quit on her. When more than ninety percent of your staff walks away from the job, you are a bad manager. Or better, you do not know how to manage. 

And yet, the issue rarely arose during the presidential campaign. Staffers of the vice president were wise enough to maintain their silence. They wanted to have a future in the Democratic party and speaking out against Kamala would have ended any chances they might have had one.

So, we are especially interested in Sean O’Brien’s views on Kamala. O’Brien heads the Teamsters Union and for the first time in many years it did not support the Democratic candidate.

O’Brien was explaining his interactions with Kamala to Tucker Carlson:

He spoke about a meeting his lieutenant Joan Corey had with Harris in June, before Biden dropped out of the race.

After she introduced herself and said she was with the Teamsters, Harris became demanding.

'Teamsters? You better get on board. You better get on board. Better get on board soon,' the candidate had told the union.

Seriously, she is not asking for his support. She is not showing him any respect. She is treating him like a lackey. And she is showing a colossal confidence in winning. Doubtless, she considered it her birthright.

After she became the nominee Harris refused to answer the questions that the Teamsters had asked of every candidate:

Later on O'Brien discussed a meeting his union leadership had with then-nominee Harris where she was refusing to answer certain questions they asked of every candidate.

'Her declaration on the way out was: I'm gonna win, with you or without you.'

He said his union gave 16 questions to each candidate and Biden would only answer five, whereas Trump and even the likes of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Cornel West would answer all 16. 

O'Brien said that Harris only answered four before making her shocking and eventually incorrect declaration that she would win.

You have an instance of colossal arrogance, a willingness to insult and offend potential supporters, and a confidence based on nothing but her sense that the job was hers for the taking.

Kamala failed to understand that you cannot lead if you cannot cooperate with your underlings. She did not see that being in charge did not mean telling people what to do and expecting them to do it automatically.

Doubtless, her gross insecurity made it impossible for her to speak respectfully to people who did not respect her.

Considering that the Democrats were constantly attacking Donald Trump for being a wanna-be dictator, the campaign showed us a more humble side of Trump.

Trump reached out, in particular, to minority voters who had never supported Republicans. Whether in a bodega in the Bronx or a Chick-fil-a in Atlanta, or a rally in Wildwood, New Jersey, or at a McDonald’s or even in a garbage truck, Trump presented himself as someone who was relatable, and who did not believe that he was lowering himself by reaching out and asking people to vote for him.

When journalist Stephanie Ruhle wanted to interview Donald Trump she called him on the phone. He picked it up and spoke with her. He also rejected the offer of an interview.

And yet, when Ruhle wanted to invite Kamala for a similar interview, she had no chance of talking with the candidate. She stated that she had to go through “fifty” handlers and never got to speak with Kamala.

The one candidate was an arrogant, incompetent, unqualified fool. The other understood that no executive can function effectively if he does not sustain cordial relationships with his employees.

If you disrespect your staff, and use every interaction as an occasion to put people down, they will not do their best for you. If it happens too often they will pick up and leave.

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

Bach - Christmas Oratorio [1-3] Harnoncourt

Tuesday Potpourri

Being as tomorrow is a holiday, it will require a more festive post. That means, I am shifting my Wednesday potpourri to Tuesday this week.

First, a high school teacher offers this comment to Jake at Omni American:

I hate to say it, but I think the reason high school students no longer like English class is because they've stopped teaching the classics and switched to not-so-great recently written books that are supposed to be 'relevant' to their experiences.

Second, Nick Sortor reports on the latest terrorist bombing in Stockholm, Sweded. It is an obvious consequence of the fact that the good Swedish people chose to open their country to masses of migrants-- who did not speak Swedish and who had no intention of assimilation.

A bomb has just exploded in central Stockholm, per @visegrad24 There were a RECORD 149 confirmed explosive attacks in Sweden in 2023, the vast majority of which are carried out by immigrant gangs. THIS is why we need mass deportations in America. Can ANYONE imagine 149 explosive attacks in New York City in a single year? Because that’s what’s coming.

Third, Democrats are agonizing over their serial losses in the last election. As for why it happened, one Rob Schneider offered this analysis:

You lost because you tried to convince the American people that it was racist to close the border and not let people come in illegally to rob and murder them. You lost because no one gives a **** about the term ‘Latinx.’ You lost because your Justice Department called parents who showed up at school board meetings terrorists just for not wanting pornography in their children's classrooms.

Fourth, Politico convened a focus group to address the issue of Democratic Party decline.

Here are some excerpts:

When asked to compare the Democratic Party to an animal, one participant compared the party to an ostrich because “they’ve got their heads in the sand and are absolutely committed to their own ideas, even when they’re failing.” Another likened them to koalas, who “are complacent and lazy about getting policy wins that we really need.” Democrats, another said, are “not a friend of the working class anymore.”

Most people are simply too afraid to denounce the candidate who was leading the Democratic Party in the last election. Still…,

Even though the focus group voters did not solely blame Harris for their distaste of the Democratic Party, they also weren’t happy about her candidacy. Participants described her as “inauthentic,” “very dishonest” and “did not seem competent.”

“It seemed like a lot of what she came out and said wasn’t really off-the-cuff, wasn’t coming from her,” said another man who voted for Biden in 2020 and Trump in 2024. “Seemed like every interview, every time she came out and talked about something, it was planned out and never her thoughts, didn’t seem genuine to her thoughts, whereas, Trump, even though you never really knew what he was going to say, when he was going to say it, it was always him and genuine to what he thought, so that’s what swayed me.”

Fifth, the safest city in the world today is Budapest, Hungary. Why should this be the case? Well, its leader, Victor Orban, refused to open the doors to illegal migrants.

David Goldman reports:

Budapest is the safest major city in the world thanks in large part to PM Orban's immigration policy. 

Roger Kimball adds this:

Viktor Orbán is a hero. That some people demonize him as an authoritarian or even "fascist" tells us a lot more about those hurling the insults than it tells us about Orbán or Hungary. 

Sixth, Libs of Tik Tok reports on the situation in the New York City subway system and our governor’s reaction to it:

Hours after a migrant lit a woman on fire and watched her burn to death on the subway, Governor Kathy Hochul is posting staged photos on the subway boasting about how safe it is. Unreal.

And, the governor was claiming that her placement of new cameras in the subways helped to catch the perpetrator.

I may be overreading, just a bit, but this incident probably marks the end of the political career of one Kathy Hochul.

Seventh, here’s a quiz for today. What do you think of when you hear the name Amelia Carter? 

Amelia Carter was the name of the victim of the Guatemalan migrant.. She was 29 years old and was white. Thus, no one dares mention her. The crime does not fit the narrative. Of course, she was neither drunk nor homeless.

Seventh, meanwhile in the cable news wars, CNN and MSNBC are bleeding audience.

CNN reportedly wrapped up 2024 with the lowest audience numbers in its history. This is despite election years usually drawing more audience to news outlets in general.  

From December 26, 2023, through December 15, 2024, CNN averaged just 93,000 viewers in the key 25-54 demographic and 488,000 total viewers, according to Nielsen Media Research as reported by the Washington Examiner. This trailed Fox News, which dominated with 1.46 million total viewers.   

The poor performance follows disappointing election night coverage, where CNN drew 5.1 million viewers—a massive 44 percent drop from its 2020 election coverage. In comparison, Fox News attracted 13.6 million viewers during the same event.   

CNN wasn’t the only left-wing media outlet that had struggles this year. MSNBC averaged 86,000 viewers in the 25-54 demographic but outperformed CNN in total viewers with 806,000. Reports on Thursday revealed MSNBC requested pay cuts from anchors Joy Reid and Stephanie Ruhle to retain their roles, following a $5 million salary reduction for Rachel Maddow.  

Eighth, Daniel Greenfield explains that in the Middle East, everything means the opposite of what it says. No area of the world suffers more from journalistic and political gaslighting.

Even as Islamic Jihadists are taking over Syria, ethnically cleansing Kurds and terrorizing Christians, the media is hailing the new “inclusive” regime which “liberated” Syria.

The regime is indeed inclusive if you consider bearded men with assault rifles to be the measure of inclusivity. And terrorizing minorities to be the exciting new diversity.

“This victory, my brothers, is a victory for the entire Islamic nation,” Abu Mohammad al-Jawlani, the leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a former Al Qaeda and ISIS allied group, declared in the Umayyad Mosque. The mosque is a symbol of the old Caliphate and it echoed the speech given by his old friend, the former ISIS Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, in Mosul’s Great Mosque of al-Nuri declaring his own caliphate. But it will no doubt be a most inclusive caliphate.

As Jawlani had previously said, “some people limit the issue of implementing the rule of the sharia to just imposing some of the Hudud punishments, chopping off hands, stoning whomever, whipping someone who drinks alcohol, and so on. But this is a very basic part of the very big concept of implementing the rule of the sharia.” There’s a lot more to Sharia Islamic law than just chopping off hands but you have to work on the basics of hand chopping before going big.

Syria’s newly appointed Prime Minister Mohammad al-Bashir appeared in front of a white Jihadist flag with the Islamic declaration that rejects all other religions except Islam. Bashir’s credentials include a degree in Sharia Islamic law and membership in the Muslim Brotherhood’s ‘Syrian Salvation Government’. After saving Syria from Assad, who will save it from the saviors?

Secretary of State Blinken is going on a tour to persuade the Turks and their Jihadis to establish an “inclusive” government in Syria. But inclusivity now means Sunni Jihadis backed by Turkey repressing and killing everyone else. This will be a fundamental liberating change from the old order in which Shiite Jihadis backed by Iran repressed and killed everyone else.

Words in the Middle East however have a way of meaning different things than they do over here. It’s not just “inclusive” that has a whole other dictionary entry.

Ninth, via Mario Nawfal, the latest from Argentina. That is, the latest from libertarian president Javier Milei:

IN 2025, WE’LL SLASH EVEN MORE REGULATIONS AND TAXES "We’ve made our first big cuts, and now we’re going deeper. In 2025, we’ll continue removing regulations, pushing economic freedom further. 

This year, we jumped 70 points in economic freedom—going from the bottom 35 to the middle—but we’ve only implemented a quarter of the reforms. 

We’ll advance privatization, deepen labor reforms, and eliminate 90% of taxes—not revenue, but the number of taxes-- moving to a simplified system with no more than six taxes.

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

Brain Rot

The Oxford dictionary has declared “brain rot” to be the word of the year. We will not nitpick that the term contains two words, but clearly the American mind, and especially the minds of American college students are rotting. 

When large numbers of college students in our most elite institutions find Luigi Mangione to be a hero, you know that something has rotted their brains. 

When they are not joining groups like Queers for Palestine or Feminists for Honor Killings American university students are lining up to extol the consummate virtue of an assassin,

One suspects that they consider Mangione to be a revolutionary hero, a man who has taken action against the patriarchy and against capitalism. That defines the fiction that they are all inhabiting. 

It’s one thing to see that the American university system at the highest level is an indoctrination mill that advances radical leftist thought. It is quite another to see that those who imbibe this swill will feel obliged to idolize someone who acts on the theories.

After all, believing the correct orthodox beliefs will never be sufficient. Students and young adults who want to move to the next level must take actions that demonstrate the depth of their conviction, or at least must idolize those who do. 

The reason, Joel Kotkin explains, lies with the American university system. Clearly, he is not the first to indict academia for having gone to the intellectual dark side, for having given up on teaching and for having chosen to force feed leftist ideology.

In the great clash of civilizations we are risking failure, because the academy has become a fifth column that has worked long and hard to undermine the bases for American greatness. That means, not just patriotic pride but the use of empirical thinking to establish truth. 

Too many of us believe that our greatness lies in the fact that we engage in free and open debate. But they fail to notice that such deliberative debate requires an empirical reference to establish truth value. And that it requires a pragmatic consideration for what does and does not work.

In place of empirical science students are being force-fed ideology, to the point where they resemble those medieval clerics who were taken before inquisitions to suss out heresies. They have embraced theory, to the point where they refuse to believe that it can be refuted by fact.

If students are judged in terms of what they believe as dogmatic truth they are not being prepared to work in the real world and to respect the verdict of objective reality and the marketplace.

Kotkin writes:

Ideologically homogenous universities have become something akin to indoctrination camps, where traditional Western values are trashed while woke ideology is promoted. Not surprisingly, the graduates of today’s universities are inclined to maintain rigid positions on various issues, confident of their own superior intelligence and perspicuity while being intolerant of other views. They also tend to be not particularly proud to be American. The kind of support professors gave to the war effort in the Second World War would be hard to imagine today.

When it was merely about the humanities and even the social sciences, no one paid much attention. But now the woke mindset is being extended to the sciences, where empirical verification has been thrown aside in favor of identity politics.

Yet as the progressive educrats have seized control, many of the disciplines they dominate, like English and history, have experienced severe decline. More recently, the woke mindset has even spread into the sciences. Now we see science departments emphasising ‘social justice’ over empiricism, and placing race, gender or other considerations ahead of merit. In 2020, the medical school at the University of California, Los Angeles gave control of admissions to a DEI administrator. Since admitting students based on race, the failure rate in exams has increased tenfold.

If I were to try to explain this in a simple concept, the educrats and the ideologues are working to detach you from reality. This is obvious in the case of transgenderism, which defies reality but which you are forced to believe is a higher truth.

Without reality to put the brakes on your schemes and dreams, you will find yourself, not just promoting bad policy, but refusing to change it when they are shown to fail. Without a real reference there is no failure. There is only messaging.

Consider the case of two detectives, coming on two crime scenes. The first has a theory. He believes it unquestionably. He will set about collecting evidence that proves his theory correct, discarding evidence that refutes it. 

He believes the theory, takes it as dogma, because it provides him with membership in a local cult of true believers. Solving a crime is a second thought.

The second detective begins his enquiry by collecting evidence. He begins by noting anything that is out of place, that does not quite seem to fit. The more he collects evidence the sooner he will see a hypothesis forming. Then, he will test the hypothesis against all the evidence collected and against all future evidence. 

His empirical approach is designed to approach the truth of what happened and even of whodunit. Such is the approach that has currently been banished from too many universities, to the point where someone who lives out the terms of the ideologically driven narrative, by killing an insurance executive, is lionized as a hero.

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

Three Days Before Christmas and Hanukkah

Tis the season…. 

This year Christmas occurs on the first day of Hanukkah. It’s a clear example of Judeo-Christian inclusivity.

As has become habitual, I pause on Sunday. It’s that time of the week, a time for reflection and contemplation. It also allows my readers to catch up on posts that they might have missed during the week.

I would like to think that among the topics for deep reflection is this one. Considering the time and effort it takes to write these posts, one would like to think that they are worthy of compensation.

Thus, in place of a tithe, I make a humble request for donations. 

I have been posting on this blog for nearly sixteen years now. It is not self-evident. I could not have done it without the financial support of you, my readers.

If you would like to show appreciation and to encourage me to continue, a good way would be by making a financial contribution. Gratitude is a virtue. 

I try to make my writing sound effortless, but, as the old saying goes, it takes a lot of work to make anything seem effortless. 

If you would like to donate please make use of the Paypal button on this page. If you prefer, you can mail a check to 310 East 46th St. 24H. New York, NY 10017.

I’m counting on you. 

If you have already donated, please pass the word along to your friends, family, neighbors, associates and colleagues.

Thank  you in advance.

Saturday Miscellany

First, you would think that the Democrats would be all over this story-- like a rash. And yet, the story of the institutional dereliction about anti-Semitism on and off campus was told by the Republican Congress. 

After all, when Columbia University was overrun with Hamas supporters, making it dangerous for Jewish students to go to class, House Speaker Mike Johnson led a group of legislators to the school, to show solidarity.

Democrats did not.

Now, the House has come out with a report, via the New York Post:

The Biden administration, top universities and medical institutions utterly failed to crack down on antisemitism that exploded in the wake of Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack, according to a scathing House Republican report released Thursday, which laid bare “systemic” and “astounding” shortcomings.

Six GOP-led House committees declared in a joint report that “antisemitism has been allowed to fester unchecked” due to “a disturbing pattern of defensiveness and denial,” according to a copy exclusively obtained by The Post.

“Across the nation, Jewish Americans have been harassed, assaulted, intimidated, and subjected to hostile environments — violations that stand in stark contrast to America’s fundamental values, including a foundational commitment to religious freedom for all,” the 42-page report says.

As I said, you would think that Democrats would be up in arms about the return of a virulent form of anti-Semitism. They are not.

The report focuses heavily on Columbia University and its recommendations urge federal agencies to use money to incentivize more stringent anti-discrimination policies — and also proposes potential legislation to that effect.

“The executive branch should aggressively enforce Title VI [anti-discrimination rules] and hold schools accountable for their failures to protect students. Universities that fail to fulfill the obligations upon which their federal funding is predicated or whose actions make clear they are unfit stewards of taxpayer dollars should be treated accordingly,” the Republican panels said.

The Ivy League school, which was the site of a large encampment that featured on its fringes multiple documented instances of anti-Jewish remarks against pro-Israel activists and Jewish students, also reneged on a vow to punish students accused of breaking the rules to protest against Israel.

“Columbia said the 22 students arrested for the criminal takeover of Hamilton Hall would face expulsion. Instead, the University lifted the students’ interim suspensions after pushback from radical faculty, allowing 7 to graduate, restoring 11 to good standing, and leaving 3 with preexisting sanctions suspended and 1 on probation,” the report said.

“Despite dozens of students being arrested for conduct related to Hamilton Hall and the encampment, or having faced discipline for other egregious antisemitic incidents; Columbia failed to expel students and issued final suspensions to only four students.”

Incoming president Trump-- you know, the one that Democrats keep calling Hitler-- has promised to tamp down these protests. Time will tell if he keeps his word.

Second, Mario Nawfal brings us up to date on the progress of Argentinian president Javier Milei-- fast becoming a culture hero to the libertarian right around the world.

MILEI DELIVERS: ARGENTINA’S POVERTY PLUMMETS UNDER HIS LEADERSHIP Big win for @JMilei as Argentina’s poverty rate drops to 38.9% in Q3, a dramatic improvement from 54.8% in Q1 and 51% in Q2, according to INDEC. 

Indigence has also taken a nosedive, falling to 8.6% from 20.2% earlier this year. These results showcase the power of Milei’s bold economic reforms, proving skeptics wrong and reigniting hope for Argentina’s economy.

Third, maybe Disney just got tired of losing money with woke productions. Newsmax explains that the company removed a transgender story line from a new series:

Disney has cut a transgender storyline from its upcoming animated series "Win or Lose," a decision that has left the 18-year-old transgender actor who voiced the highlighted character "very disheartened."

The new Disney-owned Pixar animated series, set to premiere on Disney+ Feb. 19, follows a coed middle school softball team called the Pickles as they prepare for their championship game, according to CNN. Each of the eight episodes will focus on a different member of the team.

However, a storyline involving gender identity has been removed from the series. According to a source familiar with the matter, the character will remain in the show, but the decision to exclude the plot point was made several months ago. The changes go beyond script adjustments, as the character's dialogue had already been recorded.

Fourth, as you know, the Netherlands has produced some of the worst studies of transmania. These studies are the basis for the problems that more than a few people suffer.

But, that’s not all folks. The Netherlands is also leading the world in euthanasia-- assisted suicide for people who are especially depressed. 

The Guardian has published a long and detailed account of the case of Zoe, a young woman who found her suffering unbearable, to the point where she persuaded her physicians and therapists to put her to death. The story was written by Stephanie Bakker.

Naturally, the Dutch practice revolts. Giving up seems never to be a good option. And it cannot help patients when their licensed professional caregivers discuss it as a viable option.

Zoe’s case compels because, at the last minute, after she had arranged for her death and said all of her goodbyes, she changed her mind. She decided against death, at the risk of disappointing her therapists.

On the verge of death, she wrote this:

Dear all, I changed my mind at the last minute and won’t be dying today. My apologies for any panic that I may have caused.

The case study is certainly compelling. Bakker writes:

Zoë had wanted to die because she was unable and unwilling to live with the consequences of childhood traumas. Everyday things such as showering, brushing her teeth, getting dressed and sleeping in her own bed were triggers that brought back the most awful memories, which she then would relive all over again. The nightmares made it all but impossible to sleep and there were times when she lived on fluids because she couldn’t bear solid food in her mouth.

Dare we say that she had been diagnosed and treated by an army of therapists and psychiatrists:

She was bullied in school and given a whole raft of diagnoses by mental health practitioners. Anxiety disorder, anorexia, depression, borderline personality disorder, you name it. These were eventually whittled down to a single diagnosis: complex post-traumatic stress disorder, caused by severe childhood trauma.

One cannot vouch for the quality of the treatment on offer in the Netherlands, but Zoe seems to have suffered through every variety:

All Zoë’s other symptoms stemmed from this [childhood trauma], but that hadn’t stopped her from receiving treatment for them for 10 years: cognitive behavioural therapy, creative therapy, schema therapy, family therapy, eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR), exercises to improve her self-image, eight different antidepressants and 21 rounds of electroshock therapy.

She felt like the loser who didn’t respond to treatment, the girl who hadn’t tried hard enough to get better. For fear of disappointing or being disappointed, she pushed away anyone who showed her any kindness. She was lonely.

By all accounts, she had become a professional patient. She did not have a life. She had been removed from her life, from the chance to make friends, to go do school, you name it. Her traumas had defined her. And her therapists seemed to believe that they ought to define her.

Of course, once you tell a patient that suicide is a viable option, she will start thinking that it is perhaps the only way she can be a really good patient. By killing herself she would have been saying that they did not fail her, that she was a hopeless case.

She explained what had happened with Bakker:

“Everybody was angry when I didn’t die, or else they went away, on holiday,” she told me when I visited her at the clinic in mid-July. “Now I feel more strongly than ever that I have to die, because otherwise everybody will be annoyed.”

Strikingly, aside from an army of therapists and a family that seems rather useless, Zoe seems to have one friend in the world. That is, journalist Stephanie Bakker.

Addendum: I now have some free consulting hours in my life coaching practice. If you are interested, email me at StuartSchneiderman@gmail.com

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.

Bye-bye Biden

The media is saying good-bye to Joe Biden. Some would say that it is also good riddance, but today we limit ourselves to the full throated rationalization of media lies about Biden.

As everyone understood when watching Biden’s June debate with Donald Trump, the president is not there. He is incoherent and obviously mentally defective. The notion that he would be able to do the job for four years became risible. 

And yet, the larger question is quite simple-- has Joe Biden been doing the job for these past four years. In 2020 Dr. Michael Burry, of Big Short fame, opined that Biden was suffering from senile dementia, and that the condition normally advances rapidly.

People whose visceral and mindless hatred of Donald Trump caused them to lie about Joe Biden, are trying to explain themselves.

A normally competent reporter, Peter Baker of the New York Times, offers the party line. According to Baker, Biden is “weary.”

He writes:

Time is catching up with Mr. Biden. He looks a little older and a little slower with each passing day. Aides say he remains plenty sharp in the Situation Room, calling world leaders to broker a cease-fire in Lebanon or deal with the chaos of Syria’s rebellion. But it is hard to imagine that he seriously thought he could do the world’s most stressful job for another four years.

Of course, Biden and his enablers insist that he was a consequential president. And yet, he has the lowest approval ratings in recorded history and more people consider his presidency a yawning failure than see it as a rousing success.

Of course, good journalism exists. It is not the first time that Annie Linskey of the Wall Street Journal chronicled Biden’s cognitive incapacity-- she did so in June-- but she wrote about it again yesterday.

The president’s slide has been hard to overlook. While preparing last year for his interview with Robert K. Hur, the special counsel who investigated Biden’s handling of classified documents, the president couldn’t recall lines that his team discussed with him. At events, aides often repeated instructions to him, such as where to enter or exit a stage, that would be obvious to the average person. Biden’s team tapped campaign co-chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg, a Hollywood mogul, to find a voice coach to improve the president’s fading warble. 

This meant that staff was charged with protecting Biden, from public scrutiny, and even from too many meetings with cabinet members.

The structure was also designed to prevent Biden, an undisciplined public speaker throughout his half-century political career, from making gaffes or missteps that could damage his image, create political headaches or upset the world order.

The system put Biden at an unusual remove from cabinet secretaries, the chairs of congressional committees and other high-ranking officials. It also insulated him from the scrutiny of the American public. 

It worked reasonably well, until the June 27 debate:

The strategies to protect Biden largely worked—until June 27, when Biden stood on an Atlanta debate stage with Trump, searching for words and unable to complete his thoughts on live television. Much of the Democratic establishment had accepted the White House line that Biden was able to take the fight to Trump, even in the face of direct evidence to the contrary.

Biden’s staff had known all about his decline. They accommodated and hid the truth from the public:

Yet a sign that the bruising presidential schedule needed to be adjusted for Biden’s advanced age had arisen early on—in just the first few months of his term. Administration officials noticed that the president became tired if meetings went long and would make mistakes. 

They issued a directive to some powerful lawmakers and allies seeking one-on-one time: The exchanges should be short and focused, according to people who received the message directly from White House aides. 

Ideally, the meetings would start later in the day, since Biden has never been at his best first thing in the morning, some of the people said. His staff made these adjustments to limit potential missteps by Biden, the people said. The president, known for long and rambling sessions, at times pushed in the opposite direction, wanting or just taking more time.

The White House denied that his schedule has been altered due to his age.

Staff saw that Biden had good and bad days, days when he could function and days that he could not:

If the president was having an off day, meetings could be scrapped altogether. On one such occasion, in the spring of 2021, a national security official explained to another aide why a meeting needed to be rescheduled. “He has good days and bad days, and today was a bad day so we’re going to address this tomorrow,” the former aide recalled the official saying.

Most officials and legislators could not get to see Biden. Among those who did, Sen. Joe Manchin:

One lawmaker who did get one-on-one time with Biden noticed that the president lacked stamina and heavily relied on his staff: Sen. Joe Manchin, the West Virginia 

Democrat-turned-independent who held up chunks of Biden’s legislative agenda during the first half of Biden’s term. Manchin said the job required a level of energy that he wasn’t sure Biden had been able to sustain….

Instead of Biden directing follow up, Manchin noticed that Biden’s staff played a much bigger role driving his agenda than he had experienced in other administrations. Manchin referred to them as the “eager beavers”—a group that included then-White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain. “They were going, ‘I’ll take care of that,’ ” Manchin said.

As for management, Biden was not very good at it. He rarely met with his cabinet and tended not to consult with them before making decisions.

Interactions between Biden and many of his cabinet members were relatively infrequent and often tightly scripted. At least one cabinet member stopped requesting calls with the president, because it was clear that such requests wouldn’t be welcome, a former senior cabinet aide said. 

One top cabinet member met one-on-one with the president at most twice in the first year and rarely in small groups, another former senior cabinet aide said. 

Multiple former senior cabinet aides described a top-down dynamic in which the White House would issue decisions and expect cabinet agencies to carry them out, rather than making cabinet secretaries active participants in the policymaking process. Some of them said it was hard for them to discern to what degree Biden was insulated because of his age versus his preference for a powerful inner circle.

Gone was any semblance of spontaneity. When Joe was going to answer questions from an audience, Biden’s staff collected the right questions and provided Joe with the answers. One thing they did not want was to have him speak off the cuff. Funnily enough, his vice president was similarly incompetent at interviews.

At some events, the Biden campaign printed the pre-approved questions on notecards and then gave donors the cards to read the questions. Even with all these steps, Biden made flubs, which confounded the donors who knew that Biden had the questions ahead of time.

Some donors said they noticed how staff stepped in to mask other signs of decline. Throughout his presidency—and especially later in the term—Biden was assisted by a small group of aides who were laser focused on him in a far different way than when he was vice president, or how former presidents Bill Clinton or Obama were staffed during their presidencies, people who have witnessed their interactions said.

Basically, all of those surrounding Joe Biden knew that he was enfeebled and mentally impaired. And yet, for years they covered up the truth, lying as though their careers depended on it. The problem was, foreign leaders were not so easily fooled and tricked. 

And besides, with the exception of Annie Linskey, the mainstream media colluded with the Biden administration. They were part of the cover-up. Don’t hold your breath waiting for them to admit fault and to apologize for their dereliction.

Please subscribe to my Substack, for free or preferably for a fee.