Staff Reports
The Washington Post recently revealed its hand, begrudgingly admitting what conservatives have been saying for years: Joe Biden’s cognitive decline is real, and the cover-up orchestrated by his inner circle is perhaps more scandalous than his forced exit from the presidential race. In a feeble attempt to backtrack from previous narratives, the Post’s editorial board has finally come out to acknowledge that Biden shouldn’t have even considered seeking reelection. Yet, the questions that linger about who knew what and when remain as pressing as ever.
In what can only be described as a masterclass in political gaslighting, the mainstream media has spent Biden’s presidency dismissing conservatives as alarmists for daring to point out the obvious—Biden’s frequent stumbles, lapses in memory, and overall incoherence. RedState has chronicled these blunders exhaustively while the media conspired to label these reports as “out of context” or “cheap fakes.” But after Biden’s disastrous debate performance, even his staunchest defenders were left scrambling, unable to spin the undeniable evidence of his decline.
Jonathan Turley Skewers the WaPo Over Belated Admission on Biden's Decline and the White House Coverup https://t.co/1l2md8PjdF
— Michael J. Fell (@MichaelJFell) August 21, 2024
In a recent editorial, the Washington Post did a remarkable job of washing its hands of responsibility. The piece claimed Biden’s abdication of power deserved recognition, but it also slipped in the admission that his struggles had been long apparent. It appears the Post is attempting to divert attention away from the considerable deception surrounding Biden’s decline, suggesting instead that he would have been better off if he had lived up to his supposed role as a “transitional figure.”
Jonathan Turley, a legal scholar and frequent critic of media bias, has called attention to the convenient omissions in the Post’s commentary. He points out that Kamala Harris, who is now positioned as the party’s presumptive nominee, was part of the inner circle that concealed Biden’s decline. This raises the obvious question—how can she now claim to lead if she knew about her boss’s incapacities and said nothing? The media’s near-total silence on this front has been as deafening as it has been revealing.
What remains baffling is how the White House press corps, who presented themselves as diligent watchdogs of democracy, became complicit in a charade that benefited the Democratic establishment. They allowed the administration to create a myth of Biden’s sharpness while ignoring the very real concerns expressed by many credible voices. With the Washington Post finally acknowledging the lie, the words come too late and reek of desperation to maintain credibility.
Regardless of the election’s outcome, the fallout from this debacle will not be forgotten. It is essential for the public to hold accountable not just the Biden camp but also the media that sat idly by, enabling the charade. The focus must shift to the individuals, particularly Harris and the first lady, who chose to remain silent while knowing the truth. As the future unfolds, it is abundantly clear that the American people deserve better than a leadership cloaked in deceit and denial.
