[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
National News See other National News Articles Title: Biden's Explanation of His Dropout Appears to Confirm Fears About Who's Really Running Things Biden's Explanation of His Dropout Appears to Confirm Fears About Who's Really Running Things Story by Michael Schwarz • 12 August 2024 CBS Sunday Morning / YouTube Screen Shot If President Joe Biden still had the cognitive ability to do the bidding of the deep state without letting slip something that might give away the game, then rest assured that he would have remained the Democratic Party's presidential nominee, and the polls almost certainly would have told a different story about his chances in the 2024 election. The United States' shadow government of three-letter agencies, however, can no longer trust the verbally incontinent Biden as their puppet. Thus, he had to go. In a rare sit-down interview with CBS' Robert Costa on Sunday, Biden spewed his usual gibberish while simultaneously contradicting himself and probably revealing more than he should have about who really forced him to withdraw from the presidential race late last month. "Look, polls we had showed that it was a neck-and-neck race, would have been down to the wire," Biden said of his now-abandoned contest against former President Donald Trump. "But what happened was a number of my Democratic colleagues in the House and Senate thought that I was gonna hurt them in the races," he added. The gaslighting never ends. After all, if polls showed a tight race, then how could Biden hurt down-ballot Democrats? Furthermore, in that case why would Biden find those arguments from his Democrat colleagues convincing? Then came another and even more revealing expression of phony selflessness from the president. "And I was concerned if I stayed in the race that would be the topic. You'd be interviewing me about why did Nancy Pelosi say, why did so -- " Biden said before trailing off in his trademark way of not finishing a thought. In other words, the president claimed that he wanted to avoid the "distraction." He said this despite repeatedly clinging to his campaign in the weeks following his mental collapse during the June 27 presidential debate against Trump. From that point in the interview, Biden's lies multiplied. "Number two, when I ran the first time I thought of myself as being a transition president," he said. Never mind that until his sudden withdrawal from the race and corresponding endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris -- the party's new presidential nominee -- Biden had given no hint of his "transition president" expectations. In fact, less than two weeks before quitting the race, he had sent a defiant letter to Democrat lawmakers demanding that the party unite around his candidacy. Next came a slew of nonsense followed by the obligatory paean to "democracy." "I can't even say how old I am. It's hard for me to get it out of my mouth. And, but things got moving so quickly it didn't happen. And the combination was that I thought it was a critical issue for me still is not a joke maintaining this democracy," he said. What didn't happen? What combination? And how can this addled man make decisions at a time when World War III appears closer than ever? For the rest of the interview, Biden dredged up old hoaxes. In light of his mental state, one cannot say whether he actually believed them. Either way, readers with high tolerance for gibberish and Soviet-style propaganda may watch the interview below. The relevant portion began around the :39 mark. Of course, Biden's reference to Democratic Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California, the former House speaker, appeared to confirm that the president felt pressured by party leaders who expressed concerns about his electoral prospects, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries. Former President Barack Obama also reportedly wanted Biden out of the race. We should consider, however, the high probability that those party leaders acted on behalf of their deep state masters. After all, Biden cited polls. And we know that pollsters can make polls tell any story that powerful people want them to tell. Remember, for instance the closing weeks of the 2020 election. In Ohio, the final RealClearPolling aggregate of polls showed Trump clinging to a 1-point lead over Biden. But Trump prevailed in the Buckeye State by a margin of 8.2 points. Thus, the supposedly professional pollsters underestimated Trump's support by a gargantuan 7.2 points in Ohio. RCP polling averages also suppressed Trump's actual support by significant margins in Iowa (6.2), Wisconsin (6.0), Texas (4.5) and Florida (4.2). Do establishment pollsters make those kinds of mistakes by accident? Or do they use polls to generate a narrative that makes the outcomes they want appear plausible to the public? In short, pre-debate polls might have looked much better for Biden had the deep state wanted a second Biden term. Indeed, that unusually early debate almost certainly would not have happened, nor would the establishment media have immediately adopted the "Biden must go" narrative, had powerful people not already decided to cashier a president whom they could no longer control. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||