This is the last time I'll write about the dinosaur legacy media's late "uncovering" of Joe Biden's decline — at least until the next time one of these professional liars tries to score a buck doing what they should have done in 2020, or 2022 at the very latest.
I shouldn't let it get to me, but every time an outlet like The Hill publishes a puff piece promoting a belated White House tell-all like “FIGHT: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House,” (co-authored by NBC News's Jonathan Allen and The Hill's own Amie Parnes), it makes me want to gnaw through my elbows.
The Hill's writeup says that Parnes and Allen reveal the "extensive steps to cover up the signs of Biden’s aging and contingency planning if Biden chose to step aside or even died in office."
"FIGHT" treats us to stories like the time Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) "needed to note personal details to remind Biden of who he is" at a White House picnic and the fluorescent tape staffers would line hallways with to show The Most Powerful Man in the World™ where to walk.
Here's the best bit:
To cover up the physical signs of Biden’s aging, a makeup artist met with him in the morning when he traveled. The artist also covered up aging signs before Zoom calls with his aides.
Biden consistently made these makeup appointments, but he sometimes canceled the briefings that were to follow.
Biden's preening vanity has always been comical but that tidbit just puts it over the top, doesn't it?
If any of this sounds familiar, it's because I wrote about "FIGHT" last week in the context of how Vice President Kamala Harris and her team had planned for every contingency during Joe Biden's slow, graceless exit from office — except for the part where she was a terrible candidate.
Today, let's discuss the book's authors, two D.C. insiders who somehow missed the biggest yet most obvious coverup in Washington history. You know — the story you've been reading here at PJ Media for years.
For what it's worth — a lot, considering the crux of this column — I went through 18 months of Parnes' reports for The Hill and found almost nothing about Biden's slow fade.
One report was headlined "5 worries keeping Biden, Democrats up at night," and neither his age nor obvious decline was among the five. That was in April of 2024. Another report from that month briefly admitted that "cameras have caught [Biden] stumbling at times," but was framed as yet another "Republicans pounce!" moment.
Plus: "At times" — really?
I found even less from Allen, despite him serving as NBC's Senior National Politics Reporter.
Like CNN during the Saddam Hussein regime, were Allen and Parnes afraid of losing their precious access if they reported the truth? Or were they cogs in the DNC propaganda machine that insisted that Biden was "sharp as a tack" right up until they couldn't get away with it any longer?
I don't doubt that Parnes and Allen were able to get plenty of juicy insider quotes to help sell their book. They're well-connected and now that Biden is safely out of office, it's safe for them to cash in on the story they somehow missed while it was fresh.
But it's a reporter's job to break news, not report stale gossip.
"FIGHT" might have been worth buying if it had any fight in it. But this is a limp cash grab that came too late to matter and is too stale to sell. Aside from a few gossipy details, “FIGHT” is old news, suitable only for the remainder bin.
Recommended: There's Something Very Suspicious Going on With Those Tesla Protests
P.S. Thanks so much for reading. If you'd like to join some of the smartest voices on the internet in our Virtually Troll-Free™ comments section — plus access to exclusive essays, podcasts, and video live chats with your favorite writers — consider becoming a VIP member with this 60% off promotion offer. Just use the promo code FIGHT when you sign up for your new VIP membership! Providing alternative conservative news and commentary ain't free (but right now, it IS cheap).
Join the conversation as a VIP Member