Biden aides discussed if president would need wheelchair if re-elected
President Joe Biden's aides had become so concerned about his physical deterioration that they'd reportedly discussed him using a wheelchair if he won re-election.
3 Former President Joe Biden is helped up after falling during the graduation ceremony at the United States Air Force Academy, just north of Colorado Springs in El Paso County, Colorado, on June 1, 2023.
AFP via Getty Images
The conversations, which were had in private among his advisers, were laid bare in a new book co-authored by CNN's Jake Tapper that details the lengths to which the Biden administration and its allies tried to 'cover-up' of his decline.
Advertisement
'Biden's physical deterioration — most apparent in his halting walk — had become so severe that there were internal discussions about putting the president in a wheelchair, but they couldn't do so until after the election,' Tapper and his co-author, Axios' Alex Thompson, wrote in 'Original Sin.'
The aides noted it was politically untenable to have an 81-year-old Biden appear on the campaign trail in a wheelchair, according to an excerpt of the book published by Axios.
3 Biden trips as he walks onto stage to deliver a speech at the Paddington Town Hall in Sydney on July 20, 2016.
AFP via Getty Images
Advertisement
3 Biden falls running up the stairs to board Air Force One on March 19, 2021.
Reuters
'Given Biden's age, [his physician Kevin O'Connor] also privately said that if he had another bad fall, a wheelchair might be necessary for what could be a difficult recovery.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fox News
8 minutes ago
- Fox News
Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' cracks down on Biden's student loan 'scheme,' top Republican says
The chairman of a key Senate panel is claiming victory against former President Joe Biden's student loan plans as part of President Donald Trump's "one big, beautiful bill." "The Biden administration was attempting to forgive student loans for people who willingly took on the loan and required the taxpayer, including people who never went to college and would never make what the person who took the loan would ever have the hope to make," Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee Chairman Bill Cassidy, R-La., told Fox News Digital. "So we end that transfer of that student loan on the taxpayers, and that's probably our biggest savings." Cassidy's committee released its portion of the Trump agenda bill late on Tuesday. A press release for the legislation said it "ends Biden's student loan schemes that transfer debt onto the 87 percent of Americans who chose to not go to college or already paid off their loans" and "also prevents future Democrat administrations from implementing schemes." The bill specifically takes aim at Biden's expansion of Borrower Defense to Repayment regulations and Closed School Discharge regulations, which Republicans have held up as costly policies that shift federal student loan borrowers' burdens onto other taxpayers. Various versions of Biden's plans had previously been struck down in court. The bill would also eliminate federal Grad PLUS loans, a program used by graduate-level and professional students to pay for their studies, which can be used for graduate students' entire cost of attendance. It would instead keep in place a $20,500 annual limit for Federal Direct Unsubsidized Loans on graduate degrees, capped at $100,000 total, excluding undergraduate loans. For professional degrees, it keeps a $50,000 annual unsubsidized loan limit and a $200,000 total cap. The legislation is also aimed at cracking down on taxpayer funding subsidizing degrees from lower-performing universities. Colleges that see people with undergraduate degrees earn less than the typical high school graduate in their state, or graduate programs where attendees then earn less than the normal bachelor's recipient, would be blocked from federal student loan programs. "What we've got was a situation where people can borrow more money than they can effectively pay back, and that destroys their life, leaving them with a debt burden which keeps them unable to do other things in life. And there's at least some sense that universities offering these programs know that's the case. And so we attempt to fix that," Cassidy said. "So we have provisions that would say that if the degree being acquired does not end up paying more, the person receiving that degree doesn't get more on average than a person who did not get that degree, then the federal government is not going to lend them money." To encourage more people to pursue non-collegiate degrees, the bill would also establish a Workforce Pell Grant. Pell Grants are currently aimed at low-income students pursuing bachelor's degrees and are generally not repaid. "For example, a student gets a commercial driver's license. They're going to go out and make $100,000 a year after a couple of years of driving, I am told. And so we want to enable those people to accomplish that," Cassidy said. Foreign income would be taken into account when evaluating Pell Grants, while farm and small business assets would not, under the GOP bill. Those and several other measures in the legislation would add up to roughly $300 billion in taxpayer savings, Cassidy said. Senate Republicans are currently working through their version of Trump's massive agenda bill, which passed the House late last month. Republicans are using the budget reconciliation process to pass a sweeping bill advancing Trump's agenda on taxes, immigration, energy, defense and the national debt. They are also working to use it to bring down the national debt – nearing $37 trillion – with the aim of cutting $1.5 trillion in federal spending. Reconciliation allows the party in power to completely skirt the minority, in this case Democrats, by lowering the Senate's threshold to advance from 60 votes to 51. The legislation must adhere to a specific set of rules, however, including measures that deal with the budget, taxation, or the national debt. Both the House and Senate must agree to identical versions of the bill before it gets to Trump's desk for a signature. The House's version passed 215 to 214, and leaders there have implored the upper chamber to change as little as possible. Cassidy acknowledged there were some changes made but was optimistic about how they'll be met in the House. "There's several things, but one thing I think that they're going to like is that we do fully fund the Pell Grant program. You know, we address the shortfall there. And so I think they're going to like it," he said. "It's going to give low-income students access to career education. We need those kind of career type jobs to make sure that all this manufacturing and construction has a workforce to address it. And so we think it helps the needs of society. We think it helps the needs of the student." House and Senate GOP leaders had previously set a goal of having a bill on Trump's desk by the Fourth of July. Cassidy declined to comment on whether that was a feasible benchmark but argued that lawmakers should be ready to extend that timeline – and possibly shrink their summer recess – to get the final product. "As far as I'm concerned, the most important thing is to get it right. So if there is a delay, the president said it today – if there is a delay, that's not that big of a deal. The most important thing is we get it right," he said.
Forbes
21 minutes ago
- Forbes
Climate Capital Goes Global As U.S. Turns Inward
An aerial view shows solar panels at the fishing-solar complementary photovoltaic power generation ... More base in Lianyungang, in eastern China's Jiangsu province on July 31, 2024. (Photo by AFP) / China OUT (Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images) There's an old adage in politics: presidents propose, but markets dispose. That has never felt more true than in today's climate investment landscape. In the wake of President Donald Trump's return to the White House, a quiet recalibration is underway. Investors—global and clear-eyed—are responding not with panic, but with poise. According to Robeco's 'Global Climate Investing Survey 2025,' a new study covering more than 300 institutional investors managing over $31 trillion in assets, the message is clear: the climate investment story is far from over. In fact, many believe it's only pausing before a stronger rebound. Yes, a shift is happening, as only 46% of investors now say climate change is central or significant to their investment policy, down from 62% last year. But the story isn't one of retreat—it's one of resilience. Across Europe and Asia-Pacific, where policy support remains robust, climate remains a top priority for over 60% of investors. Even in North America, where the dip has been most pronounced, many are choosing not to disengage, but to diversify. Shifting Strategy, Not Commitment The data shows we are not yet seeing a mass exodus from climate investing, but rather a strategic rerouting. Nearly 60% of investors say they're waiting to see how U.S. policy develops before making major moves in sectors likely to be impacted. But what's striking isn't the caution—it's the confidence. A majority—56%—believe the impact of current U.S. policies will be temporary. They're not abandoning climate goals; they're simply adapting their timelines. Similarly, 53% say that while the Trump administration may slow down their portfolio decarbonization efforts, it won't stop them. Less than a third believe it will derail their net-zero ambitions altogether. In fact, the long-term picture is anything but bleak. Nearly two-thirds of respondents expect climate change to become central or significant to their investment policies within the next two years, suggesting that today's lull is more of a policy-induced intermission than a structural shift. And even in the near term, optimism is driving action. A substantial 39% of respondents plan to increase investments in climate solutions. Top targets include electricity grid modernization (39%), renewables (34%), carbon capture and storage, sustainable real estate, and advanced battery technologies—all cited by nearly a third of respondents. The appetite is not shrinking; it's becoming smarter, more global, and more resilient. The Global Opportunity Awakens While some see the U.S. slowdown as a setback, others view it as an opening. Investors are expanding their horizons—and fast. Europe and Asia-Pacific are now emerging as prime destinations for climate capital, thanks to consistent policy signals and supportive regulatory environments. According to the survey, 58% of European and 62% of Asia-Pacific investors are more likely to look beyond the U.S. for climate-related opportunities. Even 38% of North American investors are eyeing international markets for deals in climate solutions and transition-aligned companies. This isn't just a geographic pivot. It's a sign that climate investing has truly gone global. No longer anchored solely to American leadership, the movement for climate-aligned capital is now distributed, diversified, and powered by a mosaic of policy environments. When investors look outside the U.S., they're not giving up—they're hedging against volatility and betting on stability. More than half of European and Asia-Pacific investors expect their own governments to maintain or increase net zero policies over the next five years. That's a compelling draw for global capital seeking policy clarity and long-term alignment. Resilience Is the Strategy Even in the trickier terrain of climate adaptation—where concerns about returns and investable products remain—there's growing recognition of future opportunity. Around half of investors believe climate resilience will become a major growth theme for equity markets in the next three to five years. While barriers persist, from product scarcity to uncertainty around risk-adjusted returns, the seeds of progress are being planted. As Lucian Peppelenbos, Robeco's Climate and Biodiversity Strategist, put it: 'While many investors remain committed to climate goals, the overall prioritization of climate change in investment strategies is showing signs of decline, particularly at the global level.' But even in that realism lies a thread of hope: the commitment remains. What's changing is how and where investors are pursuing those goals. In other words, we are witnessing not a retreat from climate, but a rebalancing—one shaped by political currents but ultimately steered by long-term vision. What this moment reveals is something deeper about markets: they have memory. Investors remember the rapid expansion of clean energy investment under Biden. They see how quickly capital can flow when policy aligns with innovation. And many believe that will happen again—sooner than we might think. Trump's administration may be testing the climate economy's political resilience, but it has not shaken the foundational conviction that the energy transition is inevitable—and investable. The climate investment story isn't ending. It's just flipping to a global chapter, with new characters, new settings, and the same central conflict. And that story, investors believe, still ends in net-zero. The plot may twist, but the arc bends toward decarbonization.
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'We have to try everything': Vanuatu envoy taking climate fight to ICJ
Tired of pleading for countries to act on climate change, Vanuatu upped the ante -- it asked the world's highest court if governments were legally obligated to do something about it. The landmark case has given Ralph Regenvanu a front row seat to history. As Vanuatu's environment minister, he has taken the decades-long climate fight by Pacific nations to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, hoping to safeguard their islands' survival. Regenvanu has called the case among the most consequential "in the history of humanity". A ruling could come as early as next month. This interview, conducted by AFP on the sidelines of the UN Ocean Conference in Nice, France, has been edited for length and clarity: Q: Why did Vanuatu go to the ICJ? A: "We thought it was necessary to take a legal approach to the issue of climate change because we feel that the UNFCCC (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) process, which has been going for 30 years, has not done anywhere near enough. "We agreed to ramp down greenhouse gas emissions. We've seen the highest levels ever just recently. We've talked about climate finance. We haven't seen that. These pledges that were made in Paris? We've not seen them having any effect. "And so we wanted to see if we could get international law to actually start to impose some requirements." Q: Has it worked? "This request for an advisory opinion from the ICJ has been historic. It was the first request from the United Nations General Assembly for an advisory opinion that was unanimous. No country opposed requesting this. "It has also mobilised youth. There's this global climate justice movement of youth now, and we have many of them here (in Nice). It's really raised the consciousness and political savvy of youth to engage with these kinds of processes. "A lot of countries would talk about what they're doing on climate change. But when we got to the court, it became very clear that they weren't prepared to do what they were talking about. So it exposed the hypocrisy of a number of countries as well." Q: Do you think others will take the legal route? A: "We're going to have to do a far greater range of things outside these UN processes -- in courts, in each and every fora we can find, to push for real climate action. "We went to the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea -- we got an advisory opinion. We're waiting for an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the same question: the obligations of states to prevent greenhouse gas emissions, and what are they consequences if they don't. "Along with Fiji and Samoa, we've submitted a resolution to the Rome Statute -- the International Criminal Court -- for a new crime of ecocide to be created. That's in process. "We will continue to call for the strongest action in all fora including this one, the United Nations Ocean Conference. "Anything and everything we can -- because what we're doing is not enough." Q: Why keep going if you're constantly disappointed? A: "Going to the climate COPs is a very depressing exercise. Last year, for example, Papua New Guinea said we aren't going anymore. I could perfectly understand that. "The problem is, when we're not at the table, we're on the menu. And so we have to be there, so people see us and realise -- and hopefully have a little bit of conscience -- that there are these people in the world who are going to perish as a result of your actions." Q: Why is this ocean summit important? "The ocean has been feeding us. It's been our spiritual home. It's been our highway. It has been the basis of our cultural heritage, our identity. We've been surviving off the ocean for as long as we've existed, which is thousands of years. "And we see the change, and the change is impacting us. We know that if we don't address climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, and if we don't take serious steps to reverse global warming, but also keep the biodiversity that has always been sustaining us, it threatens our very existence." np/klm/giv
