Biden appears in public after cancer diagnosis announcement (VIDEO)
Former US President Joe Biden has made his first public appearance since revealing he has stage 4 prostate cancer. His office confirmed on May 18 that the 82-year-old was diagnosed with an aggressive, hormone-sensitive prostate cancer that spread to his bones.
Speaking to reporters at Bradley International Airport in Connecticut on Friday, where he attended his grandson's graduation, Biden said he was 'feeling great' despite the diagnosis. The former president was accompanied by former First Lady Jill Biden.
Medical experts have questioned how such advanced cancer had gone unnoticed, noting that a Gleason score of 9 is typically caught through routine screening. A Biden spokesperson said on Tuesday that the former president had not been tested for the illness in over a decade, adding that his last known PSA test was in 2014 and that he had never received a prostate cancer diagnosis before last week.
A post shared by WTNH News 8 (@wtnh8)
President Donald Trump claimed Biden's aides used his condition to push unauthorized policies, calling it 'treason at the highest level.' Vice President J.D. Vance questioned whether Biden was capable of leading. 'I don't think he was able to do a good job for the American people,' he said.
Republican Senators Ron Johnson and John Cornyn have called for investigations into whether Biden's condition was concealed while he was in office. Johnson told Axios that he plans to seek testimony from a 'couple dozen people' who had or should have 'direct contact' with Biden. Cornyn released a letter to US Attorney General Pam Bondi calling for an investigation into whether the public was deliberately misled.
The disclosure comes as a new book, 'Original Sin', alleges that Biden's staff concealed signs of mental decline during his presidency. The report has renewed criticism of his decision to run in 2024, before he withdrew following a poor debate performance.
The former president has denied claims that he suffered from mental decline, saying: 'there's nothing to sustain that.' Separately, following the Democratic Party's defeat in the 2024 presidential election, Biden said he could have won the election had he remained in the race.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
Mission: Regrettable – Ukraine's drone strike blows up in its face
For most people, June 1st is a cheerful date – the start of summer, a celebration of children. But from 2025 onward, it may also be remembered as the day Ukraine launched its largest covert operation in Russia since the start of the conflict. While the full impact of the operation is still unclear, estimates suggest anywhere from a handful to several dozen Russian aircraft were damaged or destroyed. The precise details will likely remain shrouded in speculation. What is certain, however, is that the Russian military must rethink how it defends strategic facilities. The traditional approach – based on intercepting missiles and deploying advanced air-defense systems – has proven inadequate against cheap drones that can be assembled from off-the-shelf parts and launched from almost anywhere. That lesson is now painfully clear. But the military will draw its own conclusions. Our focus should be on the political meaning of what happened. Make no mistake – this was not just a military act. Like much of what Ukraine does, this was political theater, staged for a very specific audience: Donald Trump. Kiev's objective was simple. Derail the Istanbul negotiations and paint Russia as the intransigent party. How? By provoking a furious response – one that would make headlines, stir outrage inside Russia, and force Moscow to walk away from the table. The idea was to provoke a reaction that Ukraine could then parade before Washington. The message? 'See? We told you they don't want peace. Arm us more!' It's not the first time they've tried this tactic. From the attack on the Kursk Bridge to the shelling of Donbass civilians, Ukraine has repeatedly used provocation as a diplomatic weapon – seeking to engineer Russia's diplomatic isolation by sabotaging any steps toward negotiation. And yet, once again, it didn't work. Despite outrage from parts of Russian society, Moscow did not take the bait. Our delegation flew to Istanbul as planned. There, negotiators presented Ukraine with a memorandum reiterating the same terms previously offered. Not a step back. At the same time, humanitarian agreements were reached – including a new exchange of prisoners and the return of fallen fighters' remains. So did Russia 'turn the other cheek'? Hardly. Moscow has adopted a strategy one might call an 'Italian strike' – doing the bare minimum to deny our enemies a propaganda victory, while withholding the kind of breakthroughs that would reward bad-faith behavior. Yes, the humanitarian measures agreed upon in Istanbul are important. But let's not kid ourselves – they are not steps toward a peace settlement. Politically, the situation is unchanged. However, there is a deeper issue now at play – one with far more serious implications. On June 1st, Ukrainian forces didn't just target military bases. They targeted components of Russia's nuclear deterrent. Under our official doctrine, an attack on the strategic nuclear infrastructure is grounds for the use of nuclear weapons. Now, no one is suggesting we nuke Kiev over a few aircraft, no matter how advanced or expensive. That would be disproportionate. But here lies the paradox: If Russia does nothing, it risks undermining the credibility of its own deterrence posture, and that sends a dangerous message. In the Western capitals and among Ukrainian hawks, there are already whispers: 'If they didn't respond to this, maybe they'll tolerate even more.' That may sound absurd – but that's how these people think. Their fantasies become policy more often than one would like. So what is the answer? Let's be honest: repeating slogans like 'our response will be success on the battlefield' won't cut it here. Ukraine's leadership isn't acting out of military logic, but emotional desperation. Their calculation is political. So Russia's response must be political, too – emotionally resonant, unmistakably firm, and, above all, creative. This doesn't mean rash escalation, but we can't rely on the old playbook. Hitting the same military targets again and again achieves little. Striking Ukraine's energy infrastructure? Done. Launching another missile as a 'demonstration'? Predictable. Escalating to mass casualties? Unnecessary and, frankly, counterproductive. So what's left? Innovation. Russia must now think asymmetrically. That might mean a covert action so unexpected that it catches Ukraine completely off guard. Or it could involve striking symbolic targets that shift the psychological balance. The key is to remind Kiev – and its patrons – that nothing they do goes unanswered, and that the cost of provocation will always outweigh the benefit. In truth, Russia has spent too long responding conventionally to a conflict that is anything but conventional. Our adversaries deal in optics, symbols, and theater. To counter that effectively, we must speak the same language – without abandoning our principles or resorting to theatrics of our own. The June 1st attack was not a turning point. But it was a warning. Not just about drones or airfields, but about perception and power. The next move, as always, is Russia's to make. And this time, it must be something they don't article was first published by the online newspaper and was translated and edited by the RT team
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
‘Bone-crushing' Russia sanctions bill could crush US trade
The passage of a new US sanctions package on Russia could disrupt America's relationships with its biggest trade partners and isolate it from the world's leading economies, Politico reported on Saturday. The proposed bill includes a steep 500% tariff on imports from any country that continues to buy oil, gas, uranium, or other key commodities from Moscow. Among those most affected would be India and China, which together account for approximately 70% of Russian energy exports. Several other nations that import Russian energy and uranium could also be subject to the bill's penalties. Imposing 500% tariffs on Chinese-made imports would likely trigger a surge in consumer prices, severely disrupt supply chains, and potentially push US unemployment to levels associated with a recession, Politico noted. The sanctions could be described as targeting the US itself since the country continues to rely on enriched uranium imports from Russia for its nuclear power sector. And it could effectively isolate the US from many of the world's leading economies, including its European allies, the article says. US Senator Rand Paul wrote in the publication Responsible Statecraft that the bill 'essentially amounts to an embargo' and could trigger 'economic calamity on a scale never before seen in our country.' He added that such punitive measures are unlikely to change Moscow's core strategic goals and only further entrench the US in a 'failing' foreign policy approach. The sanctions bill was introduced in early April by a bipartisan group of senators led by Republican Senator Lindsey Graham and Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal. In addition to 500% tariffs, the measure includes secondary sanctions targeting countries that maintain commercial ties with Moscow. Graham recently proposed amendments to exempt countries providing military aid to Ukraine from the tariffs. The change would shield the EU, which continues to import gas from Russia. The senator described the bill as 'one of the most draconian sanctions bills ever written' and the sanctions as 'bone-crushing.' Russia has consistently criticized Western sanctions, calling them illegal, and maintains that they have failed to inflict lasting economic damage. In March, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that a total of 28,595 sanctions had been imposed on Russian companies and individuals in recent years – more than the total number on all other countries combined. According to the president, the West sought to eliminate Russia as a competitor, but its economy has only grown more resilient under pressure.
Russia Today
7 hours ago
- Russia Today
Musk deletes Trump-Epstein post
Elon Musk has deleted an X post claiming that US President Donald Trump's name was in the sealed Jeffrey Epstein files, suggesting that this is the real reason they remain classified. On Thursday, Musk wrote: 'Time to drop the really big bomb: @realDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public.' He added: 'Have a nice day, DJT! Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out.' In another inflammatory post no longer visible in the entrepreneur's X account, Musk responded 'yes' to a message that said 'Trump should be impeached' and Vice President JD Vance 'should replace him.' The businessman has not commented on the issue yet. Both posts became part of a public feud between Trump and Musk. During last year's election, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX set up and funded a pro-Trump political group, donating over $260 million, and was appointed in January to co-lead the newly established Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), tasked with reducing federal bureaucracy and wasteful spending. Musk stepped down last week. The rift started after the billionaire condemned Trump's massive tax-cut bill, which is estimated to add $2.4 trillion to the $36.2-trillion US debt over 10 years, calling it a 'disgusting abomination.' The US president then threatened to cancel federal contracts with Musk's companies. The clash then escalated into a series of jabs on social media. Musk accused the president of 'ingratitude' and threatened to paralyze the US space program by decommissioning the Dragon spacecraft. Trump, for his part, said that the tech billionaire had gone 'crazy' and claimed that Musk was actually upset because he 'took away his EV Mandate.' Following the feud, Tesla's shares dropped by about 14.2% on Thursday at market close, wiping roughly $152 billion off the value of the company. Trump Media stock also fell 8%. Trump had previously pledged to declassify the Epstein files, and in February, US Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the release of the 'first phase' of documents. However, key materials – including flight logs, client names, and contact lists – have remained under seal, fueling speculation about who could be implicated. Epstein, an investment banker with deep connections to political and business elites, was arrested in July 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges. He died the following month in a New York jail in what was officially ruled a suicide, though his death instantly sparked widespread controversy and conspiracy theories.
