Biden accused of photoshopping himself into Easter family picture: ‘This is so bizarre'
Egg on his face!
The internet was abuzz Sunday as sleuths tried to figure out whether former President Joe Biden photoshopped himself into his family's Easter picture.
Biden, 82, posted a picture featuring his family sitting on some steps in Delaware — without scandal-scarred son Hunter Biden — on X.
Advertisement
The former president was apparently seated on the top step wearing a blue suit — but social media users quickly became skeptical of whether the octogenarian was actually there.
X users noted Biden's strange hand placement, the lighting on his face and his overall positioning, making it unclear if he's crouching or sitting behind his family.
Advertisement
Former first lady Jill Biden's hair also looks altered on her right side, where her husband's suit is, raising more alarm.
'I mean this is obviously photoshopped right? Is he supposed to be standing? Crouching down? This doesn't even look like a plausible physically position guys,' one social media user wrote.
'This is photoshop. Biden face is brightly lit from top/bottom. Everyone else's is diffused (shaded) Biden has no discernible shadow. Jill casts a shadow, Biden does not. Super awkward body position. Head size doesn't match depth line. Is [Joe Biden] alive?' wrote another.
'Is your forearm 4ft long?' wrote a third. 'With your arm at that angle, it's physically impossible for those to be your fingers. Who the hell is doing this crappy Photoshop job?'
Advertisement
Tennessee Star reporter Tom Pappert wrote: 'Why is Biden wearing a full suit and tie and TV makeup for this loving family photo'?
3 Social media users pointed out Biden's strange positioning behind his family and the weird hand placement.
X / @JoeBiden
3 The lighting on Biden's face looked slightly different from the rest of his family, X users said.
X / @JoeBiden
'Dude all politics aside, this is so bizarre. I don't understand the [special] arrangement of Joe in this picture. Everyone in the back row of the photo *except Joe* appears to be sitting. So why isn't he towering over them? Are we supposed to believe he's sitting or something?' wrote yet another X user.
Advertisement
Others jumped to Biden's defense, arguing he likely didn't photoshop the picture.
'I don't think Biden was actually photoshopped into this pic (the hand is on the guy's back in front of him), but he still looks as photoshopped as they come. If they were gonna photoshop him in, they would definitely have made it look less obvious,' wrote social media user RedEaglePatriot.
3 The photoshop speculation comes after years of White House staffers claiming Biden was in top physical shape — only for voters to see him blunder his first and only presidential debate with President Trump in the 2024 election.
REUTERS
The photoshop speculation comes after years of White House staffers claiming the former president was in top physical shape — only for voters to see Biden blunder his first and only presidential debate with President Trump in the 2024 election.
The former president has been largely out of the limelight since the Democrats lost in November, but he did deliver his first post-presidency speech in Chicago last week on Social Security.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
34 minutes ago
- USA Today
US appeals court won't reconsider Trump's $5 million loss to E. Jean Carroll
US appeals court won't reconsider Trump's $5 million loss to E. Jean Carroll A divided 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has left intact its Dec. 30 decision upholding a $5 million verdict against Donald Trump Show Caption Hide Caption Judges deliberating on Trump's E. Jean Carroll appeal Judges are deliberating on whether the jury that awarded E. Jean Carroll $5 million should have been allowed to hear other allegations. NEW YORK, June 13 (Reuters) - Donald Trump failed to persuade a federal appeals court to reconsider the $5 million verdict won by E. Jean Carroll after a jury found that the U.S. president sexually abused and defamed the former magazine columnist. A divided 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan on June 13 left intact its Dec. 30, 2024, decision upholding the jury award. Carroll, now 81, accused Trump of attacking her around 1996 in a Bergdorf Goodman department store dressing room in Manhattan, and defaming her in an October 2022 Truth Social post by denying her claim as a hoax. More: Trump loses appeal of sexual abuse and defamation judgment in E. Jean Carroll case Jurors decided in May 2023 that Trump had sexually assaulted Carroll, and defamed her by lying. They did not find that Trump raped Carroll, as she had claimed. More: Did Donald Trump rape E. Jean Carroll? Here's what a jury and judge said. In seeking reconsideration, Trump maintained that the trial judge erred in letting jurors review the 2005 "Access Hollywood" video of him bragging about his sexual prowess, and a "pile-on" of inflammatory evidence that he mistreated two other women. One, businesswoman Jessica Leeds, said Trump groped her on a plane in the late 1970s. The other, former People magazine writer Natasha Stoynoff, said Trump forcibly kissed her at his Mar-a-Lago estate in 2005. Trump has denied their claims. More: Jury finds Donald Trump liable in civil sex abuse case of E. Jean Carroll Trump, who turns 79 on June 14, is separately appealing an $83.3 million jury verdict in January 2024 for defaming Carroll and damaging her reputation in June 2019, when he first denied her claim about the Bergdorf encounter. The president is arguing in that appeal that the U.S. Supreme Court's decision last July providing him substantial criminal immunity shields him from liability in Carroll's civil case. In his 2019 and 2022 denials of Carroll's accusations, Trump said she was "not my type" and had made up the rape claim to promote her memoir.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
U.S. Steel shares slip as Nippon Steel faces Trump's hurdle over control
(Reuters) -Shares of U.S. Steel dipped in premarket trading after a Nippon Steel executive told the Japanese Nikkei newspaper that its planned acquisition of the company required "a degree of management freedom" to go ahead, after President Donald Trump said he would exercise "total control" over the U.S. steelmaker. The comments signal that last-minute discussions continue regarding the structure of the deal, which was opposed by then-U.S. President Joe Biden and Trump when it was first proposed. Trump said on Thursday that the U.S. will have "a golden share" in U.S. Steel. "It's 51% ownership by Americans," Trump said while speaking to reporters at the White House. He did not provide details on how the arrangement would be structured. The $14.9 billion deal was first announced in December 2023 to opposition across the U.S. political spectrum, and has run a long, uncertain route in the year-and-a-half since. U.S. Steel shares fell 4% in premarket trading on Friday. Trump's public comments, ranging from welcoming a simple "investment" in U.S. Steel by the Japanese firm to floating a minority stake for Nippon Steel, have created confusion. Last month, Trump told reporters the deal still lacked his final approval, leaving unresolved whether he would allow Nippon Steel to take ownership. Sign in to access your portfolio
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Factory jobs aren't the future working Americans want
Undaunted by his predecessor's failure to spark a manufacturing renaissance, President Trump also dreams of reindustrializing America. He won't succeed either, because no president has the power to undo a half-century of post-industrial evolution. Why have our two oldest presidents fixated on 'bringing back' factory jobs? Both grew up in the '50s, when the United States bestrode a war-ravaged world like an industrial colossus. But the answer isn't just nostalgia for a lost 'golden age.' There's also a pervasive feeling that our country owes a promissory note to working families hit hard by deindustrialization. The disappearance of manufacturing jobs with decent pay and benefits — traditionally their ticket from high school to the middle class — has undermined their living standards and social standing. Since 1971, the share of Americans who live in lower-income households has increased, reports the Pew Research Center: 'Notably, the increase in the share who are upper income was greater than the increase in the share who are lower income. In that sense, these changes are also a sign of economic progress overall.' The emergence of a highly educated upper middle class, however, is scant consolation to economically insecure working families. This divergence in the economic prospects of college and non-college workers is at the root of today's working-class revolt against political elites here and across Europe. Populists insist that the cure for economic inequality is more factory jobs. But is this really what working Americans want? Urged on by progressives, President Biden spent trillions to rebuild the economy 'from the middle out,' shelved trade in favor of tariffs and industrial policy, and tried to break up Big Tech companies that have supplanted yesterday's industrial giants. Yet Bidenomics delivered only marginal net gains in production jobs. President Trump thinks he can do better by taxing imports so much that manufacturers will be forced to locate production here lest they lose access to America's huge consumer market. Both approaches gloss over the fact that the U.S. still has a healthy manufacturing sector — in 2023, it was the world's second largest after China in terms of output. What's changed is that productivity gains and automation have combined to shrink factory employment. Since 1980, the share of U.S. workers in manufacturing has steadily declined to just over 8 percent. This trend away from labor-intensive production won't be reversed. The only way a high-wage country like ours can stay competitive in manufacturing is to make our factories more efficient. Meanwhile, nearly 80 percent of Americans make their living in service-oriented jobs. The Economist notes that the manufacturing wage premium is falling, and there are lots of jobs with decent pay available to workers without degrees in skilled trades, repair and maintenance, health care and tech-related fields. The digital economy, especially, has become a prodigious source of good jobs and careers for workers on either side of the diploma divide. A new analysis by my Progressive Policy Institute colleague Michael Mandel finds that, since 2019, employment in the tech/info/ecommerce sector — which encompasses broadband, cloud computing, software and data centers as well as online retail — has risen by 18 percent, compared to a 4 percent gain in the rest of the private sector. The average weekly pay is 47 percent higher than in other private sector jobs. Given these shifts in the locus of opportunity for working Americans, Trump's inflationary tariffs make no economic sense. They're best understood as reparations for past economic injuries suffered by his blue-collar base. Yet non-college Americans don't seem eager to return to assembly-line work. Asked in a PPI poll where in today's economy they see the best career opportunities for their children, only 13 percent picked manufacturing, while 44 percent chose 'the communications/digital economy, such as writing code, managing data or e-commerce.' Democrats should leave the smokestack reveries to Trump and the populist left and offer frustrated working families something different: A positive vision for how they can flourish in post-industrial America. Their top economic priority is getting the cost of living down. Perversely, Trump's tariffs do just the opposite. Democrats should offer full-throated opposition to protectionism and work to dismantle tariffs on U.S. friends and allies. They should also get out of their defensive crouch on trade. In a supreme irony, Trump's trade wars are making Americans free traders again. Not only are his tariffs unpopular, but voters now overwhelmingly say that trade improves their quality of life. Putting working families first also means cutting regressive taxes on work, fighting exclusionary zoning that drives housing prices out of reach and breaking up concentrated markets like food processing, ticketing and hospitals and health care providers to expand consumer choice and drive prices down. The centerpiece of a new Democratic offer to working families should be a new national commitment to guaranteeing 'high skills for all.' Non-college Americans, a majority of the electorate, need a more robust alternative to college: A post-secondary system of work-study opportunities that enable young people to get in-demand skills, credentials and work experience quickly and affordably. Key features of this twin-track approach to upward mobility include dramatically ramping up apprenticeships, eliminating degree requirement for all but highly technical jobs, expanding 'workforce Pell Grants' for high-quality training programs, creating work-study opportunities for all high school students and supporting innovative 'apprenticeship degrees' that enable people to earn money while earning degrees. President Trump isn't wrong that blue-collar workers have borne the brunt of deindustrialization. But his promise of a factory job boom is Fool's Gold. Instead, Democrats should offer working families a new deal that equips them to compete for the jobs that define America's future, not its past. Will Marshall is the founder and president of the Progressive Policy Institute.
