Joe Biden took sleeping pills ahead of US Presidential debate, Hunter Biden reveals details about father's mental health
In a candid interview that is likely to reverberate across political circles, Hunter Biden offered a striking defence of his father, former US President Joe Biden , while revealing that the 81-year-old was prescribed Ambien, a sleep aid, ahead of the widely criticised 2024 presidential debate. Speaking on the Andrew Callaghan podcast , Hunter addressed growing concerns about the former president's cognitive performance and seized the opportunity to take pointed swipes at former aides to Barack Obama and critics within the Democratic Party.
The Hunter Biden interview marks one of the most forceful rebuttals from the Biden family as the former US President faces mounting pressure from some factions of his party, following his underwhelming debate performance against Republican challenger and current President Donald Trump.
According to Hunter Biden , the former president's poor debate showing was not the result of a diminished mental state but a combination of an exhausting travel schedule and the use of prescription sleep medication.'I know exactly what happened in that debate,' Hunter said, offering a personal glimpse into the days leading up to the high-stakes event. 'He flew around the world… the mileage that he could have flown around the world three times. He's 81 years old. He's tired as s---. They give him Ambien to be able to sleep.'
Hunter explained that the elder Joe Biden , upon stepping onto the debate stage, appeared 'like a deer in the headlights,' which, in his view, fed into pre-existing narratives questioning the then president's stamina and sharpness.
Hunter's remarks come in the wake of media speculation and Democratic murmurs about whether Biden should have continued his 2024 campaign. In a striking departure from Democratic unity, Hunter Biden lashed out at former members of the Obama administration and prominent Democratic operatives, accusing them of undermining his father's credibility and political future.'I hear Rahm Emanuel is going to run for president,' Hunter said with derision, also targeting Obama strategist David Axelrod . He reserved particular contempt for the hosts of Pod Save America , describing them as 'White millionaires dining out on their association with Barack Obama from 16 years ago, living in Beverly f---ing Hills telling the rest of the world what Black voters in South Carolina really want.'
The Hunter Biden interview also challenged the narrative that Joe Biden was the consensus Democratic choice in 2020. 'Bull----,' he said. 'We lost Iowa. We lost New Hampshire. We came in second in Nevada… A lot of rural voters said, 'F--- you, we love Joe.' A lot of urban voters said, 'F--- you. We love Joe.'' Despite his criticism of party elites, Hunter mounted a strong defence of the president's policy record. He credited progressives within the Democratic Party — including Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , Bernie Sanders , and Ro Khanna — for recognizing the extent of the administration's accomplishments.'They said Joe Biden has got more of our agenda accomplished in four years than any president in history,' Hunter said. 'The largest investment into climate change in history, just that alone.'He pointed to the 2024 State of the Union address as a moment that 'knocked it out of the park' and asserted that the Democratic establishment has tested his father time and again, from debates to interviews like the one with ABC News' George Stephanopoulos.Turning the spotlight to his own controversies, Hunter Biden defended his artwork — a subject of Republican scrutiny and legal inquiry — claiming it has been unfairly portrayed as part of a larger corruption narrative.'They accused me of crimes for painting,' Hunter said. 'Not that I couldn't sell my paintings, but that it was a clear conspiracy to launder money and to curry influence by selling acrylic on canvas, through this abstract painting by Hunter Biden.'He dismissed the allegations as 'insane bull----,' arguing that the accusations of influence peddling through art sales were inconsistent with how critics overlook far more blatant practices by Trump associates.'These mother f---ers are selling gold telephones and sneakers and $2 billion investments in golf courses… Meanwhile, they accuse me of international corruption because I sell paintings,' he quipped.In his wide-ranging remarks, Hunter did not shy away from slamming Donald Trump Jr. , who he alleged was engaging in transparent influence peddling through an exclusive new club.'Don Jr. is opening a club called the Executive Club in Georgetown,' Hunter said. 'It is promised that you will be able to rub shoulders — at the cost of a $500,000 initiation fee — with… people and decisionmakers in the cabinet of his father.'Hunter contrasted this with the speculative narratives around his own conduct, saying, 'If you believe the worst possible thing that they've ever said about me… what they are openly doing, they're openly doing. And nobody's batting an eye.' Hunter Biden attributed Joe Biden's underwhelming debate performance to exhaustion and the use of Ambien, a prescription sleep aid. He rejected claims of cognitive decline, saying his father was 'tired as s---' after a hectic travel schedule and that the medication contributed to his uncharacteristic appearance on stage. Ambien is a sleep medication prescribed to help with insomnia. Hunter revealed that his father had been given Ambien in the days leading up to the 2024 debate, suggesting it may have affected his alertness during the event.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
42 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Judges Continue to Block Trump Policies Following Supreme Court Ruling
WASHINGTON—When the Supreme Court issued a blockbuster decision in June limiting the authority of federal judges to halt Trump administration policies nationwide, the president was quick to pronounce the universal injunction all but dead. One month later, states, organizations and individuals challenging government actions are finding a number of ways to notch wins against the White House, with judges in a growing list of cases making clear that sweeping relief remains available when they find the government has overstepped its authority. In at least nine cases, judges have explicitly grappled with the Supreme Court's opinion and granted nationwide relief anyway. That includes rulings that continue to halt the policy at the center of the high court case: President Trump's effort to pare back birthright citizenship. Judges have also kept in place protections against deportations for up to 500,000 Haitians, halted mass layoffs at the Department of Health and Human Services, and prevented the government from terminating a legal-aid program for mentally ill people in immigration proceedings. To accomplish this, litigants challenging the administration have used a range of tools, defending the necessity of existing injunctions, filing class action lawsuits and invoking a law that requires government agencies to act reasonably: the Administrative Procedure Act. It is a rare point of consensus among conservative and liberal lawyers alike: The path to winning rulings with nationwide application is still wide open. 'There are a number of highly significant court orders that are protecting people as we speak,' said Skye Perryman, president and chief executive of Democracy Forward, a liberal legal group that has brought many cases against the Trump administration. 'We're continuing to get that relief.' Conservative legal advocates also continue to see nationwide injunctions as viable in some circumstances. 'We're still going to ask for nationwide injunctions when that's the only option to protect our clients,' said Dan Lennington, a lawyer at the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, which has challenged race and sex-based preferences in federal policies. The Supreme Court's decision was long in the making, with Democratic and Republican administrations in turn chafing against their signature policies being held up by a single district court judge. The 6-3 ruling said that when judges find that the executive branch has acted unlawfully, their injunctions against the government can't be broader than what is needed to provide complete relief to the parties who sued. Trump's birthright policy would deny citizenship to children born in the U.S. unless one of their parents was a citizen or permanent legal resident. Judges in the weeks since the high court decision have ruled that blocking the policy everywhere remains the proper solution. On Friday, U.S. District Judge Leo Sorokin in Boston again said a ruling with nationwide application was the only way to spare the plaintiffs—a coalition of 20 Democratic-run states and local governments—from harm caused by an executive order he said was unconstitutional. The judge noted that families frequently move across state lines and that children are born in states where their parents don't reside. 'A patchwork or bifurcated approach to citizenship would generate understandable confusion among state and federal officials administering the various programs,' wrote Sorokin, 'as well as similar confusion and fear among the parents of children' who would be denied citizenship by Trump's order. In a separate decision last week involving a different group of states that sued Trump, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco reached a similar conclusion. Both rulings showed that state attorneys general remain well positioned to win broad injunctions against the federal government when they can demonstrate executive overreach. 'You've got these elite litigation shops in the states,' Tennessee's Republican attorney general, Jonathan Skrmetti, said of offices such as his. 'You're gonna figure out a way to continue to be one of the most active participants in the judicial system.' A New Hampshire judge has also blocked Trump's birthright order after litigants in that case, represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, used another pathway the Supreme Court left open: filing class-action lawsuits on behalf of a nationwide group of plaintiffs. Recent cases also underscore that the Administrative Procedure Act, long a basis for lawsuits against administrations of both parties, remains a potent tool. The law allows judges to set aside agency actions they deem arbitrary, capricious or an abuse of discretion. Judges have blocked Trump policies in a half-dozen cases in the past month under the APA, and in almost every instance have specifically said they aren't precluded in doing so by the Supreme Court. Zach Shelley, a lawyer at the liberal advocacy group Public Citizen, filed a case using the APA in which a judge this month ordered the restoration of gender-related healthcare data to government websites, which officials had taken down after an anti-transgender executive order from Trump. The act was the obvious choice to address a nationwide policy 'from the get-go,' Shelley said. District Judge John Bates in Washington, D.C., said administration officials ignored common sense by taking down entire webpages of information instead of removing specific words or statements that ran afoul of Trump's gender order. 'This case involves government officials acting first and thinking later,' Bates wrote. Nothing in the high court's ruling prevented him from ordering the pages be put back up, the judge said. The Justice Department argued that Trump administration officials had acted lawfully and reasonably in implementing the president's order to remove material promoting gender ideology. The department is still in the early stages of attempting to use the Supreme Court's ruling to its advantage, and legal observers continue to expect the decision will help the administration in some cases. In one, a New York judge recently narrowed the scope of a ruling blocking the administration's attempts to end contracts with Job Corps centers that run career-training programs for low-income young adults. If the lawsuit had instead been filed as a class action or litigated in a different way, though, 'the result may very well be different,' Judge Andrew Carter wrote. Write to Louise Radnofsky at Mariah Timms at and Jess Bravin at
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
Jay Leno on steering clear of politics on The Tonight Show: ‘Don't think anybody wants to hear lecture'
Jay Leno revisited his two-decade tenure on The Tonight Show in a candid conversation with David Trulio, President & CEO of the Reagan Foundation, explaining why he consistently avoided political humour. 'I like to think that people come to a comedy show to kind of get away from the things, the pressures of life, whatever it might be,' Leno said, adding, 'I love political humour, don't get me wrong, but what happens is people wind up cozying too much to one side or the other.' Leno was known for walking a fine line between humour and neutrality during his run from 1992 to 2009 (and again briefly from 2010 to 2014). He told Trulio that his strategy was simple: appeal to everyone. 'Why shoot for just half an audience? Why not try to get the whole?' 'I don't understand why you would alienate one particular group,' he said. 'Or just don't do it at all. I'm not saying you have to throw your support or whatever, but just do what's funny.' According to Fox News, Leno recalled receiving conflicting hate mail over the same jokes, with one viewer accusing him of siding with Republicans, and another calling him a Democratic sympathiser. 'And I go, 'Well, that's good.' That's how you get a whole audience,' he said. Leno's philosophy on comedy is simple. 'Funny is funny,' he told Trulio. 'I don't think anybody wants to hear a lecture.' He drew a contrast with the current political climate in comedy, where many late-night hosts have embraced explicit political opinions. 'Now you have to be content with half the audience because you have to give your opinion,' Leno noted. He pointed to his long friendship with fellow comedian Rodney Dangerfield as a model for apolitical comedy. 'I knew Rodney 40 years,' Leno said. 'I have no idea if he was Democrat or Republican. We never discussed, we just discussed jokes.' The interview comes just before CBS announced the cancellation of The Late Show with Stephen Colbert. As reported by CNN and Fox News, the network cited financial constraints, but the decision drew speculation about political motives, given Colbert's consistent criticism of Donald Trump. Weeks before the announcement, CBS and its parent company Paramount paid Trump $16 million in a settlement related to a 60 Minutes segment. Colbert had openly criticised the deal, calling it a 'big fat bribe' on-air. The show is now set to end in May 2026. (With inputs from CNN, Fox News)
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
2 hours ago
- First Post
Phone jammers, masked guards: Why Zohran Mamdani's lavish Uganda wedding bash is receiving flak
New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani, a Democratic socialist, is facing backlash over his three-day wedding celebrations with artist Rama Duwaji at his family's lavish compound in Uganda last week. As per reports, the property had tight security, with around nine masked guards watching one gate. The Indian-origin politician's festivities, however, have sparked anger. Here's why read more New York mayoral candidate, State Rep. Zohran Mamdani (D-NY) kisses the hand of his wife Rama Duwaji as they celebrate during an election night gathering at The Greats of Craft LIC on June 24, 2025 in the Long Island City neighborhood of the Queens borough in New York City on June 24. File Photo/AFP New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani has been in the limelight since besting Andrew Cuomo to win the Democratic nomination to run the city last month. The Indian-origin socialist's shocking victory has brought him to the centre stage of US politics. Besides his views, Mamdani has also been making headlines for his personal life. The 33-year-old, who married artist and animator Rama Duwaji in February, reportedly held a lavish three-day celebration to celebrate his wedding at his family's luxurious estate in Uganda last week. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The festivities, however, have sparked controversy. Here's why. Mamdani's wedding bash in Uganda Zohran Mamdani, the son of Indian filmmaker Mira Nair and renowned Ugandan academic Mahmood Mamdani, celebrated his wedding with Rama Duwaji, 27, at a lavish compound owned by his family in Uganda, as per a New York Post report. The private compound is located in the posh Buziga Hill area outside the capital city of Kampala. The neighbourhood is home to some of Uganda's richest, including billionaire businessman Godfrey Kirumira. Mamdani was born in Uganda and spent the first few years of his life there before moving to the US at the age of seven. The Queens politician returned to his birthplace to mark his love for his wife. Duwaji and Mamdani, who met on the dating app Hinge, had eloped in February. The couple hosted wedding celebrations at the compound guarded by masked security guards, with guests partying until midnight last week, reported New York Post. Mamdani's family home is secluded and spread over two acres of lush gardens, surrounded by trees, with at least three security gates. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD A witness told The Post that the security was so tight that one gate was being watched by around nine guards. 'Outside the Mamdani house were more than 20 special forces command unit guards, some in masks, and there was a phone-jamming system set up — and all for the strictly invite-only Mamdani event,' the witness added. Guests were served fruit juices and they danced to music from a local DJ last Thursday (July 24). As per a witness, Mamdani is believed to have addressed guests later that night, with the party ending after midnight. 'Then on Friday, inside the compound, there were military style tents being taken down when the party had finished,' they added. 'Then what looked like Mamdani personal security guards took over at the gates.' Mamdani had previously confirmed his trip to Uganda on his Instagram, saying he would stay there until the end of the month. Why Mamdani's wedding bash is facing flak Zohran Mamdani, who says he wants to raise taxes on the top one per cent of New Yorkers, is facing backlash over his reported extravagant wedding festivities. Andrew Cuomo, who is still in the NYC mayoral race as an independent, took a potshot at his rival. In a poll on X, he asked his followers to vote on whether Mamdani's three-day wedding was 'champagne socialism' or 'trust fund socialism.' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Correct term? — Andrew Cuomo (@andrewcuomo) July 27, 2025 Some locals found the wedding bash 'insensitive' as Uganda was in mourning for former Ugandan Supreme Court Judge George Kanyeihamba, who lived just three minutes from Mamdanis' house. Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni visited Kanyeihamba's residence to pay his last respects and 'the street was blocked by the president's cars,' a local was quoted as saying. 'Because of the culture here, it was insensitive to have a wedding celebration in the same week as mourning – or 'Okukungubaga' – as it's called here,' another told The Post. 'He has not even been buried, and we have his friends coming to give last words and to mourn before the burial next week, yet Mamdani is celebrating his wedding for three days,' the source added. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD As reports of Mamdani's lavish wedding celebrations surfaced, X users also took a jibe at the socialist candidate. One posted, 'Zohran Mamdani wants to ban all guns and defund the police, then flies to Uganda for his wedding, guarded by masked special forces at his family's multimillion-dollar compound. Socialism for thee, not for me.' Another user mocked him as 'man of the people'. 'Zohran Mamdani: Nothing says American like getting married on your family's luxury Uganda compound. A man of the people,' they wrote. 'Mamdani clearly doesn't see the irony—his wealth and lavish lifestyle, including that Uganda wedding bash with armed guards, stem directly from capitalism. As a self-proclaimed Democratic Socialist, he thrives while pushing policies like defunding the NYPD and rent freezes that could financially ruin everyone else,' another tweeted. With inputs from agencies
