Trump orders probe into 'who ran the US' after Biden's alleged cognitive decline
Donald Trump has signed a Presidential Memorandum ordering his administration to investigate whether former President Joe Biden was really running the United States
President Donald Trump is going after the legacy of his predecessor, 82-year-old Joe Biden, ordering an investigation into whether the ex-President was really running the United States, or if White House aides orchestrated a "conspiracy" to seize executive power due to his alleged "cognitive decline".
Released late on Wednesday (June 4), the Presidential Memorandum directs investigators to probe "who ran the United States while President Biden was in office," and ascertain if aides "conspired to deceive the public about Biden's mental state and unconstitutionally exercise the authorities and responsibilities of the President."
Many Democrat voters noticed Joe Biden's purported mental deterioration during last year's presidential debates, where the veteran politician struggled to speak clearly. Following those events, Biden compounded the perception with several missteps, such as mistakenly referring to Zelensky as "President Putin" in front of cameras.
The Trump administration is attempting to cast many of the executive actions and policy decisions made by Biden as illegitimate, claiming that staffers were using an autopen to sign documents without his input. "And you know what, they ought to find out who was using that autopen. Because whoever that person was, he or she was like the President of the United States," President Trump said in the memorandum.
An autopen is a device used to replicate people's signatures. Past presidents, including Trump himself, have frequently used one due to the large number of documents they need to sign.
He went on to say: "I think a President should sign it, not use an autopen.
"And we're going to find out whether or not he knew what the hell he was doing. ... So I think it's something that we should really look at because that's so important."
Trump accused the White House staff of making decisions on behalf of his predecessor, asserting that the American public was deliberately kept in the dark about who truly held executive power.The memo also stated: "The American public was purposefully shielded from discovering who wielded the executive power, all while Biden's signature was deployed across thousands of documents to effect radical policy shifts."
He went on to name Attorney General Pam Bondi and White House Counsel David Warrington to look into the autopen's usage, including "who authorized its use, and the validity of the resulting Presidential policy decisions."
These allegations come at a time when Joe Biden is under scrutiny, particularly due to claims made in CNN's Jake Tapper's latest tome 'Original Sin'. In his book, Tapper suggests insider knowledge by declaring: "Five people were running the country, and Joe Biden was at best a senior member of the board."
Trump's memorandum asserts that Biden "issued 1,200 Presidential documents, appointed 235 judges to the Federal bench," while he also displayed "cognitive deficiencies". Trump underscored his point by highlighting that Biden "used an autopen to execute the vast majority of Biden's executive actions," during the latter half of his tenure.
With Republicans applying pressure, former Biden aides are also now facing House of Representatives' calls for interviews. James Comer, Chairman of the crucial Oversight Committee, this week summoned five Democrat staffers over an alleged "cover up" he describes as "one of the greatest scandals in our nation's history."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court rejects Republican election-rule challenge in Pennsylvania
June 6 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court passed up a chance to give politicians more power over how federal elections are conducted, declining on Friday to hear a Republican challenge to a Pennsylvania judicial decision requiring the counting of provisional ballots cast by voters who make mistakes on their mail-in ballots. The justices turned away an appeal by the Republican National Committee and Republican Party of Pennsylvania of a decision by Pennsylvania's top court on provisional ballots that the plaintiffs said ran afoul of legislature-crafted voting rules, violating the U.S. Constitution's election-related provisions. The dispute returned to the Supreme Court after the justices, on the eve of the November 2024 presidential election, rejected the emergency bid by the Republicans to block tallying the provisional ballots. The Republicans objected to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's October ruling in favor of two Butler County voters who sought to have their provisional ballots counted after their mail-in ballots were rejected during that state's 2024 presidential primary election for lacking secrecy envelopes. Election rules in states like Pennsylvania that often play a pivotal role in determining the outcome of U.S. presidential elections are a particularly sensitive issue. Republican President Donald Trump prevailed in Pennsylvania last November, but lost the state in 2020 to his Democratic predecessor Joe Biden, who won the presidency that year. The case follows a major 2023 Supreme Court ruling that allows the justices to second-guess state courts if they undermine the power that the Constitution gives state legislatures to craft election rules. That 6-3 ruling, which upheld a North Carolina state court's decision that invalidated a Republican-drawn congressional map as unlawfully disadvantaging Democrats, also rejected a more extreme theory advanced by many Republicans and conservatives that would have removed any role of state courts and state constitutions in regulating federal elections. The ruling, however, stopped short of announcing a legal test for determining when state courts have ventured too far in "arrogating to themselves" a legislature's power. In the Pennsylvania case, Republicans asked the Supreme Court to answer that question, contending that the state supreme court's ruling violated the Constitution's elections provisions, including that the "times, places and manner" of federal elections "shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature thereof." Provisional ballots generally protect voters from being excluded from the voting process if their eligibility is uncertain on Election Day. The vote is counted once officials confirm eligibility. Republicans intervened to defend Butler County's decision not to count the ballots from these voters, saying Pennsylvania's election law does not allow provisional ballots to be counted if a mail-in ballot was received on time by a county board of elections. Democrats intervened on the side of the voters, contending that if a mail-in ballot is defective and cannot be counted, that person has not yet voted and a provisional ballot must be counted. A divided Pennsylvania Supreme Court last October sided with the voters, saying that provisional ballots prevent double voting while protecting voters' right to have one vote counted.
NBC News
2 hours ago
- NBC News
13 House Republicans urge Senate to scale back clean energy cuts in bill they voted for
WASHINGTON — Thirteen House Republicans who voted for President Donald Trump's " big, beautiful bill" sent a letter Friday urging Senate GOP leaders to scale back some of its clean energy cuts, sparking pushback from conservative hardliners. The unusual criticism of their own bill indicates a modicum of regret by the GOP lawmakers, whose votes were critical to the bill passing the House by a narrow margin last month. 'While we were proud to have worked to ensure that the bill did not include a full repeal of the clean energy tax credits, we remain deeply concerned by several provisions,' said the Republicans in the letter, led by Rep. Jen Kiggans, R-Va. They cited provisions that 'abruptly terminate several credits just 60 days after enactment for projects that have not yet begun construction,' and 'restrictions to transferability.' 'This approach jeopardizes ongoing development, discourages long-term investment, and could significantly delay or cancel energy infrastructure projects across the country,' the group of House Republicans said in criticizing the legislation they voted for, while suggesting some changes to 'mitigate' the harm it could cause. Kiggans, like most of the signatories, represents a competitive district that Democrats are targeting in the 2026 election. Other politically vulnerable members include: Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa.; Juan Ciscomani, R-Ariz.; Mike Lawler, R-N.Y.; Don Bacon, R-Neb.; Gabe Evans, R-Colo.; Young Kim, R-Calif.; David Valadao, R-Calif.; Rob Bresnahan, R-Pa.; and Tom Kean, R-N.J. The remaining three, who sit comparably safer seats, are Reps. Mark Amodei, R-Nev.; Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y.; and Nick LaLota, R-N.Y. The 13 Republicans warned that 'the House-passed bill includes a phase out schedule for credits that would cause significant disruption to projects under development and stop investments needed to win the global energy race.' The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee mocked the letter and said the lawmakers will own their votes for the bill. 'These 13 Republicans promised not to support cuts to clean energy tax credits, then cast the deciding votes to raise energy costs on American families, kill tens of thousands of jobs, and undermine our nation's energy security. They are responsible for this Big, Ugly Bill and all the harm it will cause,' DCCC spokesperson Viet Shelton said. 'This toothless letter is the worst kind of political hypocrisy and voters will see it for what it is, a lie perpetrated by endangered House Republicans who caved to their D.C. party bosses at the expense of the American people.' Kiggans' office did not immediately return a request for comment on whether she was aware of the provisions when supporting the bill, or if she'd vote for one that falls short of her new demands. Senate Republicans are eying changes to the House bill to ease some of the negative impacts of the funding cuts. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, told NBC News her version of the bill will probably relax some of the deadlines to cut off funding. But she said Thursday that there probably won't be massive changes to the House-passed bill. 'I imagine it's going to track fairly similarly, but I think some of the deadlines are pretty tight in terms of when you have to have construction and those things,' Capito said. 'We've been approached by several employers who need some of those tax.' Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., said he's willing to undo some of the clean energy funding, but he wants to make sure that existing business investments aren't harmed by the bill. 'What we're trying to focus on is to make sure that if businesses have invested and have projects in progress, that we do everything we can to hold them harmless,' he said. 'Whether or not we continue some of these programs out into the future — that's a separate question that I'm willing to entertain.' Meanwhile, the conservative group Club For Growth is running ads targeting Sens. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., John Curtis, R-Utah, and Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, for backing more modest rollbacks of the clean energy funding, which carries benefits for their states. There's another reason changing the bill is easier said than done: The speedy cuts to clean energy funding under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act were part of an House agreement to win the votes of conservative hardliners who want to reduce the bill's red ink. House Republicans have a majority of 220 to 212, meaning they can only spare three 'no' votes in their ranks to pass the bill when the Senate sends back their revised version. 'You backslide one inch on those IRA subsidies and I'm voting against this bill,' Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, said Friday on the House floor. 'So you do what you want to do in the Senate, House of Lords, have your fun. But if you mess up the Inflation Reduction Act, Green New Scam subsidies, I ain't voting for that bill.'
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
White House tries to water down Russia sanctions
Donald Trump is pressuring a US senator to weaken a Bill that would impose sweeping sanctions on Russia. White House officials hoping to mend relations with Moscow have been quietly contacting senator Lindsey Graham's office urging him to water down his Bill, which aims to cripple Vladimir Putin with huge sanctions. The Bill, backed by nearly the entire Senate, would impose 500 per cent tariffs on countries that continue to buy Russian oil and gas, which bankrolls Putin's war effort. Officials have been demanding the Bill include waivers that would allow Mr Trump to choose who or what was sanctioned, congressional aides told the Wall Street Journal. Other attempts to weaken the legislation include softening the language, replacing 'shall' with 'may' to avoid making the reprimands mandatory. Removing the mandatory nature of the sanctions would render the Bill effectively toothless and do little to hamper Putin's war machine, aides fear. 'We're moving ahead and the White House is included in our conversations,' Richard Blumenthal, senator and lead Democratic co-sponsor of the Bill, told the paper. Russia's war effort is funded by fossil-fuel exports. Moscow has adapted to existing sanctions with relative ease, turning to North Korea and China for support. Fearing the impact on pump prices, Joe Biden, former president, was unwilling to crack down on Russian energy exports. Mr Trump, has threatened to impose sanctions on Ukraine, as well as Russia, if the two sides fail to reach a peace agreement. 'Any sanction package must provide complete flexibility for the president to continue to pursue his desired foreign policy,' a White House official said. They added that the constitution 'vests the president with the authority to conduct diplomacy with foreign nations'. Speaking in the Oval Office alongside Friedrich Merz, German chancellor, on Thursday, the US president said that the Bill should not move forward without his express approval. 'They'll be guided by me. That's how it's supposed to be,' he told reporters. 'They're waiting for me to decide on what to do.' Last week, Mr Graham and Mr Blumenthal visited Ukraine where they applauded the country's drone attack that destroyed 40 aircraft deep inside Russian territory. However, they were ridiculed and accused of 'stirring up' the conflict by key allies of Mr Trump, including Steve Bannon. 'By trying to engage Putin – by being friendly and enticing – it's become painfully clear [Putin's] not interested in ending this war,' Mr Graham said earlier this week. '[Putin] needs to see and hear that message as well from us, from the American people,' said Mr Blumenthal. Both said that failing to act now could pull the US deeper into the conflict later. If Putin isn't stopped in Ukraine, Mr Blumenthal said, Nato treaty obligations could compel US troops into battle. Earlier this week, Russian negotiators tabled a long memorandum, resembling a complete capitulation for Ukraine, in a second round of direct talks with Kyiv in Istanbul. They demanded Ukraine must withdraw its troops from four eastern regions that Russia only partially occupies and that international recognition of Russian sovereignty over them and Crimea must be granted.
