Betrayed by His Own Party: Biden Battles Back Against DNC Coup
Betrayed by His Own Party: Biden Battles Back Against DNC Coup
The media's sudden shift against Biden was a calculated move
The media's sudden shift against Biden was a calculated move. Joe’s refusal to step down is driven by a need to protect his family and Democratic allies from corruption investigations. His potential downfall could expose a wider network of political corruption, making his continued tenure crucial for those implicated.
OPINION — Nick Holt — Thursday July 11, 2024
By Nick Holt | 11 July, 2024
It's extraordinary to think anyone would believe the media and Democratic donors were unaware of Joe Biden's declining health and incompetence. To suggest that this awareness only surfaced during or after the debate is a very Big Lie.
The media's consistent thread of concern about President Biden’s chances of defeating Donald Trump in the 2024 election was evident well before any disastrous debate performance.
From early 2022, the media have consistently expressed doubts about President Joe Biden’s ability to defeat Donald Trump in the 2024 election. Initial speculation began in May 2022 with discussions about a likely Biden-Trump rematch, raising early concerns about both candidates.
By June 2022, media articles started questioning Biden’s age, cognitive fitness, and declining popularity in polls, reflecting early scepticism about his capacity to handle another term.
A story in Politico in August 2022 reported, “President Joseph Biden lately has been ill-tempered about two intertwined storylines. Lots of Democrats do not wish him to seek a second term, and longstanding speculation about whether he is showing age-related decline is increasingly at the centre of his coverage.”
These concerns intensified throughout 2023. Headlines like "Senior Democrats' Private Take on Biden: He's Too Old" and “The Case for Panicking over Biden's Re-election Campaign" were abundant and highlighted internal worries within the Democratic Party about Biden's viability against Trump.
By March 2023, various polls showing Biden trailing Trump fuelled further media discussions about whether Biden should step aside for a younger candidate. Throughout 2023, worsening poll numbers amplified fears about Biden’s electability.
Entering 2024, mounting scepticism among Democratic circles became increasingly audible, as more party members began to question Biden’s capacity to lead effectively and secure victory over Trump.
In March 2024, Newsweek's headline boldly declared, “Joe Biden Voters Urge Him to Step Down.” In April 2024, The Hill published a piece titled, “The Case for Replacing Biden at the Convention,” signalling widespread discussion on the matter.
In light of this knowledge, the decision to have Joe Biden debate Donald Trump on live TV at 9 PM was either a catastrophic political blunder or a deliberate setup for failure.
Given Biden's age and the established concerns about his cognitive endurance, scheduling a high-stakes event late in the evening made no sense. This decision could be seen as the dumbest political strategy in history, exposing Biden’s vulnerabilities at a critical moment.
Alternatively, if this decision was made with full awareness of Biden’s potential weaknesses, it suggests a calculated move to create a spectacle of failure. This would then enable the media machine to intensify its narrative that Biden needs to step down.
It seems more plausible and rational that the debate served as a catalyst for a pre-existing media campaign, where a highly visible event could be used to amplify and solidify the pre-existing narrative. This formula is repeatedly utilised by the mainstream media to shape public opinion.
Establish a Narrative: Begin by planting seeds of doubt or concern through ongoing reports and commentary.
Create a Catalytic Event: Arrange or highlight a pivotal event that encapsulates or seemingly validates the narrative.
Amplify Post-Event: Use the event as a springboard to intensify and spread the narrative more widely, creating a sense of urgency or inevitability.
In Biden's case, the debate served as the catalytic event. Leading up to the debate, there were already numerous articles questioning Biden's age, cognitive abilities, and overall fitness for another term.
The debate provided a highly visible moment that the media could use to validate and intensify these concerns.
Post-debate coverage amplified the narrative, pushing the idea that Biden was not fit to lead and should step aside, thereby shaping public opinion.
Usually these kinds of media campaigns work instantaneously and go undetected by the public. The “problem” gets solved, and then the solution is provided.
In this case, however, the problem wasn’t solved. Biden is refusing to step down.
The media's sudden turn on Biden wasn’t a moment of newfound integrity; it was calculated.
Remember, this is the same media who conspired to suppress and "debunk" Hunter Biden’s laptop story.
The same media has been working overtime to dismiss and discredit credible allegations of influence peddling involving the Biden family.
Throughout Biden’s first term, the Republican House Oversight Committee presented overwhelming evidence alleging that the Biden family received at least $20 million from various foreign sources, including individuals and companies in China, Ukraine, and other countries, while Joe was Vice President.
Emails and documents from Hunter Biden's laptop show how he leveraged his father's political influence to secure lucrative deals, including a controversial position on the board of Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company. The evidence also shows that Joe Biden was aware of, and likely involved in, these business dealings.
Communications revealed that Hunter Biden's business associates believed Joe Biden was integral to their success and that he participated in meetings or discussions related to these ventures while in office.
There are also allegations of money laundering, involving transactions with shell companies and complicated financial arrangements.
The mainstream media did not investigate any of these allegations.
They dismissed, ignored, or trivialised the evidence brought forward by the House Committee, which substantiated the presence of a network of companies linked to the Bidens and their associates.
Just pause for a moment and imagine this was Donald Trump being investigated. Considering the double standards that are being applied.
The allegations against Biden are serious: selling access to the White House, repeated lies about involvement in family business schemes, systemic abuse of power, and the chilling possibility that foreign adversaries may be influencing presidential decision-making.
His presidency has been a stronghold shielding this complex network of corrupt activities.
A total abandonment of protection from the media would thrust Biden into a harsh new reality. At the moment, there exists a stand-off between Democratic factions, media, and donors. Biden may wield more negotiating power than perceived.
If there is a disruption in the continuity of the Biden administration and Trump is elected, the spectre of retribution against those who have targeted Trump (and his family) is likely looming large.
Democratic operatives, and even a few Republicans, who have waged a relentless campaign to undermine Trump’s presidency and re-election campaign, have a vested interest in ensuring Biden gets re-elected.
If Biden falls, he probably won't fall alone.
His demise threatens to unravel a web of corruption exposing some of the most powerful figures in Washington.
This is now a ticking time bomb for the Biden family and the Democratic elites.
As of now, Joe Biden is clinging to power. If ousted, whether by Trump or an unsympathetic Democrat, the protective shield around him will crumble.
The attempt to replace Biden as president could easily fail. Either way, the media will return to its primary objective: ensuring Donald Trump's defeat in November.