A Presidency in Question: Biden’s Mental Decline and Its Ramifications for Governance
Bombshell reports highlight how aides and advisors assumed significant roles in decision-making, questioning how engaged Biden truly was in day-to-day operations.
Throughout President Joe Biden's term, there has been increasing scrutiny over his cognitive health and his level of direct engagement in governance. New bombshell reports have emerged suggesting that his presidency has often functioned more symbolically than substantively, with aides and advisors assuming substantial roles in decision-making processes. This situation has sparked concerns about how actively President Biden is engaged in the day-to-day operations and key decisions of his administration. Anyone paying even minimal attention can see that Biden has not been fully present for years.
During the chaotic 2021 Afghanistan withdrawal, President Biden was reportedly so mentally fatigued that he missed a critical phone call from the House Armed Services Committee before the operation, according to a Wall Street Journal report. The withdrawal marked the conclusion of the United States' longest-running conflict but came at a steep cost, with 13 American service members and over 170 Afghans losing their lives during the chaotic evacuation at Kabul airport.
At Dover Air Force Base, families of fallen U.S. Marines, including Roice McCollum—whose brother Rylee McCollum was among those killed in the Kabul airport attack—faced an additional burden. They reportedly waited an extra three hours for Biden’s arrival because he was napping aboard Air Force One, as a military officer allegedly informed Roice McCollum. She recounted the experience to the Daily Mail, describing it as deeply insensitive. Further fueling public criticism, Biden was observed checking his watch during the solemn transfer ceremony at Dover, a gesture widely interpreted as a lack of awareness and empathy for the gravity of the moment. These incidents drew sharp criticism and raised broader concerns about his leadership and sensitivity in times of national tragedy.
The question of President Biden’s fitness for office was further highlighted by a recent incident earlier this month during a meeting with African leaders in Angola. While discussing the Lobito Trans-Africa Corridor railway, Biden appeared to fall asleep, with his eyes closed for over a minute as Tanzania’s Vice President Philip Mpango spoke. The moment, captured on video, quickly went viral and was widely covered by news outlets, fueling growing concerns about Biden’s declining mental sharpness.
The perception of President Biden’s diminished role, both domestically and internationally, was underscored once again at Brazil’s G-20 summit in November. A significant moment occurred when world leaders proceeded with a group photo without waiting for Biden, which many interpreted as a sign of his reduced presence and influence in global politics.
From the very beginning of his presidency, White House aides have worked to cover up President Biden's apparent mental decline, shielding the aging commander-in-chief from the public eye. This included rearranging his schedule after disjointed performances, an explosive report revealed last Thursday.
While the lack of access to the nation’s oldest-ever president has been widely known, with Biden hosting the fewest large press conferences in modern history and frequently stumbling over his words, the full extent of how the White House has concealed these issues had remained hidden—until now. According to aides, Democratic lawmakers, and donors who spoke with the Wall Street Journal, much of the behind-the-scenes work to manage Biden's cognitive difficulties had gone unreported.
Compounding this concern, other recent reports indicate that Biden has only held nine Cabinet meetings over the past four years, compared to the 25 held by former President Donald Trump. This sharp decline has raised alarms about the effectiveness of Biden’s administration and its ability to maintain proper oversight. Cabinet secretaries and congressional leaders often struggle to secure in-person meetings with the President, and full Cabinet sessions have become a rare occurrence.
As Biden's term has progressed, direct communication with him has become increasingly rare, with most interactions now funneled through intermediaries. His statements and actions are heavily scripted, and the frequency of interviews and press conferences has declined, further diminishing public attention on his mental health and fueling questions about who is truly running the country in his place.
Meetings have also been scheduled later in the day, a practice that first came to light after Biden’s debate performance against then-President Donald Trump, when staff admitted that the President had difficulty functioning beyond a six-hour window, typically closing by 4 p.m.
Inside the White House, staff members were told to keep briefings with Biden short and to the point. Some Cabinet officials, including Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, grew frustrated with the infrequency of private discussions, with one Cabinet member eventually ceasing attempts to meet with Biden after being repeatedly rebuffed.
These revelations have only intensified ongoing debates about the transparency and operational efficacy of the Biden administration. Critics argue that the President's apparent cognitive limitations could endanger national security and hinder effective domestic policy-making, questioning his ability to lead the nation. Meanwhile, supporters contend that these criticisms are heightened by partisan politics, suggesting that the scrutiny of Biden’s health and leadership style is unfairly exaggerated or politically motivated.
Perhaps Robert Hur's assessment of Biden's declining mental acuity was accurate. In his investigation into the President's handling of classified documents, the Special Counsel referred to Biden as “an elderly man with a poor memory” and noted that “Mr. Biden’s memory appeared to have significant limitations.” Hur also provided examples from 2017, where Biden’s conversations with his ghostwriter were described as “often painfully slow,” with Biden struggling to recall events and, at times, having difficulty reading and relaying his own notebook entries.
A larger question looms: was President Biden fit to serve in office? How long had his staff and cabinet been aware of his mental decline, and who was making critical decisions in his stead? This conversation also raises broader concerns about the suitability of aging leaders for high office, the support systems in place around them, and the public’s right to be informed about the health and competence of their elected officials.
As President Biden leaves office, his legacy will undoubtedly be shaped by the ongoing debates surrounding his cognitive health and its impact on his leadership. While supporters may argue that his policy achievements and resilience under pressure define his time in office, the concerns about his mental sharpness cannot be overlooked. The question of whether his cognitive decline affected the decision-making processes within his administration remains a critical part of the conversation. As the nation moves forward, these reflections on his presidency will influence not only how future leaders are evaluated but also how transparency and support structures for aging politicians are approached in years to come.
