F**k him: Hunter Biden blasts George Clooney over father's exit from 2024 race
"Really, do you think in middle America, that voter in Green Bay, Wisconsin, gives a s*** what George Clooney thinks about who she should vote for?"Hunter's comments mark the first time a member of the Biden family has so explicitly addressed the wave of Democratic pressure -- including from party insiders and celebrities -- that led Joe Biden to end his re-election bid just months before the 2024 vote.Hunter continued his tirade, suggesting that Clooney's opinion piece in The New York Times had an outsized and unwarranted impact."Why do I have to f***ing listen to you? What right do you have to step on a man who's given 52 years of his f***ing life to the service of this country?" he said."And decide that you, George Clooney, are going to take out basically a full-page ad in the f***ing New York Times?"CLOONEY QUESTIONS BIDEN'S RE-ELECTION BIDPublished on July 10, 2024, Clooney's op-ed, "I Love Joe Biden. But We Need a New Nominee," helped ignite the growing public debate over Biden's age and fitness following a widely panned debate performance against Donald Trump in late June."I consider him a friend, and I believe in him...In the last four years, he's won many of the battles he's faced. But the one battle he cannot win is the fight against time," Clooney wrote, recalling a fundraiser where he described Biden as visibly diminished.Less than two weeks later, Biden, then 81, officially ended his campaign on July 21, clearing the way for Vice President Kamala Harris to become the Democratic nominee.The younger Biden, who has been dogged for years by legal issues and addiction, was later granted a full presidential pardon by his father in December—just weeks before Trump took office.HUNTER BIDEN SAYS AMBIEN AFFECTED HIS FATHERHunter Biden claimed that his father was taking the prescription sleep aid Ambien ahead of the June 2024 presidential debate against Donald Trump — a performance widely seen as the turning point that forced Joe Biden to exit the race weeks later.Hunter said the combination of medication and a gruelling travel schedule left the then-president exhausted and unprepared.advertisement"He's 81 years old. He's tired as s--t. They give him Ambien to be able to sleep," Hunter said. Hunter defended his father's condition, saying fatigue and medication were to blame. "He flew around the world, basically the mileage he could have flown around the world three times,' Hunter said. 'He gets up on the stage, and he looks like he's a deer in the headlights."Hunter Biden also denied any connection to the mysterious bag of cocaine found in the West Wing of the White House in 2023. "I have been clean and sober since June of 2019. I have not touched a drop of alcohol or a drug, and I'm incredibly proud of that," he said.- EndsWith inputs from Agencies Trending Reel
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
Gabbard's claims of anti-Trump conspiracy not supported by documents
Gabbard cited newly declassified emails from Obama officials and a 5 year old classified House report in hopes of undermining the intelligence community's conclusion that Putin wanted to boost Trump AP Washington Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard this month declassified material that she claimed proved a treasonous conspiracy by the Obama administration in 2016 to politicise US intelligence in service of casting doubt on the legitimacy of Donald Trump's election victory. As evidence, Gabbard cited newly declassified emails from Obama officials and a five-year-old classified House report in hopes of undermining the intelligence community's conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to boost Trump and denigrate his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton. Russia's activities during the 2016 election remain some of the most examined events in recent history. The Kremlin's campaign and the subsequent US government response were the subject of at least five major investigations by the Republican-led House and Senate intelligence committee; two Justice Department special counsels; and the department's inspector general. Those investigations either concluded or accepted the conclusion that Russia embarked on a campaign to interfere in the election through the use of social media and hacked material. The House-led probe, conducted by Trump allies, also concurred that Russia ran an election interference campaign but said the purpose was to sow chaos in the US rather than boost Trump. Several of the reports criticise the actions of Obama administration officials, particularly at the FBI, but do not dispute the fundamental findings that Moscow sought to interfere in the election. Russian election interference CLAIM: The intelligence community had one assessment: that Russia did not have the intent and capability to try to impact the outcome of the US election leading up to Election Day. The same assessment was made after the election. Gabbard to Fox News on Tuesday. The documents Gabbard released do not support her claim. She cites a handful of emails from 2016 in which officials conclude that Russia had no intention of manipulating the US vote count through cyberattacks on voting systems. President Barack Obama's administration never alleged that voting infrastructure was tampered with. Rather, the administration said Russia ran a covert influence campaign using hacked and stolen material from prominent Democrats. Russian operatives then used that information as part of state-funded media and social media operations to inflame US public opinion. More than two dozen Russians were indicted in 2018 in connection with those efforts. Republican-led investigations in Congress have affirmed that conclusion, and the emails that Gabbard released do not contradict that finding. Shift in assessment? CLAIM: There was a shift, a 180-degree shift, from the intelligence community's assessment leading up to the election to the one that President Obama directed be produced after Donald Trump won the election that completely contradicted those assessments that had come previously. Gabbard to Fox News on Tuesday. There was no shift. The emails Gabbard released show that a Department of Homeland Security official in August 2016 told then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper there was no indication of a Russian threat to directly manipulate the actual vote count. The public assessment the Obama administration made public in January 2017 reached the same conclusion: DHS assesses that the types of systems Russian actors targeted or compromised were not involved in vote tallying." Putin's intent CLAIM: The Obama administration "manufactured the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment that they knew was false promoting the LIE that Vladimir Putin and the Russian government helped President Trump win the 2016 election. Gabbard on Truth Social Wednesday. The material declassified this week reveals some dissent within the intelligence community about whether Putin wanted to help Trump or simply inflame the US public. That same question led to a partisan divide on the House Intelligence panel when it examined the matter several years later. Gabbard's memo released last week cites a whistleblower who she says served in the intelligence community at the time and who is quoted as saying that he could not concur in good conscience with the intelligence community's judgment that Russia had a decisive preference for Trump. Such dissent and debate are not unusual in the drafting of intelligence reports. The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee examined whether there was any political interference in the Obama administration's conclusions and reported that all analysts expressed that they were free to debate, object to content, and assess confidence levels, as is normal and proper. In 2018, Putin directly addressed the question of whether he preferred Trump at a press conference in Helsinki even as he sidestepped a question about whether he directed any of his subordinates to help Trump. Yes, I did, Putin said. Because he talked about bringing the US-Russia relationship back to normal. Steele dossier CLAIM: They used already discredited information like the Steele dossier they knew it was discredited at the time. Gabbard to Fox News on Tuesday. The dossier refers to a collection of opposition research files compiled by a former British spy, Christopher Steele, whose work was funded by Democrats during the 2016 election. Those files included uncorroborated tips and salacious gossip about Trump's ties to Russia, but the importance to the Russia investigation has sometimes been overstated. It was not the basis for the FBI's decision to open an investigation in July 2016 into potential coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia, the Justice Department's inspector general found. Some of the records released by Gabbard this week also reveal that it was a Central Intelligence Agency human source close to the Kremlin that the agency primarily relied on for its conclusion that Putin wanted to help Trump and hurt Clinton, not the Steele dossier. FBI agents on the case didn't even come to possess the dossier until weeks into their inquiry. Even so, Trump supporters have seized on the unverified innuendo in the document to undercut the broader Russia investigation. Many of Steele's claims have since been discredited or denied. It is true, however, that the FBI and Justice Department relied in part on the Steele dossier to obtain surveillance warrants to eavesdrop on the communications of a former Trump campaign adviser, the inspector general found. FBI agents continued to pursue those warrants even after questions arose about the credibility of Steele's reporting. The dossier was also summarised over the objections of then-CIA Director John Brennan, he has said in a two-page annex to the classified version of the intelligence community assessment. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
an hour ago
- Business Standard
How Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang won over Trump who wanted to spilt his company
US President Donald Trump has revealed that he once contemplated dismantling tech giant Nvidia to spur competition in the artificial intelligence (AI) chip sector. However, he later backed off—a move that highlights Nvidia's CEO Jensen Huang's growing influence in the White House. In fact, Huang's personal lobbying and policy engagement has helped drive a major shift in US trade policy and cemented his place as one of the most powerful tech executives in Washington. Why did Trump drop the idea to break Nvidia? Speaking at an AI summit in Washington on Wednesday (local time), Trump admitted, 'I said, 'Look, we'll break this guy up,' before I learned the facts here.' He explained that aides had advised him the move would be far more difficult than anticipated, as Nvidia's dominance in the AI hardware market was underpinned by years of development that rivals would struggle to match in the near term. 'I figured we could go in and sort of break them up a little bit, get them a little competition,' Trump said. 'But I found out it's not easy in that business.' Huang, who sat in the audience during Trump's remarks, was praised several times by the US President along with other tech leaders for their continued investments in the United States. China chip ban spurs Nvidia into action Nvidia holds more than 90 per cent of the market for chips that power AI systems. That dominance has helped it surpass Apple to become the world's most valuable public company, with a market cap topping $4 trillion. But it has also brought the company into the crosshairs of global trade tensions. In April, the Trump administration blocked sales of Nvidia's H20 AI chip to China, a move that sparked concern within the company and triggered an intense lobbying campaign from Huang. According to reports from The New York Times and CNBC, Huang responded with a full-blown lobbying campaign—meeting Trump at Mar-a-Lago, testifying before Congress, and aligning with White House insiders like AI and crypto czar David Sacks. During these meetings, Huang argued that restricting American chip exports would do more harm than good, pushing countries toward Chinese alternatives and weakening US leadership in AI. It seems this narrative began to resonate with Trump's inner circle, especially as Chinese competitor Huawei unveiled its own competing AI chip platform and Chinese demand for AI infrastructure exploded. The campaign culminated last week when Huang met with Trump in the Oval Office. Within days, the administration changed course. The decision was officially linked to broader trade negotiations, officially tying the change to a rare earth magnet deal with China, but insiders, as reported by US media, credit Huang's influence for the change. Jensen Huang's foray into policy During Trump's first term, Apple CEO Tim Cook played a key role in behind-the-scenes diplomacy. But in Trump's second administration, Huang has quietly become the most influential tech executive—surpassing Cook and Tesla's Elon Musk, both of whom have lost standing with the US president. Cook, once seen as Trump's go-to corporate statesman, has faced criticism from the administration over Apple's supply chain strategies and its manufacturing shift to India. Meanwhile, Elon Musk, once considered Trump's right-hand man, has had a public falling out with the president. Is Huang Trump's new best buddy? Huang has publicly praised Trump for acknowledging the need for energy to produce artificial intelligence. In an interview with Fox News' Bret Baier, Huang called Trump a "visionary" for recognising this need. During Wednesday's AI summit, Huang was asked during his session about the US' advantage which other countries don't have. "America's unique advantage that no country could possibly have is President Trump," said Huang.
New Indian Express
2 hours ago
- New Indian Express
Gabbard's claims of an anti-Trump conspiracy are not supported by declassified documents
WASHINGTON: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard this month declassified material that she claimed proved a "treasonous conspiracy" by the Obama administration in 2016 to politicize U.S. intelligence in service of casting doubt on the legitimacy of Donald Trump's election victory. As evidence, Gabbard cited newly declassified emails from Obama officials and a five-year-old classified House report in hopes of undermining the intelligence community's conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to boost Trump and denigrate his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton. Russia's activities during the 2016 election remain some of the most examined events in recent history. The Kremlin's campaign and the subsequent U.S. government response were the subject of at least five major investigations by the Republican-led House and Senate intelligence committee; two Justice Department special counsels; and the department's inspector general. Those investigations either concluded — or accepted the conclusion — that Russia embarked on a campaign to interfere in the election through the use of social media and hacked material. The House-led probe, conducted by Trump allies, also concurred that Russia ran an election interference campaign but said the purpose was to sow chaos in the U.S. rather than boost Trump. Several of the reports criticize the actions of Obama administration officials, particularly at the FBI, but do not dispute the fundamental findings that Moscow sought to interfere in the election.
