Hunter Biden suggests Ambien contributed to Joe Biden's poor debate performance
'I know exactly what happened in that debate,' Hunter Biden told YouTube personality Andrew Callaghan.
'He flew around the world basically the mileage he could have flown around the world three times. He's 81 years old. He's tired as sh–,' Hunter Biden said. 'They give him Ambien to be able to sleep. He gets up on the stage, and he looks like a deer in the headlights.'
The interview was posted online on the anniversary of the former president's announcement that he would not seek reelection.
A spokesperson for the former president did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Biden's debate performance was a turning point in the 2024 campaign. The former president spoke haltingly, mixed up words and struggled to complete his thoughts. Biden aides that nit attributed it to a cold and Biden later asserted in the days after the debate that he had been sick.
Some Biden allies have in the year since the debate offered up other explanations, including that the then-president was overworked and exhausted by a taxing trip to Europe before the debate. But Biden had spent roughly a week holed up at Camp David preparing for his debate with President Trump before taking the stage.
Hunter Biden took aim at several critics of his father during his interview with Callaghan, including actor George Clooney, who penned a New York Times op-ed urging the former president to drop out, and former Obama White House staffers like David Axelrod.
'David Axelrod, who had one success in his political life, and that was Barack Obama, and that was because of Barack Obama, not because of fuck— David Axelrod,' Hunter Biden said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
The former NBC host blasted the former president's son for a series of media appearances in which he blasted Joe Biden's critics.
Former NBC host Chuck Todd says Hunter Biden isn't doing himself—or Democrats—any favors with his media tour. The wayward member of the Biden family sat down for two interviews—with Andrew Gallaghan's popular Channel 5 podcast last weekend, and then with former Democratic National Committee chair Jaime Harrison on the At Our Table podcast on Tuesday—going off on an expletive-laden rant against his father's detractors and opening up about his alcohol and drug addictions. 'I don't think this does Hunter Biden any good. I don't think this does Joe Biden any good. It certainly doesn't do the Democratic Party any good,' Todd said Friday on his podcast, adding that he's generally an advocate for going to therapy, 'but let's not do it public. Try to deal with your issues amongst yourself.'
The Hill
2 hours ago
- The Hill
Trump notches winning streak in Supreme Court emergency docket deluge
President Trump is on a winning streak at the Supreme Court with conservative-majority justices giving the green light for the president to resume his sweeping agenda. Their recent blessing of his firings of more independent agency leaders is the latest example of the court going the administration's way. This White House in six months has already brought more emergency appeals to the high court than former President Biden did during his four years in office, making it an increasingly dominant part of the Supreme Court's work. But as the court issues more and more emergency decisions, the practice has sometimes come under criticism — even by other justices. Trump prompts staggering activity Trump's Justice Department filed its 21 st emergency application on Thursday, surpassing the 19 that the Biden administration filed during his entire four-year term. The court has long dealt with requests to delay executions on its emergency docket, but the number of politically charged requests from the sitting administration has jumped in recent years, further skyrocketing under Trump. 'The numbers are startling,' said Kannon Shanmugam, who leads Paul, Weiss' Supreme Court practice, at a Federalist Society event Thursday. Trump's Justice Department asserts the burst reflects how 'activist' federal district judges have improperly blocked the president's agenda. Trump's critics say it shows how the president himself is acting lawlessly. But some legal experts blame Congress for being missing in action. 'There are a lot of reasons for this growth, but I think the biggest reason, in some sense, is the disappearance of Congress from the scene,' Shanmugam said. In his second term, Trump has almost always emerged victorious at the Supreme Court. The administration successfully halted lower judges' orders in all but two of the decided emergency appeals, and a third where they only partially won. On immigration, the justices allowed the administration to revoke temporary legal protections for hundreds of thousands of migrants and swiftly deport people to countries where they have no ties while separately rebuffing a judge who ruled for migrants deported to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act. Other cases involve efforts to reshape the federal bureaucracy and spending. The Supreme Court allowed the administration to freeze $65 million in teacher grants, provide Department of Government Efficiency personnel with access to sensitive Social Security data, proceed with mass firings of probationary employees and broader reorganizations and dismantle the Education Department. Last month, Trump got perhaps his biggest win yet, when the Supreme Court clawed back federal judges' ability to issue universal injunctions. The most recent decision, meanwhile, concerned Trump's bid to expand presidential power by eviscerating independent agency leaders' removal protections. The justices on Wednesday enabled Trump to fire three members on the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). Decisions often contain no explanation Unlike normal Supreme Court cases that take months to resolve, emergency cases follow a truncated schedule. The justices usually resolve the appeals in a matter of days after a singular round of written briefing and no oral argument. And oftentimes, the court acts without explanation. Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, two of Trump's three appointees, have long defended the practice. Last year, the duo cautioned that explaining their preliminary thinking may 'create a lock-in effect' as a case progresses. At the Federalist Society event, Shanmugam suggested the court might have more energy for its emergency cases if the justices less frequently wrote separately on the merits docket — a dig at the many dissents and concurrences issued this term. But the real challenge, he said, is the speed at which the cases must be decided. 'It takes time to get members of the court to agree on reasoning, and sometimes I think it's therefore more expedient for the court to issue these orders without reasoning,' he said. 'Even though I think we would all agree that, all things being equal, it would be better for the court to provide more of that.' The frequent lack of explanation has at times left wiggle room and uncertainty. A month ago, the Supreme Court lifted a judge's injunction requiring the Trump administration to provide migrants with certain due process before deporting them to a country where they have no ties. With no explanation from the majority — only the liberal justices in dissent — the judge believed he could still enforce his subsequent ruling, which limited plans to deport a group of violent criminals to the war-torn country of South Sudan. The Trump administration accused him of defying the Supreme Court. Ultimately, the justices rebuked the judge, with even liberal Justice Elena Kagan agreeing. The Supreme Court's emergency interventions have also left lower judges to grapple with their precedential weight in separate cases. After the high court in May greenlit Trump's firings at the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), the administration began asserting lower courts still weren't getting the message. The emergency decision led many court watchers to believe the justices are poised to overturn their 90-year-old precedent protecting independent agency leaders from termination without cause. But several judges have since continued to block Trump's firings at other independent agencies, since the precedent still technically remains on the books. The tensions came to a head after a judge reinstated fired CPSC members. The Supreme Court said the earlier case decides how the later case must be interpreted, providing arguably their most succinct guidance yet for how their emergency rulings should be interpreted. 'Although our interim orders are not conclusive as to the merits, they inform how a court should exercise its equitable discretion in like cases,' the unsigned ruling reads. Liberals object to emergency docket practices The lack of explanation in many of the court's emergency decisions has frustrated court watchers and judges alike, leading critics to call it the 'shadow docket.' Those critics include the Supreme Court's own liberal justices. 'Courts are supposed to explain things. That's what courts do,' Kagan said while speaking at a judicial conference Thursday. Kagan pointed to the court's decision last week greenlighting Trump's mass layoffs at the Education Department. She noted a casual observer might think the president is legally authorized to dismantle the agency, but the government didn't present that argument. Her fellow liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and, particularly, Ketanji Brown Jackson, have made more forceful criticisms. Jackson increasingly accuses her colleagues of threatening the rule of law. She called one recent emergency decision 'hubristic and senseless' and warned another was 'unleashing devastation.' Late last month, Jackson wrote that her colleagues had 'put both our legal system, and our system of government, in grave jeopardy.' But in Wednesday's decision letting the CPSC firings move forward, the trio were united. Kagan accused the majority of having 'effectively expunged' the Supreme Court precedent protecting independent agency leaders, Humphrey's Executor v. United States, from its records. 'And it has accomplished those ends with the scantiest of explanations,' she wrote. Kagan noted that the 'sole professed basis' for the stay order was its prior stay order in another case involving Trump's firing of independent agency heads. That decision — which cleared the way for Trump to fire NLRB member Gwynne Wilcox and MSPB member Cathy Harris — was also 'minimally (and, as I have previously shown, poorly) explained,' she said. 'So only another under-reasoned emergency order undergirds today's,' Kagan wrote. 'Next time, though, the majority will have two (if still under reasoned) orders to cite.'
Fox News
3 hours ago
- Fox News
Trump slams Europe over immigration, says ‘horrible invasion' is killing the continent
President Donald Trump arrived in Scotland on Friday and wasted little time lashing out at European leaders over mass immigration, warning that the crisis is "killing" the continent and calling it a "horrible invasion." Trump fulfilled a key campaign promise by effectively closing the southern border with Mexico while Europe and the U.K., in particular, are still struggling to get to grips with the crisis as dozens of boats packed with illegal migrants continue to pour into the country every day from France. "On immigration, you better get your act together or you're not going to have Europe anymore," Trump said to reporters after landing at Prestwick airport on Friday evening. "You got to get your act together and last month we had nobody entering our country. Nobody. Shut it down. And we took out a lot of bad people that got there with Biden." Biden repeatedly had single days when apprehensions ranged from 8,000 to 10,000 migrants, with his highest single month being December 2023, when 249,785 Border Patrol apprehensions were recorded. "Biden was a total stiff. And what he allowed to happen," Trump continued, chiding his predecessor. "But you're allowing it to happen to your countries and you got to stop this horrible invasion that's happening to Europe." "Many countries in Europe, some people, some leaders have not let it happen. And they're not getting the proper credit. They should. I could name them to you right now, but I'm not going to embarrass the other ones. But stop this. Immigration is killing Europe." The U.K. saw a major surge in 2022 and 2023 when small boat crossings reached over 44,000 per year, according to government figures. Nearly 22,500 people have arrived in the U.K. so far this year after crossing the English Channel, up 57% on the same point last year. Net migration to the UK was 431,000 last year, down almost 50% from 2023. Hungary and Poland are two of the most prominent European countries to take hardline stances against immigration, particularly irregular migration and asylum seekers. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is a Trump ally. Trump is in the U.K. for a five-day trip where he will check in with his golf resorts in Turnberry and Aberdeen, as well as with British Prime Minister Kier Starmer and head of the Scottish government, First Minister John Swinney. The president is expected to discuss the latest U.S.-U.K. trade agreement, a deal dubbed the "Economic Prosperity Deal" last month, which agreed to slash tariffs. The U.K. is one of the few countries with which the U.S. has advanced its trade agreements under relatively amicable terms. "I like your prime minister. He's slightly more liberal than I am, as you've probably heard. But he's a good man, he got a trade deal done," Trump told reporters. "And they've been working on this deal for 12 years. He got it done. It's a good deal. It's a good deal for the U.K." Trump added that he would be meeting Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission about securing a trade deal with Europe. "We're meeting with the European Union. And that would be actually the biggest deal of them all if we make it," Trump said.
