Sweeping Up the Mess in Biden’s Brain

Sweeping Up the Mess in Biden’s Brain

After his seriously faltering performance in Europe in recent days, even the most ardent supporter of our alleged president has to admit something is seriously wrong with him. If they can’t admit this simple fact, repeatedly broadcast out for all the world to see, either they are profoundly dishonest or, plausibly, they might be suffering from the same dementia afflicting the current occupant of the Oval Office.

Unless you’ve been vacationing in a cave on a remote island lackng Internet or cable service, and if you’ve been paying even cursory attention to the frightening blather coming out of Biden’s mouth in recent days, you have probably already heard the things he’s been saying that have gotten so much attention. These aren’t just Jell-O Joe’s usual gaffes and non-sequiturs. They go to the heart of U.S. policy vis-à-vis Ukraine and Russia, and they come at a time of critically high tension, the highest tension in many decades, between the two biggest nuclear powers on earth. In the midst of a world-class crisis when the utmost precision is needed in our leaders’ language, President Grandpa is out there uttering babble that would befuddle your typical Applebee’s waitress.

The only comfort we can take is that Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping know Biden is just pinch hitting and isn’t really calling the shots in the U.S. Their psychological warfare experts have no doubt fully briefed them on what is, or isn’t, going on between Biden’s ears, so they can take some of his rants and rambles much as the rest of us take the rants and rambles of a favorite, but over-ripe, relative at a holiday dinner. That’s thin comfort, though. Not the only difference, but one of the bigger ones, between Uncle Terrance and Uncle Joe is that Uncle Joe has his finger on the nuclear button, while Uncle Terrance just needs some help putting gravy on this mashed potatoes.

Aside from my attempts at humor, this is no laughing matter. After all, Biden is, even if nominally, the Commander-in-Chief. So when he says the U.S. might use a chemical weapon, that American troops would soon be witnessing Ukrainian women standing in front of tanks in Kyiv, or that Vladimir Putin needs to go as head of state in Russia, these statements potentially indicate huge shifts in U.S. policy. And when, in each case, White House staff quickly come out and say, never mind, those things aren’t really U.S. policy, sweeping up the mess originating in Biden’s confused brain, that again raises the very real question of who really is in charge at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

If that isn’t bad enough, once back on U.S. soil, and adding to the confusion and the questions about what really is our policy, Biden petulantly insisted he never said the things he said — things that have been recorded and broadcast a zillion times — and then angrily said he’s not rolling back anything. Did you hear that, Vlad? Joe says you have to go. And he really means it. It’s enough to make preppers out of all of us.

Letting Joe Speak for Himself

We can see now, more clearly than ever, what happens when Jell-O Joe doesn’t have his trusty teleprompter to read from, and why he’s repeatedly told — as he himself readily says — that he’s not allowed to answer questions. Once off script, the script his aides and speechwriters have prepared for him, he’s like a four-year-old spilling out family secrets, and whatever else comes into his head, to the neighbors. Only he does it with his eyes closed, seemingly struggling to find the next idea hiding among his remaining functioning brain cells.

Let’s let Joe speak for himself, and just take the most egregious statements to come out of his visits to Belgium and Poland, juxtapositioned with what others in his administration and on White House staff have said, and you can draw your own conclusions.

On sanctions and deterrence

Joe, in Brussels last Thursday, in answer to a CBS reporter’s question: ““Let’s get something straight. If you remember, if you covered me from the very beginning, I did not say that in fact the sanctions would deter him [Putin]. Sanctions never deter. You keep talking about that. Sanctions never deter.”

But the administration line for weeks and months said something quite different (emphasis added):

National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, on Feb. 11: “The president believes that sanctions are intended to deter. And in order for them to work — to deter, they have to be set up in a way where if Putin moves, then the costs are imposed.”

Secretary of State Antony Blinken in February: ““The purpose of the sanctions in the first instance is to try to deter Russia from going to war. As soon as you trigger them, that deterrent is gone. And until the last minute, as long as we can try to bring a deterrent effect to this, we’re going to try to do that.”

Pentagon spokesman John Kirby, prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: ““We want them to have a deterrent effect, clearly. And he hasn’t invaded yet.”

Just after Russia’s initial incursion into Ukraine, Daleep Singh, deputy national security adviser for international economics and deputy director at the National Economic Council: “Sanctions are not an end to themselves. They serve a higher purpose. And that purpose is to deter and prevent. They’re meant to prevent and deter a large-scale invasion of Ukraine that could involve the seizure of major cities, including Kyiv. They’re meant to prevent large-scale human suffering that could involve tens of thousands of casualties in a conflict.”

Vice President Kamala Harris, herself an expert at verbal nonsensical salad, at a NATO conference four days before the invasion: ““Absolutely, we strongly believe [that sanctions deter]. It will exact absolute harm for the Russian economy. The purpose of the sanctions has always been and continues to be deterrence.”

Of course, a day after the invasion started, Biden walked over his VP’s claim, saying: “No one expected the sanctions to prevent anything from happening.”

Oopsie.

On possible U.S. use of a chemical weapon

Biden, last Thursday in Brussels, on whether Russia might use a chemical weapon and what the U.S. response would be: “We would respond. We would respond if he uses it. The nature of the response would depend on the nature of the use.” Later, asked by a reporter whether the use of chemical weapons by Russia would trigger a NATO military response, Biden, again eyes closed as he struggled to make a reply, responded, “It would trigger a response in kind.”

Those last two word — “in kind” — raised the question whether that meant the U.S. would use a chemical weapon in response.

Friday, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan tried to mop up Biden’s verbal spill: “The United States has no intention of using chemical weapons, period, under any circumstances.”

On American troops in Ukraine

After chowing down on pizza and taking selfies with members of the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division in Rzeszow, Poland, last Friday, Biden, speaking in his somnolent way, told the troops: “You’re going to see when you’re there, and some of you have been there, you’re gonna see — you’re gonna see women, young people standing in the middle in front of a damned tank just saying, ‘I’m not leaving, I’m holding my ground.’”

Nothing like a good story to liven up reality, but a Biden sweepsperson, uh, I mean spokesperson, followed up by saying: ““The president has been clear we are not sending US troops to Ukraine and there is no change in that position.”

On regime change in Russia

Wrapping up his tetralogy of verbal deviations from official U.S. policy, Uncle Joe had one more whopper to throw on the grill on Saturday before (thankfully) leaving Poland: After berating Putin for his invasion of Ukraine, this time shouting his words, Biden ended with, “For God’s sake, this man cannot remain in power.”

Other than giving the liberal American media something they can fawn over, shouting out the words don’t make them any less, well, stupid. If what Biden said sounds to you like a call for regime change in Moscow, you’re not alone in that. Even the very liberal Atlantic had a handle on the problem. As the magazine subtitled Tom Nichols’s piece on Biden’s speech, “The words of every world leader matter right now, and none more than those of the president of the United States.”

Which kind of underscores why Biden’s verbal wanderings are important. And troubling.

Rushing to walk back Biden’s impromptu remark, a White House spokesman said, “The President’s point was that Putin cannot be allowed to exercise power over his neighbors or the region. He was not discussing Putin’s power in Russia, or regime change.”

Well, that’s not what he said, and it sure sounded like a call for regime change to a lot of people.

France’s President Emmanuel Macron warned that use of such inflammatory language in an already volatile situation was not useful, and he was not alone among European leaders expressing anguish over Biden’s words. And the Kremlin said “personal insults” — Biden had called Putin “a butcher” — would further undermine relations, such as they are, between Russia and the U.S. Ostensibly this also would make reaching some sort of diplomatic settlement to the conflict more difficult. People can, and do, die over such blunders.

Amid all the blustery rhetoric, one has to wonder why the U.S. has been so slow to provide the levels of weapons support asked for by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and which the U.S. has promised. As I always say, don’t go by what people say. Go by what they do.

More Biden creepiness

Adding to the bizarre aspect of all this, Biden did his usual inappropriate flirting with a young Ukrainian refugee, serving as a volunteer assisting other refugees fleeing the war in Ukraine, named Victoria. After hugging her, rubbing her shoulders, and letting his hands remain on her, he asked her, through a translator, “How do you say, in Ukrainian, who do you owe those beautiful eyes to? Your father or your mother? Who had the eyes?”

The stunned Victoria simply answered that they were from her mother.

“Mother’s eyes. You owe mama very big. You owe mama,” Biden blathered to the woman, before moving on to mingle with other refugees and volunteers and picking up small children to hold them, as he has been wont to do with small children over the years.

Not content to offend Ukrainian refugees, he also had to insult Americans’ intelligence, too. In one of his other more outrageous statements, Biden compared the Ukrainian refugees fleeing into Poland to the millions of illegal immigrants his administration has allowed to cross the U.S. southwest border into the U.S. As I keep saying, you can’t make this stuff up.

Denying reality . . . or not aware of it?

Of course, Biden never said any of these things, anyway. Just ask him, like Fox News’s Peter Doocy did at a presidential press conference on Monday. Here’s the actual conversation, and you can judge what the reality is:

Doocy: “Are you worried that other leaders in the world are going to start to doubt that America is ‘back’ if some of these big things that you say on the world stage keep getting walked back?”

Biden: “What’s getting walked back?”

Doocy: “Just in the last couple days . . . it sounded like you told troops they were going to Ukraine, it sounded like you said it was possible the U.S. would use a chemical weapon, and it sounded like you were calling for regime change in Russia, and we know . . . ”

Biden, interrupting: “None of the three occurred.”

Doocy: “None of the three occurred?”

Biden: “None of the three . . . You interpret the language that way.”

Later, Biden repeated, “I’m not walking anything back.”

He might not be, but the rest of his motley crew is busy not just walking, but running things back, desperately trying to sweep up Biden’s verbal messes, re-write what we actually heard, and stave off World War III. Meanwhile, the rest of us — and the world — wonder who, if anyone, really is at the helm. If you still believe it’s Jell-O Joe, I have a nice bombed-out building in Mariupol to sell you.

Featured image: Messy Room, levelord, Pixabay. Used with permission.

Joe Biden eats pizza with the troops in Poland, Evelyn Hockstein, Reuters. Used under Fair Use.

This piece also appears on my Substack, Issues That Matter. Subscribe here, and there, and share the piece.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.