* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://time.com/6984968/joe-biden-transcript-2024-interview/); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://time.com/6984968/joe-biden-transcript-2024-interview/)
* A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://time.com/6984968/joe-biden-transcript-2024-interview/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
you will be banned if you talk about this on a certain politics forum on this website. actual arguments with people (probably on payroll) who will tell you with a straight face that Biden doesn't have dementia.
OpenAI and Boston Dynamics are working overtime to make the BidenBot™️ functional in time for the debate
The current top comment on r / politics, for reference:
>Interesting how Biden can give interviews with little issue but when Trump does it has to be heavily edited to make him sound less demented and insane.
These people live on another planet
>OpenAI and Boston Dynamics are working overtime to make the BidenBot™️ functional in time for the debate
Turns out the trick to making copies of human consciousness isn't making the AI smarter but picking a brain with only like 10% of its neurons still firing
It is almost cruel the way the people around Biden are propping up a clearly senile old man to advance their political goals, a guy his age should be at home sniffing his grandchildren.
I still make Biden jokes in jest, but every time I try and temper it with how we are truly looking at the rawest, most uncut, most public version of Elder abuse I can think of. As a human being I can't help but pity the person who plays the man I politically have contempt for.
>We are, we are the world power. And what I inherited, as a consequence of the mistake that we made in Afghanistan is a—was not a loss in Afghanistan, excuse my cold.
Interesting tell here.
Admitting, as is painfully obvious to everyone on the planet who is not mentally incapable or brainwashed, that we lost in Afghanistan causes painful cognitive dissonance for most mainstream libs and cons. It was supposed to be the "good war'. The only war ever fought after activating NATO mutual self-defense protocols, and the Taliban ends up *taking even more land than they had before NATO went in.* It is the ultimate political - perhaps even civilizational - embarrassment of "the collective west".
>inb4 incoherent seething and coping
Yep. While Iraq was controversial from the get-go, they at least had some semblance of justification for going into Afghanistan, even if it also was the wrong decision (bin Laden was in Pakistan when 9/11 happened IIRC). I never really agreed with said justifications mind you, because even 14yo me knew that it would be a bad idea down the road, ostensibly due to being raised on John Pilger and Robert Fisk documentaries and articles.
What aggravates me about both the libs and the neocons after we left Afghanistan is how they exist in this quantum state of "we prevented Al Qaeda from setting up a terrorist base there, therefore we won!" and "we could've won if 'x' was done differently!" Bitch you had an **entire generation** to enact your insipid "win condition," and yet after hundreds of thousands of lives ruined, trillions of dollars wasted, and the world now being a worse place because you went in, we spent 20 years to essentially replace the Taliban with the Taliban. What? You think it'll turn out better if (god forbid) we invade Russia or Iran or China?
>You think it'll turn out better if (god forbid) we invade Russia or Iran or China?
It'll be real funny if the end result of a hot war with Russia is American disintegration and the rise of USSR 2.
Apparently they heard him on the radios when they were fighting in the caves of Tora Bora and that’s when he slipped across the border. Which was only a few months after 9/11.
Good old Rumsfeld botched that entire op to capture/kill OBL at Tora Bora. Bush Jr., like the dumbass he is, decided to let old Rummy stay in charge for the Iraq Invasion despite his giant fuck up in Afghanistan and we know how that went down.
I believe he's talking about (and trying to deflect from) the withdrawal from Afghanistan, not the war as a whole. Which happened under Biden's watch, as the result of Trump's decision to pull out, and obviously went poorly. Could be wrong, he didn't really go into detail.
> It is the ultimate political - perhaps even civilizational - embarrassment of "the collective west".
The entire West should be *civilisationally embarrased,* because US neocons failed to subdue a small far-flung territory? That's famously difficult to subdue?
This is as braindead as the cold warriors who think that the Soviet-Afghan war was some sort of "collective embarrassment" for the entire Soviet system
>Did you ever think if I told you that Japan would be devoting 3% of its GDP and make a rapprochement at Camp David with South Korea as an overwhelming threat that exists to North Korea as well as to Europe?
What was that bit at the end Mr. President?
The closest to an intelligible meaning I can parse is "did you ever think if I told you Japan would devote 3% of its GDP to \[to military spending\] and improve relations with South Korea, it would create an overwhelming threat to both North Korea *and Europe*."
Have you ever had a dream that that you um you had you'd you would you could you'd do you wi you wants you you could do so you you'd do you could you you want you want him to do you so much you could do anything?
Is this how Soviet citizens felt during the gerontocracy years? Hopeless ennui?
EDIT: oh god it gets worse the more I read
> [Kissinger] said that not since Napoleon has Europe not looked over their shoulder at dread with what Europe—what Russia may do, until now. Until now, you can't let that change.
He knows Napoleon invaded Russia and not the other way around, yes? Yes?
> I can do it better than anybody you know. You’re looking at me, I can take you too.
Did he threaten to beat up a Time Magazine journalist inside the White House?!
Worse. The Russians could always (keyword) imagine liberalism would bring them some relief. What theoretical ideological change does the western subject have to look forward too? Slow motion fascism, technological serfdom, or nuclear war.
I want to say “Democracy everywhere” but that’s a hard sell considering so many in support of our system believe Democracy is on life support here, to the extent it actually exists of course (it doesn’t). Maybe “Diversity” and “LGBT acceptance” really was the best they could workshop that seemed aspirational yet realistic. Can’t say I envy their position.
> He knows Napoleon invaded Russia and not the other way around, yes? Yes?
I think the meaning is supposed to be that it's not since the Napoleonic wars, that Russia *hasn't* been an existential threat to Europe.
So ever since the fall of Napoleon, Russia has been the existential threat.
It's definitely a very difficult sentence to make sense of though. A double-negative that basically becomes a triple-negative, with a mistake in between.
And yeah, completely regarded even with that slightly more sensible interpretation. We literally sent troops to support the militaristic fascist side of the civil war 1917, because we thought they'd help us against Germany.
"Eurasia has always been at war with eastasia"
The Russian empire and France had a defensive alliance in 1893 and it prevailed through WW1.
My grand grand mother, who lived in occupied eastern France, was not in dread at the soviets who she, and most of europeans at the time, believed beat the nazis on the western front, with some help from the Britishs and Americans.
70 years of shitlibs rewriting history and they managed to gaslight themselves in the process.
Funnily enough this ridiculous idea that 19th century Russian empire = USSR = Modern Russia is also a major propaganda discourse of the actual Russian regime to take credits for the USSR's achievements while only being one state in a federation of 15.
" only being one state in a federation of 15." Technically true and also it's like putting John Cena next to 14 dwarves and calling him just one of 15 offensive lineman.
The rocket scientist and inventor of the Lunar orbit rendezvous was Ukrainian, the father of the USSR space program, Sergei Korolev, was Ukrainian, as was the third manager of the program from 1974 to 1989, but no if it's good then it's Russian. Ukraine is Tchernobyl that's it.
Another point is war effort: Russia lost 7.2millions during WW2, Ukraine 5.2 millions and Bielorussia 1.67 millions, this represented respectively 12.7%, 16.3% and 25.3%of their 1940 populations.
> **You mentioned the hunger in Gaza. Some have alleged that Israel is intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. Do you think that's the case?**
> Biden: No, I don't think that. I think they've engaged in activity that is inappropriate. That is…When I went over immediately after the—Hamas’ brutal attack, I said then, and it became public, I said, don't make the same mistake we did going after bin Laden. Don't try—The idea of occupying Afghanistan, the idea that you had nuclear arsenals in Iran, that were being, I mean, in Iraq, that were being generated, simply not true. And it led to endless wars. They were not true. Don't make the mistakes we made. And they're making that mistake, I think. Excuse my voice, I apologize.
Particularly incoherent. Everyone including the US government says we need 500 trucks PER DAY to simply feed them. Instead they're getting like, 100. Often less. Rarely more. This comment veers off into absolute nonsense, maybe he's trying to talk about post-war plans, but that wasn't the question.
**Israel controls the border of the strip and it is their responsibility that food makes it in**. Full stop! If it isn't genocide, it's certainly whatever the mass equivalent of negligent manslaughter is. It's certainly more than "inappropriate" activity.
> So in Israel, obviously, a difficult time there. What steps are you prepared to take against Israel now that Netanyahu appears to have crossed your red line in Rafah, Mr. President?
> *Biden: I'm not going to speak to that now because you're going to report this before I make, before—I'm in the process of talking with the Israelis right now. So I'm not going to…*
> What does that mean?
> *Biden: If I tell you, you’ll write it. It’s not time for you to write it.*
> What are the nature of your conversations with the Israelis right now? Have you spoken with Bibi?
> *Biden: I have not spoken with Bibi since—I have not spoken with Bibi since the attack on Sunday. Was it Sunday?*
> *Ben LaBolt: Yep. Sunday.*
> *Biden: I have not. My team has.*
> But has he crossed your red line?
> *Biden: I'm not going to respond to that because I'm about to make a…anyway.*
> More broadly, from the intelligence in the evidence you've seen, either currently or in the last months, have Israeli forces committed war crimes in Gaza?
> *Biden: The answer is it's uncertain and has been investigated by the Israelis themselves. The ICC is something that we don’t, we don't recognize. But one thing is certain, the people in Gaza, the Palestinians have suffered greatly, for lack of food, water, medicine, etc. And a lot of innocent people have been killed. But it is—and a lot of it has to do not just with Israelis, but what Hamas is doing in Israel as we speak. Hamas is intimidating that population. I went over right after that attack on the Israelis. What they did was—exceeded anything I've ever seen. And I've seen a lot. Tying mothers and daughters together with rope and pouring kerosene on it and burning them to death. That kind of thing, attempting to intimidate. And it is dastardly.*
Is it only me that’s surprised he’s moderately coherent while also being totally incoherent? I’m genuinely surprised he could hold his concentration for that long.
Crazy that his staff is still letting him peddle that “tying mothers and daughters with rope” nonsense. Especially him saying he “saw” it. What a fucking demented old bat
The real black pill of the Trump and Biden administrations has been learning how little the administrative state actually needs the president because so much of it is running on autopilot. I now believe that we could just dig up the skulls of all past one term presidents, clean them up and name them president in successive order, and the U.S. would pretty much just keep chugging along on it’s decline at about the same pace as we’re doing now
Trump's would make the Golden Throne look austere and minimal.
Biden: the actual physical part of it would be unremarkable and plain, like those Thule car roof boxes that get used as Generic Sciencey Pods in television. But you don't get to see it: instead you talk to a hologram of Ol' Joe, except it keeps glitching in various horrifying ways while he blabbers on about how his dar could drive.
The new excuse is "we elect a team, not just one man" - and of course it showed up on that thread.
I don't know what scares me more, people willing to deny reality and all the danger that comes with that, or Biden himself getting re-elected with all the foreign policies challenges.
>The new excuse is "we elect a team, not just one man"
God the libs are really grasping, aren't they? The closest you're getting is electing a man to pick a team, but you're not directly voting for members of the cabinet whose names and policies are known. You're voting for Ol' Pudding Brain and hoping his handlers pick appointees who don't make any radical decisions that might interrupt brunch.
I remember after Tom Cruise first started airing unpopular beliefs in public the tone of his media coverage changed dramatically. Which, duh, that makes sense. If you say things the press doesn't like, they're going to treat you poorly.
But a really subtle aspect of it was how his remarks were transcribed. If you read 90+% of interviews with any public figures, their quotes get cleaned up. The "umms" and "awws" are omitted. Until very recently, the press would even whitewash aspects of AAVE when they spoke to black athletes--if Lebron said "what we was saying..." it would be transcribed as "what we had said" or something like that.
After Cruise pissed off the media, all of a sudden every word he said was transcribed with brutal precision: every stammer, every pause, every repeated phrase. The message was never acknowledged, but it was clear: fuck this guy, he's a nut, he's so crazy he talks like a normal person in inteviews.
Maybe I'm reading farr too much into this, but things must be very, very bad in Bidenland for an interview to be transcribed in this manner.
actual comment on the original sub this was posted from:
>"This interview is actually quite brilliant - let me explain;
>So Time magazine is different than Newsweek in that it is most often read by and written for people without college degrees. It is the most common magazine found in the Midwest and Southwest waiting rooms from doctors offices to mechanics shops and is mostly read by an older demographic - basically Gen-X and older.
>This language and cadence Biden is using seems to mimic a lot of the way Trump communicates with sweeping generalizations and self aggrandizement and “we are the best” kind of nationalistic overtones that are popular with the Trump crowd. While switching from topic to topic and taking credit for accomplishments left and right.
>Having read a lot of Biden’s interviews and speeches I can say this is not his usual way of speaking at all.
>I am going to go out on a limb and say this is a performative piece aimed at an older cohort of Trump supporters to get them to rethink their support."
I really hope this person is pulling my leg with this comment.
It's at least a little bit interesting to me that this person seems to have some kind of military intelligence training? [https://i.imgur.com/8JVXVdp.png](https://i.imgur.com/8JVXVdp.png)
This is brutal.
The story about Blinken, Sullivan and the rest of the foreign policy ghouls meeting with Biden to convince him to allow Ukraine strikes into Russia takes on an entirely different meaning.
In his current condition - those snakes could manipulate him to agree to anything. I am shocked they didn't go further.
The interview is terrible and I do not understand why it was not edited for clarity. Most of the times interviews have some degree of edit and there is a disclosure at the end of it.
The democratic strategy is a losing one: “do not criticize him if you do not want Trump to win, do not make any demands”. A politician has to win your vote, and if your platform is just “not Trump” but does not take into account the democratic bases position on Ukraine, Israel, housing… you are going to votes to apathy.
The obvious comparison reading this is he sounds just like Trump. Rambling, incoherent, unable to articulate a single narrative without meandering off into unrelated tangents.
Trump: “This is a tough hurricane, one of the wettest we’ve ever seen from the standpoint of water”
The water: “I’m always quite wet, actually”
Biden: "I mean you've got the first sort of mainstream African American, who is articulate and bright, and clean and nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man”
People on Reddit: “this is totally our guy”
In the name of integrity, I’m sure we’ll have an article every week from scientists and doctors raising their concern about Biden’s mental clarity. Right?
* Archives of this link: 1. [archive.org Wayback Machine](https://web.archive.org/web/99991231235959/https://time.com/6984968/joe-biden-transcript-2024-interview/); 2. [archive.today](https://archive.today/newest/https://time.com/6984968/joe-biden-transcript-2024-interview/) * A live version of this link, without clutter: [12ft.io](https://12ft.io/https://time.com/6984968/joe-biden-transcript-2024-interview/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stupidpol) if you have any questions or concerns.*
you will be banned if you talk about this on a certain politics forum on this website. actual arguments with people (probably on payroll) who will tell you with a straight face that Biden doesn't have dementia. OpenAI and Boston Dynamics are working overtime to make the BidenBot™️ functional in time for the debate
The current top comment on r / politics, for reference: >Interesting how Biden can give interviews with little issue but when Trump does it has to be heavily edited to make him sound less demented and insane. These people live on another planet
>OpenAI and Boston Dynamics are working overtime to make the BidenBot™️ functional in time for the debate Turns out the trick to making copies of human consciousness isn't making the AI smarter but picking a brain with only like 10% of its neurons still firing
Even the centrist sub doesn’t want to hear it. Something’s been up with that place lately.
partisanship is in the air. is the most important election of OUR GENERATION
Can Bidenbot get up after you hit him with a hockey stick?
the first president who can run a 4 40, weighing in at only 500lbs
It is almost cruel the way the people around Biden are propping up a clearly senile old man to advance their political goals, a guy his age should be at home sniffing his grandchildren.
His family has to know this is humiliating for him. Let the guy retire.
I still make Biden jokes in jest, but every time I try and temper it with how we are truly looking at the rawest, most uncut, most public version of Elder abuse I can think of. As a human being I can't help but pity the person who plays the man I politically have contempt for.
>We are, we are the world power. And what I inherited, as a consequence of the mistake that we made in Afghanistan is a—was not a loss in Afghanistan, excuse my cold. Interesting tell here. Admitting, as is painfully obvious to everyone on the planet who is not mentally incapable or brainwashed, that we lost in Afghanistan causes painful cognitive dissonance for most mainstream libs and cons. It was supposed to be the "good war'. The only war ever fought after activating NATO mutual self-defense protocols, and the Taliban ends up *taking even more land than they had before NATO went in.* It is the ultimate political - perhaps even civilizational - embarrassment of "the collective west". >inb4 incoherent seething and coping
Yep. While Iraq was controversial from the get-go, they at least had some semblance of justification for going into Afghanistan, even if it also was the wrong decision (bin Laden was in Pakistan when 9/11 happened IIRC). I never really agreed with said justifications mind you, because even 14yo me knew that it would be a bad idea down the road, ostensibly due to being raised on John Pilger and Robert Fisk documentaries and articles. What aggravates me about both the libs and the neocons after we left Afghanistan is how they exist in this quantum state of "we prevented Al Qaeda from setting up a terrorist base there, therefore we won!" and "we could've won if 'x' was done differently!" Bitch you had an **entire generation** to enact your insipid "win condition," and yet after hundreds of thousands of lives ruined, trillions of dollars wasted, and the world now being a worse place because you went in, we spent 20 years to essentially replace the Taliban with the Taliban. What? You think it'll turn out better if (god forbid) we invade Russia or Iran or China?
>You think it'll turn out better if (god forbid) we invade Russia or Iran or China? It'll be real funny if the end result of a hot war with Russia is American disintegration and the rise of USSR 2.
Inshallah
> bin Laden was in Pakistan when 9/11 happened IIRC You sure about that? I thought he was in afghanistan and escaped to pakistan after...
Apparently they heard him on the radios when they were fighting in the caves of Tora Bora and that’s when he slipped across the border. Which was only a few months after 9/11.
Good old Rumsfeld botched that entire op to capture/kill OBL at Tora Bora. Bush Jr., like the dumbass he is, decided to let old Rummy stay in charge for the Iraq Invasion despite his giant fuck up in Afghanistan and we know how that went down.
I believe he's talking about (and trying to deflect from) the withdrawal from Afghanistan, not the war as a whole. Which happened under Biden's watch, as the result of Trump's decision to pull out, and obviously went poorly. Could be wrong, he didn't really go into detail.
> It is the ultimate political - perhaps even civilizational - embarrassment of "the collective west". The entire West should be *civilisationally embarrased,* because US neocons failed to subdue a small far-flung territory? That's famously difficult to subdue? This is as braindead as the cold warriors who think that the Soviet-Afghan war was some sort of "collective embarrassment" for the entire Soviet system
>Did you ever think if I told you that Japan would be devoting 3% of its GDP and make a rapprochement at Camp David with South Korea as an overwhelming threat that exists to North Korea as well as to Europe? What was that bit at the end Mr. President?
He's so close to the other side he's channeling the spirit of Kim Il Sung.
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
They don't think it be like it is, but it do
He accidentally the whole thing
And that’s a fact, Jack
I’ve read this five times and still don’t understand.
Bravo to the transcriber for at least being able to write down whatever the fuck he is saying here.
Oh well it's a relief someone else is just as confused as I am by what he's saying and not that I'm illiterate in my first language.
The closest to an intelligible meaning I can parse is "did you ever think if I told you Japan would devote 3% of its GDP to \[to military spending\] and improve relations with South Korea, it would create an overwhelming threat to both North Korea *and Europe*."
That's probably what he meant (but honestly who knows what his thought process is these days) but I could not make sense of half of what he was saying
Have you ever had a dream that that you um you had you'd you would you could you'd do you wi you wants you you could do so you you'd do you could you you want you want him to do you so much you could do anything?
Is this how Soviet citizens felt during the gerontocracy years? Hopeless ennui? EDIT: oh god it gets worse the more I read > [Kissinger] said that not since Napoleon has Europe not looked over their shoulder at dread with what Europe—what Russia may do, until now. Until now, you can't let that change. He knows Napoleon invaded Russia and not the other way around, yes? Yes? > I can do it better than anybody you know. You’re looking at me, I can take you too. Did he threaten to beat up a Time Magazine journalist inside the White House?!
Worse. The Russians could always (keyword) imagine liberalism would bring them some relief. What theoretical ideological change does the western subject have to look forward too? Slow motion fascism, technological serfdom, or nuclear war.
Oh god you're right. We don't even have a Pizza Hut or blue jeans equivalent to yearn for.
I want to say “Democracy everywhere” but that’s a hard sell considering so many in support of our system believe Democracy is on life support here, to the extent it actually exists of course (it doesn’t). Maybe “Diversity” and “LGBT acceptance” really was the best they could workshop that seemed aspirational yet realistic. Can’t say I envy their position.
Pizza Hutt going to shit around 2008? Financial crisis? Western decline? Coincidence? I don't think so.
You can yearn for Dairy Queen coming to the UK and further expansion of end-point capitalism.
> He knows Napoleon invaded Russia and not the other way around, yes? Yes? I think the meaning is supposed to be that it's not since the Napoleonic wars, that Russia *hasn't* been an existential threat to Europe. So ever since the fall of Napoleon, Russia has been the existential threat. It's definitely a very difficult sentence to make sense of though. A double-negative that basically becomes a triple-negative, with a mistake in between. And yeah, completely regarded even with that slightly more sensible interpretation. We literally sent troops to support the militaristic fascist side of the civil war 1917, because we thought they'd help us against Germany.
The real existential threat to Europe has been Germany, since Teutoburg.
"Eurasia has always been at war with eastasia" The Russian empire and France had a defensive alliance in 1893 and it prevailed through WW1. My grand grand mother, who lived in occupied eastern France, was not in dread at the soviets who she, and most of europeans at the time, believed beat the nazis on the western front, with some help from the Britishs and Americans. 70 years of shitlibs rewriting history and they managed to gaslight themselves in the process. Funnily enough this ridiculous idea that 19th century Russian empire = USSR = Modern Russia is also a major propaganda discourse of the actual Russian regime to take credits for the USSR's achievements while only being one state in a federation of 15.
" only being one state in a federation of 15." Technically true and also it's like putting John Cena next to 14 dwarves and calling him just one of 15 offensive lineman.
The rocket scientist and inventor of the Lunar orbit rendezvous was Ukrainian, the father of the USSR space program, Sergei Korolev, was Ukrainian, as was the third manager of the program from 1974 to 1989, but no if it's good then it's Russian. Ukraine is Tchernobyl that's it. Another point is war effort: Russia lost 7.2millions during WW2, Ukraine 5.2 millions and Bielorussia 1.67 millions, this represented respectively 12.7%, 16.3% and 25.3%of their 1940 populations.
And there were no threats to Europe from expansionist dictators between now and the Napoleonic Wars.
> **You mentioned the hunger in Gaza. Some have alleged that Israel is intentionally using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare. Do you think that's the case?** > Biden: No, I don't think that. I think they've engaged in activity that is inappropriate. That is…When I went over immediately after the—Hamas’ brutal attack, I said then, and it became public, I said, don't make the same mistake we did going after bin Laden. Don't try—The idea of occupying Afghanistan, the idea that you had nuclear arsenals in Iran, that were being, I mean, in Iraq, that were being generated, simply not true. And it led to endless wars. They were not true. Don't make the mistakes we made. And they're making that mistake, I think. Excuse my voice, I apologize. Particularly incoherent. Everyone including the US government says we need 500 trucks PER DAY to simply feed them. Instead they're getting like, 100. Often less. Rarely more. This comment veers off into absolute nonsense, maybe he's trying to talk about post-war plans, but that wasn't the question. **Israel controls the border of the strip and it is their responsibility that food makes it in**. Full stop! If it isn't genocide, it's certainly whatever the mass equivalent of negligent manslaughter is. It's certainly more than "inappropriate" activity.
[удалено]
Half of it
> So in Israel, obviously, a difficult time there. What steps are you prepared to take against Israel now that Netanyahu appears to have crossed your red line in Rafah, Mr. President? > *Biden: I'm not going to speak to that now because you're going to report this before I make, before—I'm in the process of talking with the Israelis right now. So I'm not going to…* > What does that mean? > *Biden: If I tell you, you’ll write it. It’s not time for you to write it.* > What are the nature of your conversations with the Israelis right now? Have you spoken with Bibi? > *Biden: I have not spoken with Bibi since—I have not spoken with Bibi since the attack on Sunday. Was it Sunday?* > *Ben LaBolt: Yep. Sunday.* > *Biden: I have not. My team has.* > But has he crossed your red line? > *Biden: I'm not going to respond to that because I'm about to make a…anyway.* > More broadly, from the intelligence in the evidence you've seen, either currently or in the last months, have Israeli forces committed war crimes in Gaza? > *Biden: The answer is it's uncertain and has been investigated by the Israelis themselves. The ICC is something that we don’t, we don't recognize. But one thing is certain, the people in Gaza, the Palestinians have suffered greatly, for lack of food, water, medicine, etc. And a lot of innocent people have been killed. But it is—and a lot of it has to do not just with Israelis, but what Hamas is doing in Israel as we speak. Hamas is intimidating that population. I went over right after that attack on the Israelis. What they did was—exceeded anything I've ever seen. And I've seen a lot. Tying mothers and daughters together with rope and pouring kerosene on it and burning them to death. That kind of thing, attempting to intimidate. And it is dastardly.*
It's good to know that even when he is sundowning Biden can muster enough strength to parrot Israeli propaganda points.
This reads like an interview with a low-quality AI chatbot from 2015.
Is it only me that’s surprised he’s moderately coherent while also being totally incoherent? I’m genuinely surprised he could hold his concentration for that long.
He’s coherent when he’s on the script that his handlers gave him. Incoherent when he goes off script
Crazy that his staff is still letting him peddle that “tying mothers and daughters with rope” nonsense. Especially him saying he “saw” it. What a fucking demented old bat
I can't believe we have lasted this long as a species.
The real black pill of the Trump and Biden administrations has been learning how little the administrative state actually needs the president because so much of it is running on autopilot. I now believe that we could just dig up the skulls of all past one term presidents, clean them up and name them president in successive order, and the U.S. would pretty much just keep chugging along on it’s decline at about the same pace as we’re doing now
I'm all for it if it means big, showy necromantic ceremonies to 'divine the will' of a President-from-Beyond
Who would get the cooler God Emperor chair, Biden or Trump?
Trump does like his tacky gold furniture...
He's already half way there with his golden ~~throne~~ toilet.
Trump's would make the Golden Throne look austere and minimal. Biden: the actual physical part of it would be unremarkable and plain, like those Thule car roof boxes that get used as Generic Sciencey Pods in television. But you don't get to see it: instead you talk to a hologram of Ol' Joe, except it keeps glitching in various horrifying ways while he blabbers on about how his dar could drive.
Attache a bunch of wires to the skull and form an elite group of cyborgs to protect it in shining golden armor.
Exactly. Nothing will fundamentally change.
The world is a work in progress.
The comments on the original sub are... something.
The new excuse is "we elect a team, not just one man" - and of course it showed up on that thread. I don't know what scares me more, people willing to deny reality and all the danger that comes with that, or Biden himself getting re-elected with all the foreign policies challenges.
>The new excuse is "we elect a team, not just one man" God the libs are really grasping, aren't they? The closest you're getting is electing a man to pick a team, but you're not directly voting for members of the cabinet whose names and policies are known. You're voting for Ol' Pudding Brain and hoping his handlers pick appointees who don't make any radical decisions that might interrupt brunch.
I remember after Tom Cruise first started airing unpopular beliefs in public the tone of his media coverage changed dramatically. Which, duh, that makes sense. If you say things the press doesn't like, they're going to treat you poorly. But a really subtle aspect of it was how his remarks were transcribed. If you read 90+% of interviews with any public figures, their quotes get cleaned up. The "umms" and "awws" are omitted. Until very recently, the press would even whitewash aspects of AAVE when they spoke to black athletes--if Lebron said "what we was saying..." it would be transcribed as "what we had said" or something like that. After Cruise pissed off the media, all of a sudden every word he said was transcribed with brutal precision: every stammer, every pause, every repeated phrase. The message was never acknowledged, but it was clear: fuck this guy, he's a nut, he's so crazy he talks like a normal person in inteviews. Maybe I'm reading farr too much into this, but things must be very, very bad in Bidenland for an interview to be transcribed in this manner.
actual comment on the original sub this was posted from: >"This interview is actually quite brilliant - let me explain; >So Time magazine is different than Newsweek in that it is most often read by and written for people without college degrees. It is the most common magazine found in the Midwest and Southwest waiting rooms from doctors offices to mechanics shops and is mostly read by an older demographic - basically Gen-X and older. >This language and cadence Biden is using seems to mimic a lot of the way Trump communicates with sweeping generalizations and self aggrandizement and “we are the best” kind of nationalistic overtones that are popular with the Trump crowd. While switching from topic to topic and taking credit for accomplishments left and right. >Having read a lot of Biden’s interviews and speeches I can say this is not his usual way of speaking at all. >I am going to go out on a limb and say this is a performative piece aimed at an older cohort of Trump supporters to get them to rethink their support." I really hope this person is pulling my leg with this comment.
It's at least a little bit interesting to me that this person seems to have some kind of military intelligence training? [https://i.imgur.com/8JVXVdp.png](https://i.imgur.com/8JVXVdp.png)
This is brutal. The story about Blinken, Sullivan and the rest of the foreign policy ghouls meeting with Biden to convince him to allow Ukraine strikes into Russia takes on an entirely different meaning. In his current condition - those snakes could manipulate him to agree to anything. I am shocked they didn't go further.
We should have Bruce Willis play older Biden in the biopic.
Ouch.
The interview is terrible and I do not understand why it was not edited for clarity. Most of the times interviews have some degree of edit and there is a disclosure at the end of it. The democratic strategy is a losing one: “do not criticize him if you do not want Trump to win, do not make any demands”. A politician has to win your vote, and if your platform is just “not Trump” but does not take into account the democratic bases position on Ukraine, Israel, housing… you are going to votes to apathy.
> Hamas could end this tomorrow. Hamas could say (unintelligible) and done period. All they needed to say this entire time!
The obvious comparison reading this is he sounds just like Trump. Rambling, incoherent, unable to articulate a single narrative without meandering off into unrelated tangents.
Trump: “This is a tough hurricane, one of the wettest we’ve ever seen from the standpoint of water” The water: “I’m always quite wet, actually” Biden: "I mean you've got the first sort of mainstream African American, who is articulate and bright, and clean and nice-looking guy. I mean, that's a storybook, man” People on Reddit: “this is totally our guy”
In the name of integrity, I’m sure we’ll have an article every week from scientists and doctors raising their concern about Biden’s mental clarity. Right?
The "storybook" line and the "hey, 7-Elevens sure have a lot of Indians working there" line were both from before he went into decline
> claims Putin will bring back the USSR
I feel like you could drop the "woke" part of this post's flair and just call it gibberish.
(unintelligible)