"President" Michelle Obama?

Robert Hur's Special Counsel Report Has Opened A Pandora's Box Of Presidential Speculations

How serious is the debate that is now starting to swirl around Joe Biden and the extent of his mental competency?

Serious enough to have survived several news cycles past the publication of Robert Hur’s Special Counsel Report declining to indict Joe Biden for mishandling classified documents after his tenure as Vice President of the United States ended in 2017.

In a newly released report, US special counsel Robert Hur chided President Joe Biden for his handling of classified documents but said he shouldn't be charged with any crimes.

"We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter," the report said at the beginning of its executive summary. "We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president"

Serious enough that even corporate media has latched on to Hur’s rationale against indicting the President because Joe Biden is simply “too old”.

"We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory," the report said, noting potential jurors would likely want to give him the benefit of the doubt. "It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him — by then a former president well into his eighties — of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

As I said when the report came out: Joe Biden convinced Robert Hur that he was too old and infirm to stand trial.

Special Counsel Finds President Too Old To Be Charged In Documents Case

In other words, Biden successfully persuaded Robert Hur that he really is a doddering old fool. President Biden successfully made “Dementia Joe” a legal defense.

Of course, if he is the doddering old fool he told Robert Hur he was, why is he still sitting in the Oval Office?

Perhaps more crucially, why have the other members of his Cabinet and his Administration not sought to invoke the Twenty-Fifth Amendment?

The debate now swirling around Joe Biden and the extent of his mental competency is arguably the worst thing that could have happened to the Democrats at the start of an election year. Robert Hur has presented ostensibly politically neutral information that makes a substantial case for Biden’s mental incompetency—and thus poses a substantive disqualifier for Biden as a candidate for the 2024 Presidential Election.

Robert Hur opened up a Pandora’s Box of political speculation, and the Democrats will find it difficult to close it again.

We must be clear on one point: Robert Hur “brought receipts” on the question of the President’s mental competency. Two paragraphs in particular stand out.

Mr. Biden's memory also appeared to have significant limitations-both at the time he spoke to Zwonitzer in 2017, as evidenced by their recorded conversations, and today, as evidenced by his recorded interview with our office. Mr. Biden's recorded conversations with Zwonitzer from 2017 are often painfully slow, with Mr. Biden struggling to remember events and straining at times to read and relay his own notebook entries.

In his interview with our office, Mr. Biden's memory was worse. He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended ("if it was 2013 - when did I stop being Vice President?"), and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began ("in 2009, am I still Vice President?"). He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died. And his memory appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him. Among other things, he mistakenly said he "had a real difference" of opinion with General Karl Eikenberry, when, in fact, Eikenberry was an ally whom Mr. Biden cited approvingly in his Thanksgiving memo to President Obama.

To the moderately informed layperson, President Biden’s behavior very much fits the typical symptoms of dementia¹.

Dementia symptoms vary depending on the cause. Common symptoms include:

Cognitive changes

• Memory loss, which is usually noticed by someone else.

• Problems communicating or finding words.

• Trouble with visual and spatial abilities, such as getting lost while driving.

• Problems with reasoning or problem-solving.

• Trouble performing complex tasks.

• Trouble with planning and organizing.

• Poor coordination and control of movements.

• Confusion and disorientation.

Psychological changes

• Personality changes.

• Depression.

• Anxiety.

• Agitation.

• Inappropriate behavior.

• Being suspicious, known as paranoia.

• Seeing things that aren't there, known as hallucinations.

In addition to the poor memory and difficulty reading described in the report, in his hastily called press conference after the report was published Biden arguably displayed the sort of agitation and even paranoia that is frequently associated with dementia.

President Joe Biden gave a press conference Thursday night after the release of a report from special counsel Robert Hur, who announced that Biden would not face charges over his handling of classified information from prior to his presidency.

Biden was combative, forcefully rejecting Hur’s claims that he has a poor memory. But the president was also repeatedly inaccurate, making three claims that were clearly contradicted by Hur’s report.

Even corporate media was not going to attempt to spin or fabricate to support the President’s misstatements over his handling of classified documents. Joe Biden either told a deliberate falsehood or he simply could not recall what his actual disposition of the classified materials found in his possession was. Whether Biden lied as a matter of technical definition relies on whether or not he genuinely knew what the truth was and made his demonstrably false statements anyway; either way his assertions in his press conference were too far removed from truth for the normally supine and compliant corporate media to play along.

There can be no doubt, then but that Robert Hur documented “something” amiss with Joe Biden’s mental faculties. While we cannot and should not extrapolate a clinical diagnosis from the Hur report, we can and should realize that Hur fairly conclusively proved that “something” is very wrong with the President’s mental faculties.

Yet as corporate media would go on to state—and state accurately—the Hur Report in one data dump of largely unimpeachable evidence gave form and power to what had up until then had been treated by the corporate media as rather malicious gossip and innuendo.

Details ostensibly meant in part to explain a lack of criminal liability border on mockery. The special counsel's report -- which includes ample photographs -- states flatly that a cache of Afghanistan documents Biden kept at his Delaware home were stored "in a badly damaged box in the garage, near a collapsed dog crate, a dog bed, a Zappos box, an empty bucket, a broken lamp wrapped with duct tape, potting soil, and synthetic firewood."

Even where there is an effort to provide a pro-Biden spin, what emerges is less an effective rebuttal of the essential claims regarding Biden’s memory and competency and more a defense rationale predicated on the seeming impropriety of hounding a man suffering from memory and cognitive decline—from dementia.

This is where the political problem emerges for the Democratic Party. If the Democrats concede that Joe Biden is suffering from dementia, Biden’s bid for re-election is effectively ended, and he would no longer be the Democratic Party’s standard bearer in the fall election. However, in the event that concession is made, the Democratic Party has no good method to introduce an alternative candidate to the base.

With less than a year until election day, the Democratic Party has no apparent backup plan if it decides to part with its endorsed candidate.

Choosing a candidate to run against or replace Biden would also likely be a tremendously messy process: Would the party want to go with its current vice president, Kamala Harris, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, or some other dark horse candidate? Who within the party would ultimately make that decision? What happens to all of the Biden campaign's funding?

The Democratic Party doesn't have the luxury of time to figure it out, either: The primary election season has already begun across the nation, and it's far too late for many states to add new names to their ballots per local election laws.

In fact, for all but a handful of states, the chance to insert any other candidate on their primary ballot has, quite simply, come and gone². In nearly every state, the deadline for putting a name on the primary ballot has passed.

As a consequence, if the Democratic Party means to replace Joe Biden, it will have to do so via a deal cut by various party brahmins and operators at the Democratic Convention later this summer. Back room deals are the very thing the primary process was established by both major parties to end, and yet a back-room deal would be the only way forward for the Democrats once Biden’s dementia is acknowledged.

For his part, former Presidential hopeful Vivek Ramaswamy has said this quiet bit very much out loud—there is, in Ramaswamy’s eyes, “no way” for Joe Biden to be the Democratic nominee for President..

Yet Ramaswamy is far from the only one making these speculations. Even the Washington Post has weighed in on the topic, with this fairly charged headline:

Philip Bump goes on to say the same quiet part out loud: what happens if Biden is not the nominee?

In a year where the party front-runners are both historically old and both facing additional pressures, it’s not inconceivable that 2024 might see the nominating contests suddenly upended.

So then what happens?

“What happens” is, of course, that the Democratic Party will select a new nominee, using the back-room deal method that pre-1968 was the norm for political parties in this country.

This, however, invites another question: “Who will the nominee be if not Biden?”

That is a loaded question. While both the Republican and Democratic Parties have extensively articulated rules on how candidates might be replaced, the rules largely start and end with the process of replacement—who gets tapped as the replacement is still very much a process of back-room wheeling and dealing.

It’s worth noting at the outset that both the Democratic and Republican parties have extensively articulated rules that govern how nominees are selected. You will not be surprised to learn this, both because those rules reduce the likelihood of embarrassing shenanigans (like state party organizations going sideways or candidates trying to upend delegate counts) and because political institutions have a demonstrated affinity for things like Roberts Rules of Order. The nominating rules, often finalized at the parties’ nominating conventions, indicate how delegates are awarded and how, if needed, candidates might be replaced.

For example, the rules of the Democratic Party indicate that the members of the Democratic National Committee have responsibility for “[f]illing vacancies in the nominations for the office of the President and Vice President” in the event that the nominated candidate is unable or unwilling to appear on the ballot. The Republican rules similarly empower the governing committee in that way; or the party could reconvene, that is, hold another convention.

What’s important to remember here, though, is that these decisions come down to individual people. The parties try to lock down what those people can do as much as possible; delegates won in nominating contests, for example, are generally bound to vote for the candidates their states selected. The same is true of the electors who formally vote for the winner of their states’ general elections; those electors are generally chosen in part because they are understood to be fervently loyal to the candidates they have been chosen to represent. But if a nomination or a nominee should suddenly go sideways, that means that the process can devolve into a scramble for power among those same people.

Despite having a Vice President who is theoretically “ready to go”, it is not at all clear that the Democrats have any confidence in Kamala Harris’ capacity to campaign and win in the fall.

Choosing a candidate to run against or replace Biden would also likely be a tremendously messy process: Would the party want to go with its current vice president, Kamala Harris, California Gov. Gavin Newsom, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, or some other dark horse candidate? Who within the party would ultimately make that decision? What happens to all of the Biden campaign's funding?

However, if social media and right-leaning corporate media have any legitimate insights into the Democrats’ conundrum, we may have already seen the Democrats “real” candidate in 2024: Michelle Obama.

Indeed, according to Cindy Adams, writing for the New York Post, Michelle Obama is merely waiting for the convention to be officially tapped to be the Democratic Party’s standard bearer in 2024

Plans are to grab Michelle for the Democratic presidency choice. Making the music is Barack the orchestra leader.

Michelle says she’s “terrified” Trump will win. No casual burp. Was programmed. She’s sent a survey to Dem biggies asking their feelings about her candidacy.

Obama’s quietly angling for Joe to go. He’s weaseled up to this for a few weeks. Mouths aren’t talking. But mouths are knowing.

Over one year ago, summer of 2022, she was in NYC meeting several big hedge CEOs, and said, “I am running, and I am asking for your support.”

Moreover, Michelle Obama arguably could be starting to lay a political foundation for stepping in as an eleventh-hour replacement for Joe Biden. Early in January, Michelle went on a podcast interview describing how she was “terrified” how the 2024 election might turn out.

Former first lady Michelle Obama said she’s “terrified” about the potential outcome of the 2024 election, listing November’s presidential contest as among the fears that keep her awake at night, in a podcast interview released Monday.

“What’s going to happen in this next election? I’m terrified about what could possibly happen, because our leaders matter. Who we select, who speaks for us, who holds that bully pulpit, it affects us in ways sometimes I think people take for granted,” Obama told Jay Shetty on his podcast “On Purpose.”

Is she “terrified” enough to step in and fill Joe Biden’s shoes in the fall election?

She likely would have to be very terrified to run. According to Democratic strategist—and Obama loyalist—David Axelrod, Michelle Obama has no love for politics.

AXELROD: Well, here's what I know, Michelle Obama loves this country. She's a brilliant person and a brilliant communicator. But she was a conscript to politics. She never was interested in a political life. Even when Barack Obama was a young politician, she really didn't participate much in his campaigns. I was with him in a Senate campaign in 2004, I think she showed up twice in the whole campaign on election nights. So, you know, she is not someone who likes politics. She doesn't like the tone and tenor of politics.

And I would be floored if she would be consent to that. They feel that they gave 10 years of their life to this. And I'm sure she feels as Barbara Bush did when she said there has to be someone other than the Bush's and the Clintons who could be President of the United States. My guess is that's her attitude.

I always say, Michael, that I have as much chance of dancing in the Bolshoi Ballet next year than that she would be President of the United States. And so, if you see me running around at the end of the year in a leotard you'll know what I mean.

If we take Cindy Adams reporting at face value, Michelle Obama is already laying the foundation to take over as the Democratic nominee at the convention.

If we take David Axelrod’s comments at face value, there is not a snowball’s chance in Hell of Michelle Obama stepping into the 2024 presidential ring.

Unfortunately, we have no reliable corpus of objective evidence to determine which assessment of Michelle Obama is correct.

The suddenly now-credible corporate media speculations on Michelle Obama also highlight another awkward political reality for the Democrats: the “natural” substitute for Joe Biden on the fall ballot, Kamala Harris, has even worse unfavorable ratings than Joe Biden.

Even Donald Trump’s favorability polls look better—way better—than Kamala Harris’.

It is not hard to construct a scenario where the Democrats do not tap Kamala Harris for the simple reason that she very likely cannot beat Donald Trump in the fall election.

Who besides Kamala Harris would be satisfactory to the many Democrat cliques within the broader party? Michelle Obama. At least, that is what the polling results and other data about the mindset of Democratic voters appears to suggest.

At present, the media talk about drafting Michelle Obama to run for President is just that: talk. Even the Cindy Adams’ pieces in the New York Post arguing that Michelle Obama is already angling for the nomination present little factual data to support that speculation.

While it is certain the speculation swirling around both Michelle Obama and Joe Biden in the aftermath of the release of Robert Hur’s special counsel report has taken on an urgency and credibility that this narrative could never have enjoyed but for the Robert Hur report, such speculation fails to address another challenging question: does Michelle Obama have enough time before November 5 and the election to present a compelling case on why she should be President?

Donald Trump and Joe Biden have been campaigning in their respective fashions now for well over a year. The RealClearPolitics polling averages have had time to accumulate a wealth of data about voter sentiment for either candidate. One reason the Robert Hur report is damaging to Biden is that the poll averages are already anticipating a narrow win by Donald Trump come the fall election.

We do not have any comparison poll data for Michelle Obama, but unless she is already seen as vastly more popular than Joe Biden, she would be starting with at least a small handicap and much less time than either Trump or Biden have had to make their case to the broader electorate.

The Robert Hur report is the opening of a true political Pandora’s Box for the Democrats. On the one hand it has undermined the President, perhaps even fatally so far as his reelection prospects are concerned. On the other hand it does not suggest that Michelle Obama is any better in terms of electability. On yet another hand the Hur report highlights what an abysmally bad VP choice Kamala Harris has proven to be.

The Robert Hur Special Counsel report on Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents has saddled Joe Biden’s re-election efforts with a number of awkward questions, while providing the Democrats almost no time at all, politically speaking, to resolve them.

It is now problematic whether or not Joe Biden will be the Democratic nominee come the fall.

It is equally problematic whether or not either Joe Biden or the Democrats will admit “the truth” about Joe Biden’s mental faculties.

It is equally problematic whether or not Michelle Obama can be drafted to take Joe Biden’s place.

Such questions surrounding Joe Biden’s candidacy were considered “conspiracy theory” by the corporate media before Robert Hur released his report. After the release of that report, these questions are now fit fodder for the entire corporate media chattering class.

That reality alone tells us just how politically disruptive the Robert Hur report has already been, and will likely continue to be through Election Day.

1. Mayo Clinic Staff. Dementia - Symptoms and Causes. 30 Aug. 2023, https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/dementia/symptoms-causes/syc-20352013.

2. Ballotpedia. “Deadline to Run for President, 2024.” Ballotpedia, 2024, https://ballotpedia.org/Deadline_to_run_for_president,_2024.