Bill Clinton’s got Biden’s back, but is it a case of loyalty blinding reality? The former president, now 78, went on “CBS Sunday Morning” to push his book, “The First Gentleman,” and ended up dismissing claims that President Joe Biden was ever unfit to lead. His defense smells like Democratic damage control, but let’s unpack the facts.
Fox News reported that Clinton sat down with anchor Tracy Smith to talk about Biden’s health and mental sharpness. The interview, aired on a Sunday, tackled allegations from a new book, “Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again,” by Axios’ Alex Thompson and CNN’s Jake Tapper.
The book argues Biden’s team hid his physical and mental decline from the public. Smith pressed Clinton hard, asking if he ever thought Biden was unfit to run or showed cognitive decline.
Clinton, who’s four years younger than Biden, swore he’d had “several long talks” with the president and never saw anything amiss. Sounds convincing until you remember loyalty runs deep in Democratic circles.
“I thought he was a good president,” Clinton said, brushing off concerns about Biden’s age. He claimed Biden was “always on top of his brief” during their chats.
That’s a bold statement when Biden’s debate flop last year had even loyalists wincing.
Clinton doubled down, saying he saw Biden “not very long ago” and found him in “good shape.” He’s painting a picture of a spry, capable leader, but the public’s memory of Biden’s stumbles isn’t so forgiving. Selective recollection, perhaps?
The former president admitted he hasn’t read “Original Sin,” which hit shelves last month. He dismissed it as a political hit job, suggesting it’s just a way to pin Donald Trump’s reelection on Biden. That’s a convenient dodge for someone who claims to know the real Biden.
“I didn’t know anything about this,” Clinton said about the book’s allegations. He insisted he “never saw him that way,” referring to Biden’s supposed decline.
Ignorance might be bliss, but it’s a weak defense when the book’s stirring up serious questions.
“Original Sin” doesn’t pull punches, claiming Biden’s team shielded him from scrutiny and misled allies. The book’s release has reignited criticism of the Democratic Party and media for allegedly downplaying Biden’s weaknesses until his debate with Trump exposed them. Clinton’s denial feels like a lone voice in a growing chorus.
Clinton’s quick to praise Biden, saying he “did a good job” as president. But he sidestepped the book’s core issue: whether Biden’s age and health were liabilities hidden from voters. It’s a classic political pivot—focus on the good, ignore the ugly.
Clinton and his wife, Hillary, were quick to endorse Kamala Harris after Biden exited the presidential race. That move, hours after Biden’s withdrawal, shows where their loyalties lie. It also raises questions about whether Clinton’s defense is more about party unity than truth.
Smith’s questions cut to the chase: “Did you ever have a moment with him where you thought maybe he was unfit to run?” Clinton’s firm “No” might reassure some, but it doesn’t erase the doubts raised by Biden’s public appearances. Actions, as they say, speak louder than words.
The book’s timing is no accident, coming after Biden’s debate performance last year shocked even his supporters. Critics argue the media and Democrats covered for Biden until the truth was undeniable. Clinton’s dismissal of “Original Sin” as irrelevant feels like an attempt to rewrite history.
Clinton, who took office at 46, contrasted sharply with Biden, who was 78 at the start of his presidency. He acknowledged the age question, noting the challenge of leading into one’s 80s. Yet, he insisted Biden handled it fine—wishful thinking or genuine belief?
The former president’s defense hinges on personal anecdotes, not hard evidence. His claim that Biden was “on top of his brief” clashes with the narrative of a president struggling under the weight of age. Personal loyalty can’t trump public perception forever.
