As President Joe Biden's term draws to a close, a startling report from The New York Times reveals the extraordinary extent to which his inner circle controlled not only access to the president but also the flow of information he received. This revelation sheds light on the highly managed and insular nature of his presidency, raising serious questions about his capacity for independent decision-making and the broader implications for the nation.
The Six Gatekeepers of Biden’s Presidency
The Times identifies six individuals who effectively acted as gatekeepers, determining what information reached Biden and how it was presented. Jill Biden, the First Lady, and Hunter Biden, his son, reportedly played pivotal roles in maintaining Biden’s confidence in his ability to govern. Alongside them were Mike Donilon and Steve Ricchetti, trusted aides who carefully managed the delivery of critical information. Annie Tomasini, the Deputy Chief of Staff, and Anthony Bernal, the First Lady’s senior aide, tightly controlled the president’s schedule, ensuring it aligned with what Biden could comfortably manage.
This carefully orchestrated structure suggests that the president’s inner circle prioritized shielding him from scrutiny over transparency and accountability. While Biden’s defenders might frame this as a strategy to protect him from undue stress, it paints a picture of a president heavily reliant on a small group of advisors to navigate even routine aspects of governance.
A Leader Out of Touch?
Throughout his term, Biden’s public schedule reflected an unusual pattern for a sitting president. His daily agenda often began late in the morning and concluded by mid-afternoon. Press conferences were infrequent, interviews were sparse, and on the rare occasions he engaged with the media, Biden’s hesitance to take unscripted questions became glaringly apparent. The president was often heard asking, “Am I allowed to take any questions?” — a telling indication of the degree to which his interactions were choreographed by his staff.
Even more peculiar was the routine use of teleprompters during informal events, such as private fundraisers, where only one reporter might be present. This reliance on scripted remarks, even in low-stakes settings, underscores concerns about the president’s ability to think and respond extemporaneously — a critical skill for a world leader.
A Foggy Mindset
Perhaps most troubling are the accounts that suggest Biden was frequently unaware of the implications of his own decisions. House Speaker Mike Johnson recently recounted a deeply unsettling interaction with the president regarding a policy decision to pause liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports to Europe. Johnson described Biden as being genuinely unaware that he had signed an executive order with significant economic and geopolitical ramifications. This wasn’t a matter of Biden deflecting responsibility; it was a moment of stark realization that the president may not fully comprehend the policies his administration enacted in his name.
If the leader of the free world does not grasp the decisions being made on his watch, who is truly steering the ship? Johnson’s experience — and the fear it instilled — is a chilling reminder of how dependent the administration appeared to be on unelected staffers making critical calls behind the scenes.
The Myth of Overexertion
The Times also attempted to defend Biden’s performance, pointing to the “exhausting” nature of his travel schedule as a contributing factor to his occasional lapses. But a closer look at the president’s itinerary shows a less grueling pace than his aides implied. For example, after attending the G7 Summit in Italy in mid-June 2024, Biden returned to Washington and had no public events for over a week before a critical debate. If 11 days of rest are insufficient to recover from travel, one must seriously question whether Biden had the stamina required for the presidency.
What This Means for America
The revelations about Biden’s presidency raise urgent questions about leadership, accountability, and transparency in government. The American people deserve a president who is not only capable of making informed decisions but also actively engaged in the process of governance. The image of a president cocooned by advisors, shielded from the realities of his own administration, is deeply unsettling.
As we reflect on the past four years, one unavoidable question looms: Who was truly running the country? The gatekeepers may have believed they were serving the president’s best interests, but in doing so, they may have eroded the very foundation of democratic governance — the people’s right to hold their leaders accountable.
In the end, the Biden presidency serves as a cautionary tale about the dangers of a leader disconnected from the machinery of government and overly dependent on a small, insulated group of advisors. As the nation moves forward, it must grapple with the lessons of this administration and demand greater transparency and accountability from its leaders. The stakes are simply too high for anything less.
0 Comments