Advertisement

White House Turned Down Super Bowl Over Fears Biden ‘Will Say Something Stupid’: Analyst

Advertisement

OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.


A noted political analyst and mainstream media columnist argued on Saturday that the reason the White House decided against allowing President Joe Biden to sit for a pre-game Super Bowl interview for the second year in a row is fear he’d say something “stupid.”

In an interview with NPR, New York Times columnist David Brooks, who appeared with Washington Post associate editor Jonathan Capehart, explained to host Amna Nawaz that special counsel Robert Hur’s report citing Biden’s lapsing memory and mental capacity likely drove the White House’s decision.

“I think the special counsel used — talked about the age because his job is to think through how a jury would think. And the argument was a jury would not convict the guy because they think he’d be a well-intentioned guy with memory problems,” Brooks began after Nawaz played a clip of Biden criticizing Hur for claiming in his report that the president could not remember the date of son Beau’s death from brain cancer.

“Nonetheless, prosecutors are also not allowed to insult people who they don’t charge because they — the people they’re insulting don’t get their day in court to fight back. And so there — this is prosecutorial standards, and I think he sort of very much flirted or went over the line on that,” Brooks claimed.

Advertisement

“On the age issue, I think it’s a perfectly legitimate issue. Listen, I have been interviewing Joe Biden for 30 years. He’s not as quick as he was. I say he was a pitcher — used to do it, throw 94, now throws 87 [mph]. So the age is a factor, and you got to think, it’s 86, he will be if he’s reelected,” he continued.

“It’s a totally legitimate issue. His staff seems to think it’s a legitimate issue because they act like he has a big problem. I was stunned that he turned down the Super Bowl interview for the second year in a row this time. Your guy is behind. You have a chance for an easy interview to talk to tens of millions of people, and you turn it down because they’re so cautious, the staff thinks he will say something stupid?” Brooks continued.

“Now, my own personal opinion, based on my own direct contact and my reporting, is that his judgment is — his memory may sometimes slip, but his judgment is good. And he absolutely runs the White House. He’s in charge of that administration. He’s completely sharp enough to do that,” Brooks claimed. “But will he be able to do that in five years? I think it’s a legitimate issue for voters to think about.”

WATCH:

Others vehemently disagree with Brooks’ assessment that Biden is capable.

Even before Hur’s Hur’s report documenting Biden’s diminished mental capacity and lack of memory came out on Wednesday, an eyewitness who interacted with the president in person last week reported that she found his condition “shocking.”

On Thursday evening, Fox News host Laura Ingraham discussed Hur’s findings with contributor and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, noting at one point during the segment that Democrats were already refuting Hur’s characterizations of Biden’s mental capacity by remarkably claiming that he did not display any shortcomings in their presence.

Advertisement

Ingraham noted that Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) claimed to CNN that he had not seen any signs that Biden had “poor memory,” while Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) said, “I’ve talked to him for hours on end as recently as a couple of months ago,” going on to say he is “as sharp as ever.”

“I mean, Newt, come on,” Ingraham said, before adding:

I have it on good authority…a friend of mine was in the White House a couple of weeks ago, and she is not a Trump fan, let me just say this… She was up close and personal with the president, and was shocked — her words were ‘shocked’ about his state.

Test your skills with this Quiz!

WATCH:

 

Advertisement