# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Democrats All but Admit Their Economic Policies Didn't Work | National Review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While eating an ice-cream cone, Joe Biden declared that, 'Our economy is strong as hell.' But as two new polls indicate that Americans think the economy is doing bad.

# data[].attributes.body
This story from Politico by Olivia Glander reports on Joe and Hunter Biden, and whether or not he'd be prosecuted for tax crimes and a false statement during a gun purchase. It's a straight news story and no opinion has been interjected. Olivia simply gives the facts and information surrounding the story.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
President Joe Biden addressed the possibility of his son, Hunter Biden, being prosecuted for tax crimes and a false statement during a gun purchase - the first time the elder Biden has answered questions about the possibility of charges, first reported by the Washington Post.

"I didn't know anything about it," the president said in an interview that aired Tuesday on CNN, of his son possibly lying about drug use on an application to purchase a gun.

Federal agents think they have enough evidence to charge the younger Biden with tax crimes and the false statement, the Washington Post reported last week. However, no such charges have been filed by the U.S. Attorney in Delaware - an appointee of former President Donald Trump - yet.

Federal law requires people to attest they're not unlawfully using or addicted to drugs when they buy a gun; Hunter Biden has said that he was struggling with drug addiction in 2018, the same year he purchased a gun, the Post has reported.

The president repeatedly stressed that he's proud of his son for overcoming drug addiction and establishing "a new life."

"I have great confidence in my son," Biden said in a pre-taped interview with CNN's Jake Tapper. "I love him and he's on the straight and narrow, and he has been for a couple years now. And I'm just so proud of him."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
President addresses possibility of Hunter Biden prosecution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Joe Biden addressed the possibility of his son, Hunter Biden, being prosecuted for tax crimes and a false statement during a gun purchase - the first time the elder Biden has answered questions about the possibility of charges, first reported by the Washington Post.

# data[].attributes.body
This story from Economist by an unnamed author is an opinion story from the title to the conclusion. The writer of this article clearly has some form of bias toward the legalization of cannabis and thinks cocaine should be legalized as well. It is the focal point of the article after all, and they have a lot to say about it as well.

The title alone is the first sign of this being an opinion story, stating President Biden as being "too timid," and that it is time to legalize cocaine. Both of which are written in the opinion of the author. I could excuse it if it were being quoted as the opinion of someone else, however. They double down on this opinion as the article goes on. I almost criticized the author of the article as well for misspelling "legalize," until I looked into The Economist, and found out they're a Britsh-based news outlet. So you get the pass this time, unnamed author. But, I'm watching you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"I t makes no sense," said Joe Biden on October 6th, as he pardoned the 6,000 or so Americans convicted of possessing a small amount of marijuana. Although cannabis is fully legal in 19 American states, at the federal level it is still deemed to be as dangerous as heroin and more so than fentanyl, two drugs that contributed to more than 100,000 Americans dying of opioid overdoses last year. But the president's admission applies to drug policy more broadly. Prohibition is not working-and that can be seen most strikingly with cocaine, not cannabis.

Since Richard Nixon launched the "war on drugs" half a century ago, the flow of cocaine into the United States has surged. Global production hit a record of 1,982 tonnes in 2020, according to the latest data, though that is likely to be an underestimate. That record high is despite decades of strenuous and costly efforts to cut off the supply. Between 2000 and 2020 the United States ploughed $10bn into Colombia to suppress production, paying the local armed forces to spray coca plantations with herbicide from the air or to yank up bushes by hand. To no avail: when coca is eradicated on one hillside, it shifts to another.

The worst harm falls on producing and trafficking countries, where drug profits fuel violence. Murder in Colombia is three times more common than in the United States; in Mexico, four times. In some areas, drug gangs are so wealthy and well-armed that they rival the state, giving cops and officials the choice of plata o plomo (silver or lead): be corrupted or be killed. Prohibition also sucks children out of school, as drug gangs favour recruits who are too young to be prosecuted (see Graphic Detail).

Two presidents, Gustavo Petro of Colombia and Pedro Castillo of Peru, are clamouring for change. Mr Petro has suggested steering the police away from coca farmers by decriminalising coca leaf production and allowing Colombians to consume cocaine safely. These are all good ideas, but the cocaine gangs will remain powerful so long as their product is illegal in the rich countries that consume most of it, such as the United States.

Half-measures, such as not prosecuting cocaine users, are not enough. If producing the stuff is still illegal, it will be criminals who produce it, and decriminalisation of consumption will probably increase demand and boost their profits. The real answer is full legalisation, allowing non-criminals to produce a strictly regulated, highly taxed product, just as whisky- and cigarette-makers do. (Advertising it should be banned.)

Legal cocaine would be less dangerous, since legitimate producers would not adulterate it with other white powders and dosage would be clearly labelled, as it is on whisky bottles. Cocaine-related deaths have risen fivefold in America since 2010, mostly because gangs are cutting it with fentanyl, a cheaper and more lethal drug.

Legalisation would thereby defang the gangs. Obviously, some would find other revenues but the loss of cocaine profits would help curb their power to recruit, buy top-end weapons and corrupt officials. This would reduce drug-related violence everywhere, but most of all in the worst-affected region, Latin America.

If cocaine were legal, more people would take it. For some, this will be a choice: snorting a substance they know is unhealthy because it gives them pleasure. But cocaine is addictive. A paucity of research makes it hard to know how it compares with alcohol or tobacco on this score. More study is needed, as are greater efforts to treat addiction. This could be funded (and then some) by the money saved if the "war" were wound down.

In private, many officials understand that prohibition is not working any better than it did in Al Capone's day. Just now full legalisation seems politically impossible: few politicians want to be called "soft on drugs". But proponents must keep pressing their case. The benefits-safer cocaine, safer streets and greater political stability in the Americas-far outweigh the costs. ■

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Joe Biden is too timid. It is time to legalise cocaine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"I t makes no sense," said Joe Biden on October 6th, as he pardoned the 6,000 or so Americans convicted of possessing a small amount of marijuana. Although cannabis is fully legal in 19 American states, at the federal level it is still deemed to be as dangerous as heroin and more so than fentanyl, two drugs that contributed to more than 100,000 Americans dying of opioid overdoses last year.

# data[].attributes.body
New York Post is listed as a Right-wing outlet on the Allsides Media Bias Chart.

This headline of the article alone can stand to reveal a conservative bias, but of course there is more, as even Liberal will throw a few shots at Biden. I digress.

While no direct correlation to Conservative bias can be made with the topic of Biden and his blunders, the sheer amount in which they speak of it and the nature of the article itself reveals a conservative bias. Ridiculing everything and anything the man makes a single mistake on.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Joe Biden's cognitive deficits are increasingly apparent, even to the most amateur observer.

Whether he has dementia at this point is immaterial. Half the world thinks he does and that weakens the United States and imperils us all.

Whether he is falling up the stairs of Air Force One or falling off a stationary bike, whether he is wandering around on stage in a fog or clutching cheat sheets designed for a 4-year-old, whether he is shouting incoherently or whispering creepily, the optics are shocking.

With his 80th birthday approaching next month, even if most Americans are too polite or willfully unobservant to say so, it's clear that Biden is not up to the world's most difficult job.

He projects weakness and folly at a time of international turmoil. Disrespect for the president echoes around the world, among allies and enemies alike.

Even when he went to London last month for the Queen's funeral, people were filmed yelling, "Let's go, Brandon" at his passing limousine. He and first lady Jill Biden arrived late to Westminster Abbey and, after they were ushered to the cheap seats 14 rows back, he was mocked for playing with his tongue during the service.

It's criminal that the Democratic Party has placed America in such an invidious position with an emotionally febrile part-time president who appears not to be all there an awful lot - either in his mind or at the White House. The least they could do is cover up his deficits more skillfully.

Last week, at a press conference, much was made of his calling out for recently deceased Congresswoman Jackie Walorski.

"Jackie, are you here?" he said. "Where's Jackie?" he continued, looking around the startled room. "I think she wasn't going to be here."

Well, no, because she died in August, as he should have remembered since he issued a long public condolence letter after her death in a car crash, and the conference he was speaking at was partly in honor of her memory, with a film montage of her life due to be played.

The memory lapse would likely have passed unnoticed, like so many of Biden's oopsies, except for some reason the White House press corps decided they had had enough of being gaslit about the president's mental fitness.

"What happened here?" reporters asked of flummoxed White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, who only had one glib talking point prepared, which she repeated over and over: Walorski "was on his mind - she was top of mind." But the answer cleared up nothing.

"Was the president confused?" asked one reporter. "Was something written in the teleprompter that he didn't recognize? Help us explain what happened here?"

Another reporter asked, "Why, if she and the family is top of mind, does the president think she's living, and in the room?"

Yet another pointed out, "I have John Lennon top of mind just about every day, but I'm not looking around for the man."

No satisfactory answer was forthcoming, and how could there be?

There is no explanation for how anyone of sound mind could make such a bungle.

Pity the president

The late congresswoman's brother, Keith Walorski, handled the "big mess-up" with compassion: "All I'm saying right now about the president is bless his heart for trying," he told reporters, adding that Biden is "doing the best he can do with what he's got right now ... I just feel sorry for him."

Ouch. That is the decent response, although it is no good for the president of the free world to be an object of pity.

As dishonest and destructive as Biden has been, it's hard to see an elderly man humiliating himself every day while the White House continues to pretend there is nothing to see and the media pretends he is a serious candidate for 2024.

Saturday night, Biden dressed up in a bow tie to deliver another angry speech railing against his "semi-fascist" political opponents to a Congressional Black Caucus dinner in Washington: "I know I'm being banged up by the Republicans, but come bring it on," he snarled.

"Hate will not prevail in America," he bellowed later, warming to his favorite imaginary topic. "White supremacy will not have the last word."

How many more times must we endure these spiteful outbursts from a president who promised to unite the country?

How much longer must we cringe as he reads "end of quote, repeat the line" off the teleprompter?

How many times must we wince as he ad-libs recklessly in a speech about international tinderboxes, like Russia, Ukraine, the Nord Stream pipeline, or Taiwan?

How much longer must we watch him wandering around lost on stage after giving a speech, appearing to shake imaginary hands or gesture to invisible staff?

The embarrassment is not just for a 79-year-old career politician who needs cue cards to tell him when to stand and where to sit and what to write in a condolence book. It's for every American.

When Biden went to Israel in the summer, he stumbled off Air Force One asking, "What am I doing now?," had to be steered onto the red carpet and then accidentally waxed lyrical about the "honor" of the Holocaust.

"The truth is that it's not Biden who is senile, all of America is senile," was the conclusion of Israeli newspaper Haaretz.

Who's to blame

It is at least a staff failure that Biden is left to wander around confused in front of the cameras. Why isn't a minder always at his side to subtly steer him off stage?

He keeps looking to Secret Service agents to step in and guide him. But it's not their job to play nursemaid.

It's also a wife failure. Dr. Jill ought to be saving her husband's dignity, but she always looks out of sorts when she is in place to perform the role, whether it's telling him what direction to walk in the Rose Garden or helping him put on a jacket at the airport.

It's not easy, as anyone knows who has experienced the aging of a loved one. But Nancy Reagan would never have allowed her husband to be repeatedly humiliated in public.

At stake is the nation's honor, at least.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Senile' Joe Biden is bringing shame to the United States

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Joe Biden's cognitive deficits are increasingly apparent, even to the most amateur observer. Whether he has dementia at this point is immaterial. Half the world thinks he does and that weakens the United States and imperils us all.

# data[].attributes.body
Vox is listed as far left on the Allsides Media Bias Chart. Although I was told I don't have to use it, I thought it was still worth mentioning.

And while there isn't an overwhelmingly large amount of bias present, you can tell there's leaning support for the left both in their headline and in the article itself. They speak towards right leaning political ideologies with a somewhat negative cadence, while voicing support and opinions that fall in line with left leaning views. For example:

"In Democratic circles, especially, abortion has often been banished to the sidelines — it’s been seen as a social issue, or a “women’s” issue, as opposed to the kind of pocketbook matters that voters supposedly really care about. This kind of thinking has permeated media, too — “This Is A Story About Abortion, No One Will Read It,” Marie Solis wrote at Jezebel in 2020, detailing the way she and other reporters on the beat struggled to “get readers to care” about an issue that is intimately connected to economic, racial, and social justice, but often seemed all too easy to ignore.

Republicans, meanwhile, have taken advantage of this vacuum. Since the 1980s and especially since 2010, conservative politicians have made restricting abortion an explicit priority, and while Democrats have generally voiced support for reproductive freedom, they’ve rarely been as committed to upholding abortion rights as Republicans have been to dismantling them. That’s likely one of the reasons Republicans have been so successful in rolling back access to the procedure across large swaths of the country."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For decades, abortion has been treated as a fringe issue in American politics.

Sure, it made headlines when a new law passed or a new decision was handed down, and it was always deeply important to activists on both sides — as well as to many ordinary people, regardless of politics, who wanted to end a pregnancy.

For much of the 2000s and 2010s, though, abortion was routinely sidelined in presidential debates. It was compromised away when Democrats wanted to enlarge their tent by welcoming more socially conservative candidates and voters. Activists have campaigned for years to get politicians to even bring up abortion in speeches — President Joe Biden himself did not use the word until more than 200 days into his term, and then only in a written press statement, according to the abortion rights group We Testify.

In Democratic circles, especially, abortion has often been banished to the sidelines — it’s been seen as a social issue, or a “women’s” issue, as opposed to the kind of pocketbook matters that voters supposedly really care about. This kind of thinking has permeated media, too — “This Is A Story About Abortion, No One Will Read It,” Marie Solis wrote at Jezebel in 2020, detailing the way she and other reporters on the beat struggled to “get readers to care” about an issue that is intimately connected to economic, racial, and social justice, but often seemed all too easy to ignore.

Republicans, meanwhile, have taken advantage of this vacuum. Since the 1980s and especially since 2010, conservative politicians have made restricting abortion an explicit priority, and while Democrats have generally voiced support for reproductive freedom, they’ve rarely been as committed to upholding abortion rights as Republicans have been to dismantling them. That’s likely one of the reasons Republicans have been so successful in rolling back access to the procedure across large swaths of the country.

Now, at least for the moment, abortion is the center of attention on the left. A leaked draft opinion overturning the landmark abortion decision Roe v. Wade, written by Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito and published by Politico on May 2, has captured the attention of Republicans and Democrats alike, inspiring protests around the country and wall-to-wall news coverage.

The overturning of Roe, now a near certainty, will lead to a loss of access more widespread than any single state law. Abortion will likely become illegal in 22 states, and 41 percent of women of childbearing age will see their nearest abortion clinic close, according to an analysis by the New York Times. The moment abortion rights supporters have been dreading — and abortion opponents have been eagerly awaiting — for the past 40 years has finally arrived.

The draft opinion is also momentous because it exposes how wrong it always was to consider abortion some kind of niche concern. A wholesale overturning of Roe as outlined in the Alito opinion won’t just allow states to ban abortion within their borders; it will also open the door for state officials to pursue legal action against abortion providers in other states, something some have already pledged to do. This situation — states pitted against each other over a major civil rights issue — has frightening parallels in American history.

It happened under slavery, when fugitive slave laws allowed authorities to return escaped enslaved people to their enslavers, even if they were on free soil. It happened, too, under Jim Crow, when Southern states enforced segregation in schools and throughout public life, sometimes in violation of federal law.

“When we see states trying to interfere with people being able to leave to get to freedom — oh, my goodness, we’ve seen that before,” said Michele Bratcher Goodwin, a law professor at UC Irvine and the author of the book Policing The Womb: Invisible Women and the Criminalization of Motherhood. “When we see the kinds of policing of people’s bodies and the surveilling of people who are trying to get to freedom, we’ve seen all of that before.”

That kind of policing and surveillance ultimately led to civil war. It’s too soon to say where the fall of Roe will lead, but one thing is certain: Today, abortion politics strikes at the heart of American democracy. The draft opinion heralds an uncertain future in which LGBTQ rights, the right to contraception, the legitimacy of the Supreme Court, and federalism itself are all in jeopardy. Anyone who still thinks of abortion as a side issue is about to be proved very wrong.

Abortion has been sidelined in liberal politics since the 1970s

The marginalization of abortion in Democratic politics is at least as old as Roe v. Wade. The 1973 decision, which established a constitutional right to an abortion, may have given liberals a false sense of security, Goodwin said. “There was a confidence that the United States was a country that would not roll back, and that would not reach back to its worst tendencies.”

It wasn’t just Roe. Americans had also seen the recent gains of the civil rights movement, including the Voting Rights Act and integration of schools, after brutal and sometimes bloody fights. There was “this sense that we can breathe now in the 1970s,” Goodwin said, “that now we can say we’ve learned from these horrors of the past and that we will not take lightly what respecting equality truly means under this flag.”

The gains of the 1960s and early 1970s quickly began to erode. In 1976, Congress enacted the Hyde Amendment, which bars federal funding for most abortions, thus putting the procedure out of reach for many low-income Americans. In 1984, President Ronald Reagan put in place the Mexico City policy, also known as the “global gag rule,” which bars organizations abroad that receive US foreign aid from performing or even discussing abortion. Later, in the 2000s, a steady march of state-level restrictions shut down clinics across the South and Midwest, making abortion access more and more difficult for people who couldn’t afford to drive hundreds of miles or spend thousands of dollars on a plane ticket.

Abortion was becoming a right that only the privileged — usually middle- and upper-class white women — could access. Those women did not rise up en masse to defend abortion access for others. There was a “failure to see that we all haven’t made it,” Goodwin said. “And when we all haven’t made it, the overall rights become vulnerable.”

Moreover, abortion was allowed to fall by the wayside in the Democratic Party. Beginning in the 1980s, Republicans began campaigning on an anti-abortion platform as a way to appeal to socially conservative voters, including Catholics. Democratic politicians generally supported abortion rights, but did not always push back vociferously on restrictions. The Hyde Amendment, for example, became a political third rail that many liberal candidates avoided touching for fear of upsetting centrists — overturning it did not become part of the Democratic Party platform until 2016, a full 40 years after it was first enacted.

Even then, abortion was often framed as something outside the mainstream of American politics, a social issue that could be easily separated from more important economic issues — even though the ability to decide when and how to become a parent has profound effects on birthing people’s finances and the entire economy.

In 2017, for example, Sen. Bernie Sanders and some Democrats endorsed Heath Mello, a Democratic candidate for mayor of Omaha, despite his past support of anti-abortion bills. While Sanders himself supports abortion rights, he said such compromises might be necessary “if we’re going to become a 50-state party.” It was part of a larger debate, that often went beyond Sanders himself, in which abortion was sometimes cast as an issue of “identity politics” that Democrats couldn’t afford to focus on if they wanted to win working-class voters. (In fact, it’s not at all clear that embracing anti-abortion candidates is a reliable strategy to win working-class votes, and a majority of Americans support Roe v. Wade.)

Sometimes abortion just didn’t get talked about at all. In 2016, activist Renee Bracey Sherman started the hashtag #AskAboutAbortion to encourage moderators at presidential debates to bring up the subject. She and others who participated in the campaign were frequently disappointed, as debate after debate went by without substantive discussion of the issue.

This inattention has been mirrored in media, where abortion coverage was often siloed at so-called women’s interest publications. Major media outlets rarely dedicated even a single reporter to the issues of reproductive rights and justice. Even reporters at publications like Jezebel that paid more attention to the topic often struggled to interest readers outside of brief flurries of activity around specific bans. In 2020, Solis recalled pitching her editor a piece about a new restriction on medication abortion, only to be told “that it was a good idea, and important to cover, but difficult to get anyone to read about. Even on a site like Jezebel, where a large swath of the audience is ostensibly interested in the topic, a reported piece on abortion was likely to get little engagement.”

Some of this was probably post-Roe complacency. Some of it was generational — as Solis noted, Gen Z and younger millennials, especially people of color, have often felt disconnected from an abortion rights movement that has long centered the concerns of white women. And some of it comes from prejudices rooted deep in American society, even on the left.

In America, there has been “a lingering disregard for the equality and the personhood of women,” especially Black and brown women, Goodwin said. Now that disregard has led us straight to the end of Roe.

Forty million women of reproductive age live in states that are likely to ban abortion when Roe is overturned. Those most impacted will be people who lack the money or other resources to travel to another state for the procedure — namely low-income Americans, especially Black people, Indigenous people, and other people of color. “Black and brown folks have been sounding the alarms for years and none of it was hyperbole,” Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) said in a statement on the draft opinion. “We know that our most vulnerable communities will bear the disproportionate brunt of any decision to restrict and deny access to abortion care.”

The opinion also has enormous implications for the future of American law. In a matter of months, nearly half of the United States will ban something that is seen by millions of Americans — and that has been protected for over 40 years by the US Constitution — as a crucial human right. Those states will also seek to extend the bans beyond their borders. Texas is already doing this, including an extradition provision in a recent restriction on medication abortion that would allow the state to prosecute residents elsewhere who send the pills into Texas.

Abortion opponents in Texas also hope to find ways to restrict abortions that Texans receive out of state. “All options are on the table,” John Seago, legislative director of Texas Right to Life, said in an April interview. “Our legislature is very motivated, and they’ll continue to be motivated even post-Roe.”

The larger legal implications of such efforts are immense. No one knows exactly what will happen when a state like Texas tries to prosecute abortion providers in a state like California, or what the courts will do if and when such prosecutions are challenged. Such a situation, however, eerily echoes divides between free and slave states prior to the Civil War, and between Southern and Northern states under Jim Crow.

The parallels become even more pronounced when you recognize that the populations most affected by the fall of Roe, especially Black Americans, were also those who had their rights stripped from them under slavery and Jim Crow, Goodwin pointed out. And some of the same states that enacted Jim Crow legislation are those seeking to ban abortion today. Those states also “still happen to have legislatures that are predominantly white, and overwhelmingly male,” Goodwin said. “They haven’t significantly changed.”

Interstate conflict over slavery, obviously, eventually gave rise to war. When states enshrined racial discrimination in law and practice under Jim Crow, it took a mass movement led by Black Americans — in which many were killed — to wrest back victories like Brown v. Board of Education and the Voting Rights Act. Even after Brown, President Dwight Eisenhower had to call in the National Guard so that nine Black students could go to school in Arkansas.

It’s far from clear what’s going to happen when half of US states ban abortion. What we know is that, as misguided as it always was to think of reproductive rights and justice as side issues, it’s now impossible to do so. If history is any guide, these issues are going to cause conflicts that shake the federalist system to its core.

Civil rights issues shouldn’t have to threaten the union or precipitate clashes between federal and state authorities to grab the attention of white, middle-class Americans, but that could very well be where we’re headed. Those who have had the luxury of not paying attention may not have it much longer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Abortion has been treated as a fringe issue by Democrats for decades. This is the result.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The likely fall of Roe will roll back access for millions. It will also strike at the heart of American democracy.

# data[].attributes.body
This is mostly a straight news story, however. The headlines choice in words poses it as a biased article. With the almost honorable quote in the headline, in conjunction with the picture for the article gives off a heroic feel

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Biden to Florida: 'We're gonna pull together as one team' following Hurricane Ian | CNN Politics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Joe Biden said Thursday that it's time for the country to pull together to help those affected by Hurricane Ian as he sought to deliver unifying remarks at the Federal Emergency Management Administration's headquarters in Washington.

# data[].attributes.body
It's clear that the headline to this article is opinionated, and it's doubly clear that it's in the opinion of a conservative author, especially when reading through the entire piece.

Of course, the headline referring to this as a "bizarre episode" is a stand out piece that pins this as an opinion piece at first glance.

The the actual text doesn't get any better. The first sentence in the article is referring to it as a "gaffe" which means "an unintentional act or remark causing embarrassment to its originator" or "a blunder." But I'm getting ahead of myself.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
FIRST ON FOX: Several Republican lawmakers shared their concerns about President Biden's latest gaffe in which he appeared to search for the late Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-Ind., in a crowd while calling out for her.

During his remarks at the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health on Wednesday, Biden appeared to search for Walorski, who died in a car accident last month.

"I want to thank all of you here, including bipartisan elected officials like ... Senator Braun, Senator Booker, Representative ... Jackie, Jackie are you here?" Biden said, searching for the late congresswoman. "I think she was going to be here to help make this a reality."
WH PLAYS DAMAGE CONTROL YET AGAIN AFTER BIDEN SEARCH FOR DECEASED REP. WALORSKI ADDS TO LIST OF WALK-BACKS
A video tribute to the late Republican congresswoman was scheduled to play at the event but was not shown while the president and White House press pool were at the event.

Several Republican lawmakers spoke out with their concerns on the president's mental state, with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, telling Fox News Digital that "Joe Biden's diminished capacity is so blatantly obvious that even the White House Press corps couldn't hide their concern."

"That's how you know it's bad," Cruz added.

Fellow Texas Republican Rep. Ronny Jackson, who formerly served as physician to the president for both Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump, again called for Biden to take "a cognitive test."

"In yet another pathetic display of incompetence, Joe Biden not only thought my departed colleague was alive but he also had his puppet-master, Karine Jean-Pierre, deny he was confused," Jackson said in a statement.

"It doesn't take a neurologist to realize he's in serious cognitive decline. The American people know what's going on here and they don't think the Commander-in-Chief is capable of doing his job," he continued.

"It's past time for White House staff and the liberal media to stop shielding him from questions about his mental acuity and demand he answer my call for a cognitive test," the Texas Republican added.

Rep. Greg Murphy, R-N.C., a practicing surgeon and the GOP Doctors Caucus vice chairman, told Fox News Digital that these "kinds of senseless gaffes have become par for the course for this president" and blasted the White House for their "cover-up" of the gaffe.

"The American people can see that Mr. Biden's mental acuity is certainly in question," the North Carolina Republican said. "What's more disturbing to me, however, is the way in which this White House continues to deceive and misdirect the American people on a daily basis."

"It appears there is nothing the White House won't do to cover up for a failed president and a failed administration," Murphy added. "The American people clearly deserve better."

Kyle Hupfer, the Indiana Republican Party chairman, released a statement on Wednesday after Biden's gaffe, saying it "calls too much into question."

"No amount of spin from the White House can justify President Joe Biden forgetting the tragic passing of Jackie Walorski - the latest gaffe that calls so much into question," Hupfer said.

"The American people deserve a straight answer, not a political talking point, as to how the President of the United States could forget that a congresswoman he was purportedly trying to honor had passed away just last month," he continued.

"White House Spokesperson Karine Jean-Pierre's explanation is a disrespectful lie to Jackie's constituents and the American people," Hupfer added. "We deserve a real answer."

When asked for comment, White House deputy press secretary Andrew Bates told Fox News Digital that "President Biden has delivered record job creation, achieved the biggest infrastructure investment in 70 years, empowered Medicare to negotiate prescription drug costs, signed the most far-reaching gun reform since 1994, made NATO the strongest it has ever been, and taken unprecedented action to fight climate change and bring manufacturing back from overseas."

The president had mourned the late Walorski a month prior to Wednesday's gaffe, prompting the White House to play defense and clean up another comment.

"The President speaks directly and candidly - straight from the shoulder, as he often says," White House spokesperson Robyn Patterson told Fox News Digital in a statement, when asked about the president's long track record of saying things his staffers later corrected.

"Doing so has been critical to his success in everything from rallying the world to support Ukraine to empowering Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices," Patterson added. "And when he feels the need to add context to something he said, or to direct his staff to do so - as every President has - he doesn't hesitate to."

The White House's comments came after Jean-Pierre struggled to explain away his latest gaffe. After the bizarre episode, Jean-Pierre said Biden "was naming the congressional champions on this issue and was acknowledging her incredible work."

"He had already planned to welcome the congresswoman's family to the White House on Friday, there will be a bill-signing in her honor this coming Friday," Jean-Pierre said. "So, of course, she was on his mind. She was at top of mind for the president."

Jean-Pierre doubled down on the White House's cleanup of Biden's fumble when pressed by reporters.

Biden's mental state was also joked about by his son, Hunter, in a text exchange with his therapist from his infamous laptop.

A few months before Joe Biden launched his presidential campaign, Hunter Biden was exchanging text messages with Keith Ablow, his therapist and friend, in early January 2019. The book highlighted that Ablow and Hunter were discussing Democratic presidential candidates when Ablow said, "Your dad is the answer" and then later quoted himself, mockingly saying, "Any man who can triumph over dementia is a giant. Think what he could do for our nation's needed recovery."

"You're such an a--hole, but that made me laugh out loud," Hunter Biden replied.

Ablow went on to quote himself, saying, "Perhaps he can help us remember all we intended to be as a people since he can now remember his address," prompting Hunter to say that his father "doesn't need to [know] where he lives" because "that's the only thing the secret service get[s] right at least 75% of the time."
Fox News Digital's Cameron Cawthorne and Thomas Catenacci contributed reporting.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Biden's bizarre 'Where's Jackie?' episode cause for alarm, Republicans say: 'Diminished capacity'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
FIRST ON FOX: Several Republican lawmakers shared their concerns about President Biden's latest gaffe in which he appeared to search for the late Rep. Jackie Walorski, R-Ind., in a crowd while calling out for her. During his remarks at the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health on Wednesday, Biden appeared to search for Walorski , who died in a car accident last month.

# data[].attributes.body
This headline reports on the Biden Administrations progress on student debt relief without interjecting any opinion on the matter. There's no biased language, which serves it as a straight news story.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Biden administration kicks off student loan debt forgiveness process | CNN Politics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Biden administration on Thursday is kicking off its efforts toward forgiving student loan debt, sending updates on the process via email before the window to apply opens next month.