Patterico's Pontifications


President Biden’s Comments

Filed under: General — Dana @ 3:54 pm

[guest post by Dana]

During an interview with the President:

President Joe Biden turned heads Sunday night when he declared the COVID-19 pandemic is “over” even while stating the United States is still having a “problem” with the virus.

“The pandemic is over,” he said during an interview on CBS’ “60 Minutes.”

Biden continued, “We still have a problem with COVID. We’re still doing a lot of work on it. It’s — but the pandemic is over.”

President Biden also warned President Putin not to use chemical or nuclear weapons in their war against Ukraine:

“Don’t, don’t, don’t,” said Biden, when asked for his message to Putin on the use of such weapons. Biden said that deciding to use them would “change the face of war — unlike since World War II.”


“You think I would tell you if I knew exactly what it would be? Of course, I’m not going to tell you. It’ll be consequential. They’ll become more of a pariah in the world than they ever have been. And depending on the extent of what they do, [it] will determine what response would occur.”

The President also addressed the question of whether he was planning to seek re-election:

“Look, my intention, as I said to begin with, is that I would run again. But it’s just an intention. But is it a firm decision that I run again? That remains to be seen,” Biden told CBS’ Scott Pelley on “60 Minutes” when asked whether he would run.

Oh. Okay.

So, since the President declared the pandemic over, will we see all restrictions and mandates lifted? Also, will the CDC be releasing any kind of statement agreeing with the President’s pandemice remarks? I just checked, and both the CDC website and Twitter account make no mention of the pandemic being over. Additionally, why would the President tell us the pandemic is over at this point? Perhaps because a state of emergency status is no longer necessary:

Why does Biden’s statement matter so much? I’ll tell you: It matters because the memo that the Biden administration released to justify his order rested entirely upon there being an ongoing emergency, and because, as Biden has just confirmed, there is no ongoing emergency.

Back in August, Biden’s lawyers argued with half-straight faces that the 2003 HEROES Act — which, as Bloomberg Law has noted, was passed not as a generalized enabling act but “to help borrowers serving in the military in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks” — could be twisted to apply to any national emergency, including pandemics such as Covid-19. This, of course, was nonsense.

You know, if President Biden doesn’t run for re-election, guess who is waiting in the wings? Allegedly, Gov. Gavins Newsom of California (whom we’ve seen pulling his own early campaign stunts over the past few months):

California Governor Gavin Newsom is “undeniably, unequivocally” planning to run for president in 2024 if President Biden chooses not to seek a second term, two individuals with knowledge of Newsom’s plans told TheWrap.

“After this midterm election is over, he absolutely is going to announce that he is running for the presidency once Biden announces that he is not running,” a leading California fundraiser with close ties to the Newsom family told TheWrap. “No ifs, ands or buts. He will run if Biden does not.”

A second individual close to the governor, a Los Angeles philanthropist with deep connections in the Democratic Party and a long history of fundraising for its candidates, confirmed Newsom’s intention to run.


19 Responses to “President Biden’s Comments”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (1225fc)

  2. Biden says U.S. troops would defend Taiwan in event of attack by China

    President Biden has again confirmed that U.S. troops would defend Taiwan in the event of an attack from China, the clearest recent statement Biden has made about how far the United States would go to support Taiwan militarily.

    In an interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes” that aired Sunday evening, Biden told host Scott Pelley that the United States would defend Taiwan “if in fact there was an unprecedented attack.” China claims Taiwan, a self-governing democracy that is home to 23 million people, as its own territory, and has asserted that it could one day use force to take control of the island.

    “So unlike Ukraine, to be clear, sir, U.S. forces — U.S. men and women — would defend Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion?” Pelley asked.

    “Yes,” Biden replied.


    ……..Who is in charge? The elected president or his unelected staff? Biden should put an end to this game by decisively rejecting his staff’s mischaracterization of his policy.
    Biden has now clearly stated multiple times that this ambiguity is over. He has given the same answer to multiple questions on whether the United States would defend Taiwan if the latter were invaded: Yes, it would.

    ………. Making the U.S. position clear gives Beijing something to think about. If it knows that any invasion of Taiwan would meet with a U.S. military response, it might be deterred from attacking the nation in the first place.

    That’s why the staff’s repeated walk-backs are so harmful. …….
    The staff’s walk-backs replace clarity with damaging opaqueness. No one seriously doubts that Biden wants to defend Taiwan sovereignty if it is attacked. But they now have reason to wonder whether Biden’s will alone determines U.S. policy.
    Biden is right to commit the United States to Taiwan’s defense. …….

    Biden can stop his staff from undercutting him in one of two ways. One way is to hold a news conference in which he definitively states that U.S. policy has changed. If he chooses this route, he should do so with all the relevant decision-makers behind him, such as Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. That would put an end to the walk-backs and instill clarity about U.S. intentions.

    The other way is to deploy U.S. military units to Taiwan itself. …….

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  3. Newsome/AOC democrat ticket 2024.

    asset (d217e7)

  4. Avoids a railroad strike but still manages to have a trainwreck.

    Attaboy, Squinty.

    DCSCA (93eab5)

  5. I didn’t see the 60 Minutes segment, but he was 4-5 months late on the pandemic, he adequately communicated longstanding US policy about nukes and Taiwan, and he should’ve made news and said that he won’t run and will endorse Michelle Obama.

    Paul Montagu (753b42)

  6. IF the pandemic is over, does that mean that state election laws go back to what the legislatures passed?

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  7. Newsom/AOC democrat ticket 2024.

    Vile threats have no place here.

    Kevin M (eeb9e9)

  8. @7 Well played!

    norcal (da5491)

  9. I would say that Biden just said he probably isn’t going to run. But he won’t announce it until he has to, because it leaves him as a lame duck.

    Also, Newsom isn’t the worst person who could run. He’s done a reasonable job as governor, even if he is a slightly plastic political social climber given to political stunting.

    How do I feel about the pandemic being “over” or not? Originally, back in spring 2020, the reason things were considered dire was the cases of COVID were overwhelming the hospitals, and that was why we needed to lock down until we had a vaccine. I would say they stopped being that dire in the US by summer of 2021, when everyone who wanted to vaccinate did and so the danger of overwhelming the hospitals was very considerably reduced. Is there still a pandemic? Probably, but it is much less dire than it was.

    Nic (896fdf)

  10. I would say that Biden just said he probably isn’t going to run. But he won’t announce it until he has to, because it leaves him as a lame duck.

    That’s a reasonable analysis. Hedging isn’t a confidence builder. So if he gets the party clobbered in the midterms, they’ll will bench him. Which torpedoes Kamala for sure– and any chance of a VP HRC coattail run as well.

    DCSCA (e839d7)

  11. Also, Newsom isn’t the worst person who could run.

    He’s better than Bernie, Fauxcahontas, and AOC, but that isn’t saying much.

    norcal (da5491)

  12. Also, Newsom isn’t the worst person who could run.


    Yes he is.

    DCSCA (7067e5)

  13. Rip Murdock (d2a2a8) — 9/19/2022 @ 4:06 pm

    Who is in charge? The elected president or his unelected staff?Biden should put an end to this game by decisively rejecting his staff’s mischaracterization of his policy.

    Talk about your backhanded compliments disguised as criticism. It is not an elected President and an unelected staff. It is a Politburo and a figurehead. Who by his elected position can say things that are against the positions of the other members of the Politburo with little fear of being denounced and sent into internal exile at a dacha by the Caspian.

    Biden could denounce the dissenting Politburo members, but he needs them to run the country, and their replacements would have to be acceptable to the Party. Back to square one.

    We saw some of that, emphasis on some, now with Boris Johnson and his Cabinet leaving him. We saw it in 1974 with Nixon. And we saw it with Trump and his revolving door with Musak playing Hosanna! on the way in and Exorcizamus te! When you elect a President, you are electing the head of a Cabinet which will actually run the country.

    When you have a strong, smart, and virtuous President, he will set policy, his Cabinet will carry it out, and Heaven will rain blessings on on the land. When you have a feeble or unvirtuous President, his governance will be chaotic and the land will suffer.

    nk (74d040)

  14. *denounce fire*

    nk (74d040)

  15. *Exorcizamus te on the way out*

    Comment 13 on a Tuesday. To be expected.

    nk (74d040)

  16. he adequately communicated longstanding US policy about nukes and Taiwan….

    Paul Montagu (753b42) — 9/19/2022 @ 6:51 pm

    Actually Biden’s statement on Taiwan is the opposite of longstanding US policy, which is one of ambiguity whether the US would militarily support the island in the event of an attack. However, he is right in that domestic political considerations will force the US to intervene. Taiwan is second only to Israel in its influence upon US government policy.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  17. @16. Of course it’s opposite. Everything he says is opposite

    Kabul won’t be Saigon Redux; Inflation is transitory, nay, zero; the pandemic is over… his list of wrong headed stupiodity is half a century old, garnished with the now classic: “Putin knows, if I am president of the United States, his days of tyranny and trying to intimidate the United States and those in Eastern Europe are over…”

    “Senator, you’re a windbag.” – Brit Hume

    DCSCA (23025c)

  18. ……..Who is in charge? The elected president or his unelected staff? Biden should put an end to this game by decisively rejecting his staff’s mischaracterization of his policy.

    Well, it’s not official policy (because officially, that would be intervening in a civil war and the State Department doesn’t want to say the United States would do it)

    Biden is just letting everyone know what he, in fact, would do..

    Except that, in a crunch, he might not do it. It depend maybe on the polls or the opinions of most Senators.. Which we know what they are.

    The more interesting thing in that interview was that Biden again gave Putin the news that if he crossed a redline in a small way (as Putin did not on Feb.24) he might not do anything much.

    About his running in 2024, he didn’t commit partly for legal reasons and partly because he honestly doesn’t know what his health will be.

    Sammy Finkelman (1d215a)

  19. An ex-ally of Putin and former employee of Moscow’s Aviation Institute was found not to be airworthy.

    Adviser to the rector of the Moscow Aviation Institute, Anatoly Gerashchenko, died after falling from a height at the institute on Wednesday, according to Russian reports.

    No confirmation yet if there was a window involved or whether he “slipped” off the roof.

    Paul Montagu (753b42)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0702 secs.