The Biden Gatekeepers: Who Really Ran the White House During Cognitive Decline
From the core Politburo to family protectors, here are the names, positions, and alleged roles of those accused of running Biden's shadow presidency.
Note: This article is exclusive to paying supporters for 5 days and will then be made available to all subscribers. Most of this article draws from revelations in Jake Tapper's book "Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again." This is a long one, so grab a drink and settle in.
Congressional investigators have identified about fifteen people who allegedly ran a massive cover-up of Joe Biden's cognitive decline while controlling presidential decision-making. Here are their names, their jobs, and what they're accused of doing.
Jake Tapper, in his explosive book "Original Sin," calls this inner circle a "Politburo." The secretive group that ran the Soviet Union. The comparison isn't accidental. Like their Soviet counterparts, this group operated with crazy amounts of power, made decisions affecting millions of Americans, and kept control through loyalty, secrecy, and shutting out anyone who disagreed.
But who exactly were these people? What jobs did they hold, and how did they allegedly pull off what might be the biggest cover-up in presidential history? As the House Oversight Committee's investigation heats up and former aides either hire lawyers or plead the Fifth, we're getting a clearer picture of three power circles around Biden: The Politburo, The Praetorian Guard, and The Family Circle.
Understanding these players isn't just about pointing fingers. It's about figuring out how American democracy worked when the elected president may not have been working at all.
Unlock the full experience with It's Meseidy!
Get exclusive early access to articles, subscriber-only "Desk Notes," and dive into the complete archives. Join now with a 30% discount on your annual subscription using the button below and stay ahead with premium content!
The Politburo: The Three Pillars
At the center of Biden's shadow government sat three men whose relationships with Biden went back decades. These weren't new hires or temporary advisors, they were the guys who built Biden's political brand and had become so tied up with his success that you couldn't tell where Biden's interests ended and theirs began.
The sophistication of their operation comes through in "Original Sin's" description of managing "two Bidens." Starting in fall 2023, aides carefully controlled scheduling to show only the "functioning Biden" in public while hiding him from cabinet members and other officials who might see his decline. Cabinet meetings became elaborate performances with scripted questions and answers, heavy reliance on note cards, and careful planning to avoid Biden having to speak off-script.
One cabinet member quoted in the book described how obvious the deception was: "Cabinet meetings were terrible and uncomfortable... The staff did him wrong." The meetings were so obviously managed that cabinet secretaries started briefing aides instead of the president directly, while staff worked to "filter information and direct Biden's decision-making."
Mike Donilon: The Perception Manager
Mike Donilon, Biden's longtime strategist and brother of former Obama national security advisor Tom Donilon, was the mastermind of the cover-up. For over 40 years, Donilon had been crafting Biden's political image, and managing a cognitively declining president was his biggest challenge yet.
Colleagues joke that Donilon's influence was so complete that "if he wanted, he could get Biden to start a war." More fundementally, Donilon was the main filter for information reaching Biden, especially polling and public perception data. Sources in "Original Sin" describe how Donilon and others acted as "spinmeisters," filtering polling data to hide Biden's real electoral chances, including hiding that internal assessments showed only a 5% chance of winning reelection.
When concerned staff brought up Biden's age as a problem, Donilon's response was dismissive: "He's going to get elected again with people thinking he's too old." This wasn't political spin, it was delusion rooted in the belief that Biden's team could govern effectively regardless of his personal limitations, and that keeping Trump out of office justified any level of public deception about the president's actual capacity.
Donilon's pay reveals how much his personal interests aligned with his ideological convictions. To advise the 2024 campaign, he demanded about $4 million and "wouldn't budge" on the price. When staff objected, Biden personally stepped in: "Pay Mike what he wants." This financial tie meant that Donilon's fortune was literally connected to Biden staying in the race, creating a perfect storm where personal profit, institutional loyalty, and supposed national salvation all pointed in the same direction.
Steve Ricchetti: The Story-Killer
If Donilon managed perceptions, Steve Ricchetti, 68, killed stories. As Counselor to the President, Ricchetti had influence way beyond his official title, serving as Biden's main gatekeeper and damage control guy. His four kids all snagged plum gigs thanks to Dad's clout: Daniel as a senior advisor in the State Department's arms control office, Shannon as deputy associate director for the White House social secretary, J.J. as a special assistant in Treasury's Office of Legislative Affairs, and even Tyler "Tiger" landing a legislative assistant role for Rep. Debbie Dingell, a blatant web of family entrenchment that reeks of nepotism, granting the Ricchettis unparalleled access and influence in the halls of power while underscoring just how indispensable (and insulated) Steve truly was.
Ricchetti's most telling moment came when frustrated Democrats late in Biden's presidency asked whether anyone had directly told Biden about the electoral reality he faced. Ricchetti's blunt reply: "No." I suspect this wasn't incompetence, but deliberate information control designed to keep Biden committed to reelection no matter what, based on the conviction that the alternative was unthinkable for American democracy.
Ricchetti's media manipulation is equally troubling because it reveals the extent to which the inner circle believed they could decide what information the public should receive. When a national news outlet tried to run a story about Biden's "serious and disturbing moments, forgetting names and facts, sometimes seeming seriously confused at meetings," Ricchetti called them off the record claiming everything was "false." The story got killed. Similarly, when George Clooney was preparing his influential New York Times piece calling for Biden to step aside, Ricchetti threatened to "shut Clooney down" in language that colleagues said sounded "like a Mob boss." These weren't just political tactics, they represented a systematic effort to control the narrative because they believed the public couldn't handle the truth about their preferred alternative to Trump.
Bruce Reed: The Policy Guardian
Bruce Reed, 65, was Deputy Chief of Staff and represented the policy side that enabled the alleged shadow presidency. Having previously been Biden's vice presidential chief of staff, Reed knew Biden's decision-making processes inside and out, knowledge that became crucial when those processes started falling apart.
Reed's role went beyond traditional policy work. Sources describe him as helping to "cast out potential heretics," staff members who questioned whether Biden's presidency could continue or suggested other approaches. His daughter Julia Reed as Biden's day scheduler created even more family investment in keeping the existing power structure going.
During the crucial debate prep period, Reed was among those arguing that Biden could "slog it out" in November despite obvious evidence otherwise. This wasn't optimism, it was willful blindness by someone whose career and family were completely embedded in the Biden world.
The Praetorian Guard: The Protective Circle
Around the core Politburo was a bigger circle of advisors, operatives, and family loyalists who served as both protectors and enablers. Like the elite Roman soldiers who guarded emperors, this Praetorian Guard had extraordinary influence while supposedly serving the president. And like their historical counterparts, they sometimes seemed to have more power than the leader they were supposed to protect.
Ron Klain: The Enforcer-in-Chief
Maybe no one shows the contradiction at the heart of the Biden presidency better than Ron Klain, the 63-year-old veteran Democratic operative who was Chief of Staff until 2023. Klain had been Biden's chief of staff during the vice presidency and came back to manage his transition to the presidency, a role that apparently went way beyond normal boundaries.
Klain's methods showed just how systematic the alleged cover-up was. When respected Democratic strategist David Axelrod publicly questioned Biden's fitness for a second term in a June 2022 NYT article, calling his age a potential "major issue," Klain personally called to scold him: "Who else is going to do this, Axe? Who's going to beat Trump?" This wasn't policy disagreement, it was enforcing silence.
The most damning revelation about Klain comes from the June 2024 debate prep at Camp David. According to "Original Sin," Klain arrived to find Biden taking long naps, wandering off to the swimming pool, and struggling to follow basic exchanges between campaign staff and Trump surrogates. Yet publicly, Klain kept up the act. After the disastrous debate performance, multiple sources report that Klain privately admitted "We're f---ed" while simultaneously running the public defense of Biden's capabilities.
This double-think: private acknowledgment coupled with public denial characterized Klain's approach throughout Biden's decline. He enforced what sources describe as a "bunker mentality" where loyalty to Biden mattered more than honesty about his condition, even when that loyalty potentially hurt national governance.
Anita Dunn: The Communications Strategist
Anita Dunn, 67, brought decades of Democratic communications experience to her Senior Advisor role, having previously been Obama's communications director and co-founded the SKDKnickerbocker consulting firm. Her expertise in crisis management and controlling narratives made her essential for maintaining Biden's public image as evidence of decline mounted.
Dunn's approach involved aggressive pushback against negative coverage and systematic suppression of stories about Biden's decline. Working with communications staffer Andrew Bates, she pioneered the "cheap fakes" strategy, labeling legitimate video evidence of Biden's confusion and disorientation as misleadingly edited footage. This coordinated campaign tried to gaslight the American public about evidence they could see with their own eyes, apparently justified by the belief that voters couldn't be trusted to make the "right" choice if they understood the full scope of Biden's limitations.
Dunn's media manipulation went beyond spin into active suppression rooted in ideological conviction. She led efforts to smear journalists and commentators who raised legitimate questions about Biden's fitness, while coordinating positive coverage through friendly outlets. According to "Original Sin," videos of Biden were edited with "jump cuts" to remove verbal stumbles, including one particularly telling example where a 13-second video of Biden challenging Trump to a debate required five separate jump cuts to appear coherent. The administration also staged a 2024 town hall with pre-given questions, closed to reporters who might ask unscripted questions. But even with all these controls, Biden's performance was so concerning that they ultimately scrapped the entire event, publicly claiming "bad lighting" while privately acknowledging the footage was simply unusable. These examples go beyond typical political strategy and symbolize a desperate, systematic clampdown on information, driven by the aides' terror that any alternative to Biden would result in the downfall of our democracy.
Dunn's role in managing post-debate damage control showed how sophisticated the operation was. Internal pollsters were warning aides about the poor polling numbers, but Donilon and Dunn would not allow them to meet with the president. Instead, Donilon filtered the polling information to the president, presenting a more optimistic view, while Dunn handled the public messaging. Even as the campaign privately acknowledged catastrophic polling numbers, Dunn helped coordinate public messaging that maintained Biden's viability while privately exploring backup plans. Her influence extended to Hollywood, where renowned director Steven Spielberg provided coaching for Biden's speeches and debate prep (including his Normandy address and 2024 convention strategy) in what critics call an effort to mask communication struggles and craft a favorable narrative, representing long-term management beyond immediate political needs.
Dunn's communications strategy included what sources describe as a "bunker mentality" where dissent wasn't tolerated. Communications aide Andrew Bates led aggressive pushback efforts, while Dunn herself worked to marginalize critics within the Democratic establishment who questioned Biden's fitness for a second term.
Anthony Bernal: The Family Guardian
Anthony Bernal represents maybe the most troubling part of the alleged cover-up: the blurring of official White House business with personal family loyalty. As Senior Advisor to First Lady Jill Biden, Bernal had influence that went way beyond traditional East Wing responsibilities and was accused of creating what sources call a "toxic environment" in the White House.
Sources describe Bernal as "the Bidens' eyes and ears" with a particular focus on "casting out potential heretics." His job involved identifying and sidelining staff members who questioned Biden's fitness or suggested alternatives to his continued presidency. One longtime Biden aide's assessment was blunt: "He would not be welcome at my funeral."
But Bernal's influence went beyond political gatekeeping into seriously problematic personal behavior. Multiple sources accuse him of workplace bullying and inappropriate comments about staff appearances, with reports in conservative media highlighting allegations of sexual harassment-like behavior toward female staff. This pattern of intimidation served two purposes: maintaining control over White House operations while silencing potential critics.
Central to the family protection strategy was what sources describe as a "near-total ban" on discussing Hunter Biden, even as his legal troubles dominated headlines during the 2024 campaign. Bernal, working closely with Jill Biden, enforced this ban so strictly that most senior aides had no advance warning when the First Lady decided to attend Hunter's federal trial, showing her willingness to act independently of official White House planning.
Bernal's closeness to the First Lady gave him unique power to influence family dynamics during critical moments. He was reportedly dismissive of Kamala Harris's electoral prospects, telling colleagues "Please. She can't win" when discussions came up about alternative Democratic nominees. This assessment may have influenced family calculations about Biden's 2024 campaign, with Bernal and other senior staffers reacting "dismissively" whenever Harris's presidential potential was mentioned.
Most significantly, Bernal dodged a voluntary transcribed interview before the House Oversight Committee, forcing Chairman Comer to slap him with a subpoena for a deposition today July 16, 2025. This blatant evasion erupted right after the Trump administration yanked executive privilege protections from former Biden aides, exposing Bernal's likely terror over exposing the family's deep entanglements in White House governance. In the midst of these intensifying probes, Bernal's stonewalling (methinks he doth protest too much) only fuels suspicions, leaving us to wonder just how much he's desperate to conceal about the family's inner workings and what explosive secrets might spill out if he talks.
Jeff Zients: The Institutional Manager
Jeff Zients, who replaced Klain as Chief of Staff in 2023, inherited a White House already set up to manage an incapacitated president. His business background and previous government experience made him well-suited to keeping institutional functions running even as the main decision-maker's abilities declined.
Reports describe Zients overseeing a "disarrayed" White House during Biden's final period, suggesting that even professional management couldn't entirely make up for presidential dysfunction. His role in the autopen scandal remains unclear, but his position during the period of heaviest usage makes his eventual testimony crucial to understanding the full scope of the alleged cover-up.
Neera Tanden: The Document Controller
Neera Tanden, 55, director of the Domestic Policy Council and former Staff Secretary, has a unique position in this investigation as the first insider to testify publicly about autopen usage. Her June 25, 2025, appearance before the House Oversight Committee provided the first official confirmation of systematic autopen use and raised disturbing questions about presidential authorization.
Tanden admitted to authorizing autopen signatures from October 2021 to May 2023, describing a process she inherited from "prior administrations." However, her testimony revealed a troubling gap in accountability: according to Chairman James Comer's summary, Tanden claimed to send decision memos to Biden's inner circle but had "no visibility of what occurred between sending the memo and receiving it back with approval."
This admission is extraordinary. The person responsible for directing presidential signatures claims she didn't know who actually authorized those signatures. Either Tanden is being deliberately misleading, or the Biden White House operated with such loose controls that critical presidential decisions were being made by unknown parties. However, later claims from her attorney, Michael Bromwich, that Biden 'personally approved every decision' and that Tanden was 'never' in the dark directly contradict her testimony, suggesting coordinated damage control (especially as Biden himself echoed this in a recent New York Times interview, while the article highlights ongoing scrutiny over the questionable chain of evidence and his admission that he approved broad standards rather than every individual pardon).
The scope of Tanden's autopen authorization covered some of the most consequential presidential actions: federal judge appointments, executive orders, and pardons that will affect American governance for decades. If her testimony is accurate, these decisions may have been made by an unidentified subset of Biden's inner circle while the president remained unaware or incapacitated.
Annie Tomasini and Ashley Williams: The Daily Managers
Annie Tomasini, Deputy Chief of Staff, and Ashley Williams, Deputy Director of Oval Office Operations, represent the operational layer that made day-to-day functioning possible despite Biden's limitations. Both were longtime Biden loyalists who had worked closely with him since his vice presidency and 2020 campaign.
According to "Original Sin," these aides began "directing his every step to a degree they hadn't before" as Biden's condition got worse. Their responsibilities included managing his schedule to minimize public exposure during periods of confusion, preparing extensive briefing materials and note cards to make up for memory issues, and coordinating with other staff to present the appearance of normal presidential functioning.
Williams appeared before House investigators on July 11, 2025, for a six-hour session that revealed troubling gaps in her memory. According to sources familiar with her testimony, Williams claimed she "did not recall" multiple critical instances during her time in the White House, including whether teleprompters were used in Cabinet meetings, discussions about Biden using a wheelchair, any cognitive testing, and discussions of Biden's mental or physical decline. This pattern of selective amnesia about the most sensitive aspects of Biden's presidency raises questions about either deliberate stonewalling or the normalization of concerning behavior.
Her willingness to testify, in contrast to Bernal's refusal, may indicate either innocence or calculation about legal exposure. However, the extensive use of "I don't recall" responses suggests preparation to avoid providing substantive information about Biden's condition.
The significance of these operational roles can't be overstated. If Biden was indeed experiencing cognitive decline, these were the people who would have witnessed it most directly and been responsible for adapting daily operations to accommodate his limitations. Their testimony, complete or otherwise, could provide crucial evidence about the timeline and extent of presidential incapacity.
Tomasini is scheduled to appear before investigators on July 18, 2025, and her testimony will be closely watched to see if she follows Williams' pattern of strategic memory loss or provides more substantive information about the daily management of an allegedly impaired president.
The Family Circle: Personal Stakes and Protective Instincts
The most emotionally complex part of the alleged cover-up involves Biden's family members, whose personal relationships with the president created powerful incentives to maintain his position regardless of his fitness for office. Unlike political operatives whose careers could survive a presidential transition, family members faced losing not just influence but their central family dynamic and crucially, the end of "Biden Inc."
For decades, the Biden family has built a business model around Joe Biden's proximity to power. What started during his Delaware Senate years evolved into a more sophisticated operation during his vice presidency, when family members (particularly Hunter Biden) leveraged the Biden name and access for lucrative foreign business opportunities. Hunter's board position with Ukrainian energy company Burisma, his business dealings in China, and various other ventures consistently traded on his father's political influence and access.
The end of Biden's presidency didn't just threaten family prestige, it threatened to shut down an entire ecosystem of influence-peddling that had sustained the extended Biden family financially for years. From th is perspective, the family's fierce protection of Biden's political viability wasn't just about emotions or even ideology; it was about preserving a decades-long business model built on proximity to American political power. Whether motivated by love, financial necessity, or genuine belief in saving democracy from Trump, the result was the same: a family circle determined to maintain Biden's presidency at all costs.
Jill Biden: The Guardian-in-Chief
Jill Biden, 73, emerges from multiple accounts as maybe the most influential figure in maintaining her husband's presidency despite his decline. Her role went way beyond traditional First Lady responsibilities into what sources describe as "political partnership" that put protection over transparency. Recent books, particularly "2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America," detail what authors call Jill Biden's deliberate "power grab" as her husband's capabilities declined.
But understanding Jill Biden's fierce defense of her husband's presidency requires recognizing that she wasn't just protecting a spouse, she was protecting a decades-long family enterprise. As the person closest to Joe Biden throughout his political career, Jill understood better than anyone how the family's financial well-being had become intertwined with his political influence. The prospect of losing the presidency meant not just personal embarrassment, but the effective end of "Biden Inc." as a going concern.
The scope of Jill Biden's influence was extraordinary. White House staff report that "Jill isn't going to like this" became a conversation-killer that could shut down policy discussions or strategic planning. She actively managed Biden's diet, schedule, and public appearances, questioning staff when events ran too long or when he was exposed to potentially challenging situations. In one documented case from January 2022, a Biden aide apologized to the First Lady when she questioned why they allowed a press conference to go on for too long.
Her response to Biden's disastrous debate performance revealed how invested she was in his continued presidency. Rather than acknowledging obvious problems, she doubled down: "Joe isn't just the right person for the job. He's the only person for the job." This wasn't spousal support, it was strategic denial that put family interests over national interest. During the critical post-debate family meeting at Camp David, Jill Biden was described as one of the inner family circle who persuaded Biden to stay in the race despite mounting pressure from party leaders and donors to step down.
Most troublingly, Jill Biden's influence operated through surrogates like Anthony Bernal, creating a shadow power structure that could advance family interests while maintaining plausible deniability about direct involvement in governance decisions. She exerted power through Bernal, who "answered for her" and often made it unclear whether opinions he expressed were his own or the First Lady's. When donors or voters asked her questions, Bernal would frequently "jump in to answer," showing the extent of their coordination.
Jill Biden's protective instincts extended to extraordinary lengths during Hunter's legal troubles. Against the advice of senior White House staff, she attended multiple days of Hunter's federal trial, traveling long distances from overseas trips and campaign events. She attended the first three days, flew to France for the D-Day commemoration, then returned to Wilmington less than 24 hours later for the fifth day of the trial. Most senior aides learned of these decisions only after the fact, revealing her independence from normal White House coordination and her prioritization of family over official duties.
The recent revelation of Biden's aggressive prostate cancer diagnosis on May 18, 2025, suspected by many to have been known earlier, adds another layer to the family's protective instincts. Despite potential long-term health concerns that could have impacted a second term, the inner circle pressed forward, raising questions about whether this too was concealed to maintain power.
Hunter Biden: The Problematic Counselor
Hunter Biden's influence during his father's presidency represents one of the most ethically problematic parts of the alleged cover-up. Despite facing federal criminal charges and being a source of ongoing political liability, Hunter maintained regular access to his father and influence over key decisions, access that was crucial to the business model he had built around the Biden name.
Hunter's financial interests were perhaps more directly tied to his father's political survival than anyone else in the inner circle. His various business ventures, from his Burisma board position to Chinese investment deals, had consistently relied on the value of the Biden brand and the access that came with it. The end of his father's presidency didn't just mean losing family influence, it meant the collapse of a business model that had sustained him for years.
Sources describe Hunter advocating for aggressive responses to criticism, including pushing back against the Robert Hur report that described Biden as an "elderly man with a poor memory." Rather than accepting this assessment as evidence for a measured response, Hunter reportedly argued for personal counterattacks that risked further exposure of his father's limitations.
Following the June debate disaster, Hunter continued advocating for his father's candidacy, taking the position that "it was the family against the world." This perspective put family loyalty over electoral realities or national interests, suggesting that personal considerations (both emotional and financial) were driving crucial political decisions.
Hunter's later pardon by his father (the only pardon not signed by autopen) represents the ultimate convergence of personal interest and presidential power. The pardon was particularly significant because Biden had repeatedly promised publicly that he would not pardon his son, making the eventual decision a direct reversal of his stated position. For Hunter, keeping his father in office wasn't just about preserving the family business model, it was potentially about staying out of jail. If Biden was cognitively impaired during this decision, it raises questions about whether the pardon represented his autonomous choice or family manipulation of presidential authority driven by the need to protect both Hunter's freedom and the broader Biden family business interests.
Systemic Implications: When Good Intentions Become Dangerous Deception
The emerging picture of Biden's inner circle reveals how a toxic combination of personal loyalty, financial self-interest, and ideological conviction can corrupt democratic governance. While personal stakes certainly mattered, understanding the full scope of the alleged cover-up requires grappling with a more troubling possibility: that many of these individuals genuinely believed they were saving American democracy by subverting it.
The "We Know Better" Mentality
Beyond the obvious financial entanglements and career considerations lay a deeper motivation that may have driven the alleged cover-up: the sincere belief that keeping Trump out of office justified any deception necessary, including lying to the American people about their president's cognitive capacity. This represents perhaps the most dangerous form of political arrogance, elites deciding they know what's best for the country regardless of what voters might choose if given accurate information.
Sources throughout "Original Sin" and related accounts suggest that Biden's inner circle operated from a fundamental conviction that Trump represented an existential threat to democracy. From this perspective, maintaining Biden in office wasn't just about preserving their own power, it was about protecting the nation from what they saw as an unacceptable alternative. Even if Biden wasn't fully capable, they believed the experienced team around him could govern effectively while using him as a figurehead.
This "ends justify the means" mentality echoes patterns from Trump's first presidency, when similar unfounded concerns about him colluding with Russia led to extraordinary measures by government officials who believed they were protecting the country. The difference here is scale and systematic coordination: rather than individual acts of resistance, the Biden situation allegedly involved a comprehensive, multi-year deception of the American electorate.
The financial entanglements were still particularly corrupting. Donilon's $4 million campaign contract created a direct financial incentive to keep Biden in the race regardless of his fitness. When campaign staff initially objected to the astronomical fee, Biden personally stepped in with "Pay Mike what he wants," revealing how personal loyalty trumped fiscal responsibility. Ricchetti's four children all securing administration positions created an entire family ecosystem dependent on Biden's continued presidency.
The broader network of employment and influence surrounding Biden created what amounts to a patronage system where dozens of careers and livelihoods depended on maintaining the facade of presidential competence. High-powered law firms, including some that have since cut deals with the Trump administration to avoid retaliation, represent former Biden officials in the investigation, suggesting the financial stakes extend well beyond government employment.
But the media manipulation aspects reveal something more sophisticated than simple corruption, they show an understanding of narrative control rooted in the belief that the public couldn't be trusted with the truth. The systematic suppression of negative stories, coordination of positive coverage through friendly outlets, and aggressive attacks on critics suggest an operation that went way beyond normal political communications into the realm of state propaganda. The "cheap fakes" campaign represents maybe the most audacious example, attempting to convince Americans to disbelieve video evidence of presidential incapacity, not just for political gain, but because they believed the alternative was too dangerous to allow.
Constitutional Crisis: When Guardians Become Deceivers
Maybe most disturbing is the constitutional dimension of the alleged cover-up. If unelected staff and family members were making presidential decisions while Biden's signature was being mechanically reproduced on documents affecting judicial appointments, pardons, and executive orders, then core democratic principles were violated regardless of the technical legality of autopen usage. The scope of autopen use (over 1,200 documents including 235 federal judge appointments) suggests the potential magnitude of unelected governance.
This wasn't just about hiding an aging president's limitations. It was about a small group of people deciding they could run the country better than the man Americans actually elected, while simultaneously denying voters the information they needed to make an informed choice about whether to continue that arrangement. Whether motivated by noble intentions or personal gain, the result was the same: the systematic deception of the American people about who was actually governing them.
The Investigation Continues: What We Still Don't Know
As congressional investigators continue their work and more former Biden officials face testimony requirements, crucial questions remain unanswered. The refusal of key figures like Anthony Bernal to testify, the coordinated legal strategies employed by former staff, and most dramatically, the Fifth Amendment invocation by Biden's physician, suggest systematic efforts to prevent full disclosure.
The most shocking development came when Dr. Kevin O'Connor, Biden's White House physician, appeared before the House Oversight Committee on July 9, 2025, and invoked the Fifth Amendment to every single question, including whether he was asked to lie about Biden's health. As I detailed in a previous Desk Notes piece, this 20-minute constitutional shield-fest was as revealing as it was legally savvy, suggesting either criminal exposure or coordinated damage control.
The emerging pattern of testimony reveals what appears to be coordinated damage control. Williams' extensive use of "I don't recall" responses, Tanden's admission of autopen control coupled with claims of ignorance about authorization, and Bernal's outright refusal to appear suggest preparation designed to minimize harmful disclosures while avoiding perjury charges.
The timeline of Biden's cognitive decline remains disputed, with family and staff maintaining that concerns were overblown while insider accounts suggest problems dating as far back as 2015 following the death of his son Beau Biden. Understanding this timeline is crucial for determining the scope and duration of any alleged shadow presidency.
The decision-making processes around critical issues, from Afghanistan withdrawal to Supreme Court appointments to the pardon spree, require careful examination to determine whether Biden was actually directing policy or merely rubber-stamping decisions made by others.
Most fundamentally, the investigation must determine whether the alleged cover-up represents the inevitable dysfunction of any aging presidency or a deliberate conspiracy to maintain power through deception.
The investigation is speeding up with a packed schedule of upcoming testimonies:
Anthony Bernal: Subpoenaed to appear following his previous refusal scheduled for July 16, 2025.
Annie Tomasini: Scheduled to appear on July 18, 2025.
Ron Klain: Scheduled to appear on July 24, 2025.
Steve Ricchetti: Scheduled to appear on July 30, 2025.
These promise to be the most crucial testimonies yet, with transcribed interviews continuing through August 7, 2025. Chairman Comer has indicated that no transcripts will be released until all interviews are completed.
Thank you for putting all this information together! The levels of corruption & lies is staggering!