President Joe Biden grips the lectern as he delivers remarks on the end of the war in Afghanistan. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
The Special Counsel’s report into misplaced classified documents is, on the surface, good news for President Biden. He won’t be indicted, even though it’s clear he “willfully” retained classified documents and shared some of them with a ghostwriter. We will thereby be spared the indignity of choosing between two indictedpresidents this November. The reason for dropping the case is that it likely could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Biden did this deliberately, and he cooperated fully with the inquiry, and returned the materials promptly.
The report is persuasive and thorough, it seems to me. But in some ways it would have been better for the president if he had been indicted. Because among the reasons he wasn’t is that he’s “a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” Money quote:
Mr. Biden’s [2017] recorded conversations with Zwonitzer from 2017 are often painfully slow, with Mr. Biden struggling to remember events and straining at times to read and relay his own notebook entries.
In his interview with our office, Mr. Biden’s memory was worse. He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended (“if it was 2013 — when did I stop being Vice President?”), and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began (“in 2009, am I still Vice President?”). He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died. And his memory appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him. Among other things, he mistakenly said he “had a real difference” of opinion with General Karl Eikenberry, when, in fact, Eikenberry was an ally whom Mr. Biden cited approvingly in his Thanksgiving memo to President Obama.
The last two things are worrying. The death of his son Beau was a searing event — and Biden couldn’t recall when it happened “even within several years.” Publicly, he even keeps saying Beau died in Iraq! And recalling a key ally in your fight over Afghanistan as a key opponent is a mark of real senescence. This past week alone, Biden talked of a recent G-7 meeting when he was chatting with President Mitterrand of France, a man who died in 1996; three days later, he had another memory of that same summit, recounting what Helmut Kohl had said, when it was obviously Angela Merkel. Mitterand, Macron — maybe an alliterative mistake. But confusing Kohl, who died in 2017, with Merkel? That’s a little harder to dismiss.
Even in his presser yesterday, he said he was talking to the president of Mexico, rather than Egypt, about Gaza. Or watch his recent attempt to explain where Israel-Hamas negotiations are at. Yes, he’s trying not to gaffe there, which is a good thing. But he seems close to catatonic. He has a habit of wandering off stage. And remember “Where’s Jackie?” Ahead of Sunday, Biden has — for the second year in a row — turned down an offer for a pre-Super Bowl interview. It’s a pattern. Biden has held the fewest press conferences since Reagan, and jokes about it: “In a lot of ways, this dinner sums up my first two years in office. I’ll talk for 10 minutes, take zero questions and cheerfully walk away.”
Am I being too harsh? The NYT did their trademarked headline: “Republicans pounce on report that puts spotlight on Biden’s memory lapses.” (They later stealth-edited that away). Matt Yglesias was pissed: “[Robert Hur’s] investigation does not reveal a crime. So instead of saying ‘all good!’ he goes off and does partisan political hits?” But Hur did establish a crime — the classified docs were badly mishandled; and part of his explanation for a decision not to indict was that Biden’s general dotard affect would make it impossible to get a conviction. A true partisan might have indicted nonetheless, if only to give Trump cover. Hur didn’t.
And look: neither you nor I know how much dementia is affecting an 81 year old. There are times when Biden seems remarkably lucid for a man his age. My best guess is that it’s patchy: he has good days and bad days. But this much we do know: even if we judge him able to do the job now, what about in three or four years’ time? That’s what we are being asked to judge. Many of us have parents who were fine in their eighties … until suddenly they weren’t — and in the case of my mother, the decline was swift. That’s why in a poll last year, “fully 77 percent said Biden is too old to be effective for four more years,” and 69 percent of Democrats feel this way. Who wouldn’t?
When you add to this his refusal to replace Kamala Harris on the ticket to reassure us that someone faintly capable of doing the job could take over if and when he crashes, and you have a classic Ruth Bader Ginsburg problem. RBG’s belief in her own superpowers, and her familiar human resistance to giving up power, led to the end of Roe — a body-blow to her longstanding jurisprudence. She destroyed much of what she had achieved by her refusal to leave the stage in a timely manner.
You can say the same for Hillary Clinton. She had her chance to win the presidency in 2008, failed, and should have been content to serve in Obama’s cabinet and retire from the stage. But hell no, she wouldn’t go — ensuring that Donald Trump became president. Joe Biden seems prepared to follow in her footsteps, risking a second Trump term, rather than concede that after decades in public service, two terms as veep and one term as POTUS, it might be time to make way for someone else. Can someone not take him aside and beg him to do the right thing?
(Note to readers: This is an excerpt of The Weekly Dish. If you’re already a subscriber, click here to read the full version. This week’s issue also includes: my take on the Senate immigration bill; a lively chat with Isikoff and Klaidman on the Trump conspiracy in Georgia; an “LGBTQ+” dissent from a reader with a trans son; nine notable quotes from the week in news, including an Yglesias Award for Al Sharpton; 18 pieces on Substack we recommend on a variety of topics; a Mental Health Break that personifies everything I love about America; and, of course, the results of the View From Your Window contest — with a new challenge. Subscribe for the full Dish experience — less than a buck a week!)
From a new subscriber:
I like the guests you speak with every week. You impress me with your passion; you admit when you’ve been wrong or have changed your mind; you’re consistent with your faith and how it informs what you feel, say, and write about; and you take stands on topics that will submit you to withering comments and judgments.
The Immigration Compromise
It seemed to me a bit of a watershed last week when a reporter for the New York Times wrote the following:
In December alone, more than 300,000 people crossed the southern border, a record number. It is not just because they believe they will be able to make it across the 2,000 mile southern frontier. They are also certain that once they make it to the United States they will be able to stay. Forever.
This was undoubtedly news to readers of the NYT, who have long been reassured that there is no border or immigration crisis, except in the minds of white supremacists. The Dish has been making the point that we have effectively had open borders for years now — only to be told that only a bigot could say such a thing. Now President Biden and the Democrats agree — primarily, it seems, because they want to send money to Ukraine and Israel, and are beginning to shit their pants over the election.
(Read the rest of that 800-word piece here, for paid subscribers.)
New On The Dishcast: Isikoff & Klaidman
Michael Isikoff is the chief investigative correspondent for Yahoo News, where he is also editor-at-large for reporting and investigations. Daniel Klaidman is the editor-in-chief for Yahoo News. The veteran reporters have new a book called Find Me the Votes: A Hard-Charging Georgia Prosecutor, a Rogue President, and the Plot to Steal an American Election. We had a lively chat!
Listen to the episode here. There you can find two clips of our convo — on the violent threats spurred by Trump’s conspirators, and the hero of the Georgia case. That link also takes you to a ton of commentary on last week’s pod with Justin Brierley on finding faith in modern times. I might have underestimated your interest in all the God stuff. We also hear from readers on the “LBGTQ” craze, including a dad seeking advice about his gay son.
Here’s a clip from the Brierley pod:
A listener writes:
I wanted to respond to your quip in the recent pod about some listeners not liking how often you talk about God. It is personally my absolute favorite topic on the Dish, and the number one thing I miss about the old Daily Dish was the spiritually focused posts on Sunday. Your writing breathed life into my faith at exactly the time I most needed it (in college and the immediate aftermath), and it’s been an instrument in reinvigorating my Catholic identity. So keep the God stuff coming!
Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Nate Silver on the 2024 race, Christian Wiman on resisting despair as a Christian, Jeffrey Rosen on the pursuit of happiness, George Will on Trump and conservatism, and Abigail Shrier on why the cult of therapy harms children. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other pod comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.
Don’t you think, Andrew, that the artsy, “effeminate,” theatre-loving gays of the past maybe didn’t like bears like you crowding into their bars and clubs and summer playgrounds? Maybe we need two words to describe what kind of gay a person is.
You seem really personally threatened by kids who identify as trans and fearful the “gay community” (whatever that means) will shrink due to maybe-gay-kids-being-pressured-into-sex-change-surgeries because they now think they are trans, not gay. Do you not think parents, doctors, and the kids themselves don’t consider that possibility VERY carefully?
LGBTQI+ means anyone who does not fit the cis, heteronormative experience. No one thinks they are all identical. But they do have some similar experiences. When specific identities are called for, then people can focus on just Ls or Gs (oh, but wait — bears or queens?) or Bs or Ts, etc. Try to calm down a bit on this.
Read my 500-word response here, for paid subscribers. Other assorted dissents are on the pod page.
I spoke with the great and powerful Freddie Sayers about what I got wrong about Trump in the run-up to his presidency, and the nature of his threat today:
In The ‘Stacks
This is a feature in the paid version of the Dish spotlighting about 20 of our favorite pieces from other Substackers every week. This week’s selection covers subjects such as the Trump immunity ruling, a looming trade war, and contraceptives. Below is one example, followed by a few new substacks:
Coleman Hughes counters a “breathtakingly dishonest” review of his new book.
Check out New Jerusalem, a new ‘stack by Spencer and Andrew Klavan. Reality Check is a new one about misinformation from Steve Brill and Gordon Crovitz.
If you have any recommendations for “In the ‘Stacks,” especially ones from emerging writers, please let us know: dish@andrewsullivan.com.
The View From Your Window Contest
Where do you think it’s located? Email your guess to contest@andrewsullivan.com. Please put the location — city and/or state first, then country — in the subject line. Proximity counts if no one gets the exact spot. Bonus points for fun facts and stories. The deadline for entries is Wednesday night at midnight (PST). The winner gets the choice of a VFYW book or two annual Dish subscriptions. If you are not a subscriber, please indicate that status in your entry and we will give you a free month subscription if we select your entry for the contest results (example here if you’re new to the contest). Happy sleuthing!
The results for this week’s window are coming in a separate email to paid subscribers later today. Last week, a romantic Dishhead requested help from the VFYW community:
I do not have a VFYW entry, but a small hope you could help me surprise my wife with reliving a happy memory. She and I took our first vacation together to Puerto Rico in 2008, when we were still in med-school. In April we are going back for the first time, with our two boys. The picture I keep on my nightstand is from that trip. She looks like a pixie in a yellow sundress.
I would like to take her back to that spot. Back to the tree she was leaning on and showing me that smile I fell in love with. The VFYW contest inspired me to try my hand at finding the spot on my own. I could not.
Would you be able to ask the VFYW sleuths to help me locate the street we walked on? We stayed just east of San Juan, and I think the spot was within a few blocks of the ocean. We were walking back from the beach to our shoddy hotel room (the name of which has disappeared from my mind and email) when we stopped to take pictures.
The pictures he provided:
Not much to go on, right? But the sleuths came through. The first one to send a solution was, of course, the great and powerful Chini:
The street they walked on was Jose M. Tartak Avenue. The exact spot of the photo was:
18°26'33.28"N 66° 1'16.92"W
Sadly, the tree appears to be gone, but everything else is pretty much still there.
Here’s how another sleuth — the ski-champ one — tracked down the spot:
The Puerto Rico challenge was easier to identify than I first thought — it took me about 30 minutes to get to the exact spot in Street View — on José M. Tartak Ave, Carolina, Puerto Rico:
Facing in the opposite direction, you can glimpse the white building with the distinctive pattern of windows behind the cement truck and the then-new construction:
Unfortunately, the leaning tree has been cut down (you can see several stumps along the fence). It took me about 15 minutes of flying in Google 3D Global View along the coastal development near San Juan to find the white building, and then another 15 minutes in Street View to find the exact spot on nearby José M. Tartak Ave.
Six sleuths in total found the spot. One of them is our resident chef, who waxes poet:
So, the tree where his wife was standing is no more, but the other tree in that picture is still there, so maybe he can get a picture with his wife and the kids at that one. The tree of love will stay eternal in memory, the tree of family lives on.
Chini adds:
I hope the doctors and their kids have a great time in Puerto Rico. It feels awesome for the VFYW group to use its skills for something like this, and perfectly timed a week before Valentine’s Day.
