OAN Guest Commentary – Kenin M. Spivak
4:00 PM – Friday, July 19, 2024
President Biden is under intense pressure from Democrats to withdraw from the race. Some news reports say he is on the verge of doing so. On the other hand, Biden is a cognitively impaired, angry, and corrupt old man who will do anything to cling to power.
Last week, in his post-NATO summit “big boy” press conference, Biden was asked if he would withdraw from the race if his team showed him data that Kamala Harris would fare better against Trump. His answer was “no.” He said he would only consider stepping down if, in addition, there was “no way” he could win. In his interview the previous week with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos, Biden explained that he would step down only if the “Lord Almighty” asked him to do so. In a conference call with moderate Democrats the morning of the Trump assassination attempt, Biden was not only “rambling,” according to participants, but also dismissive and aggressive toward those who asked him to consider withdrawing.
Biden sought the presidency for more than 30 years before winning. His first effort in 1988 ended when he was caught plagiarizing a speech made by British politician Neil Kinnock and exaggerating his law school performance. Biden’s refusal to consider withdrawing in 2024 shreds the media’s portrayal of a man who wants what’s best for America.
Concurrently, his lawless lawfare against Donald Trump and his supporters; vituperative personal attacks on Trump as recently as the week before a would-be assassin in Butler, Pennsylvania, shot Trump, killed former volunteer fire chief Corey Comperatore, and wounded two others; and his acerbic dismissal of his role in heated political rhetoric during an interview with NBC anchor Lester Holt a few days after the attempted assassination, pulverize his claim to moral high ground.
Following the shooting on Saturday, Biden addressed the nation from the Oval Office on Sunday night. He said, “The political rhetoric in this country has gotten very heated. It’s time to cool it down. And we all have a responsibility to do that.” He added (disregarding his garbled delivery), “In America, we resolve our differences at the ballot box.” Biden meant none of what he said.
Just a few days earlier, Biden told donors, “I have one job, and that’s to beat Donald Trump. I’m absolutely certain I’m the best person to be able to do that. So, we’re done talking about the debate. It’s time to put Trump in a bullseye.” Then, the day before the shooting, instead of describing policy differences, during a campaign appearance in Detroit, what the New York Times called a “fiery” Biden ripped into Trump as a “convicted criminal,” a “rapist,” and a “business fraud” to chants of “lock him up.” Biden added, “Most importantly, and I mean this from the bottom of my heart, Trump is a threat to this nation. He led a violent mob on January 6 to overturn the 2020 election to hold onto power despite an election I won by seven million votes.”
Trump has not been charged with leading any mobs, and until judgment is entered in the New York business records case, he is not a convicted felon. Trump has moved to set aside the verdict because of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on immunity. Perhaps more relevant, last month, in Erlinger v. United States, the Supreme Court reiterated that a unanimous jury verdict is required for any factual finding that increases a potential sentence. Trial judge Juan Merchan did not require unanimity from the jury for the predicate crime that was used to convert an expired business records misdemeanor into a felony. As I explained last month, there are at least a dozen reasons Trump’s conviction should be, and likely will be, reversed.
Trump’s bump in polls and increase in donations after his conviction suggest that the farce of convicting him on facts never before prosecuted in New York, led by the former third-ranking official in Biden’s Justice Department, is understood as a corrupt abuse of power.
As to Biden’s incendiary attack on Trump as a rapist, if the target of the attack was anyone else, the media would be slamming Biden. Trump has never been prosecuted for rape, let alone convicted. In a civil proceeding 23 years after the alleged encounter that lacked any of the protections of a criminal trial, a jury found that Trump had improperly touched E. Jean Carroll. Abusing his position, the trial judge falsely wrote that the jury’s finding was the equivalent of a rape finding.
The alleged business fraud comes from the other highly politicized New York farce—an equally unprecedented case decided by a conflicted judge who should have recused himself. In a case with no victim and no losses, Judge Arthur Engoron found Trump liable under an unusual New York statute and ordered him to pay a fine of $455 million, forfeit his New York businesses, and take away the right to secure an appeal bond from any bank that does business in New York. The New York appeals court swiftly stayed most of Engoron’s ruling and allowed Trump to post a reduced bond of $175 million for his appeal.
While the quirks of New York law may ultimately support Engoron’s finding of liability, it is unlikely that the damages and other penalties will survive because they are so excessive that they violate the 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I §5 of the New York Constitution. There is also no precedent in New York for the punitive order.
A president who seeks and endorses others who seek to keep his opponent off the ballot through unconstitutional means. To keep Trump off the campaign trail by gagging him and corralling him into courtrooms fighting farcical, selective, and excessively charged prosecutions that were timed to come to trial during the election cannot be taken seriously when he says elections should be won at the ballot box.
Underscoring Biden’s corruption, except in New York, his lawfare is imploding. The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the cowardly effort to keep Trump off the ballot (Trump v. Anderson). In two 6-3 decisions, it rejected prosecutors’ overreach to convert federal laws prohibiting document tampering into laws prohibiting demonstrations (Fisher v. United States), and it held that a president is immune from prosecution for official acts (Trump v. United States), eliminating most of federal prosecutor Jack Smith’s election fraud case in Washington, D.C.
In a separate ruling, U.S. Federal District Court Judge Aileen Cannon dismissed the Mar-a-Lago classified records case, holding that Smith’s appointment as special prosecutor violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution (Article II, § 2, clause 2), and his use of a permanent indefinite appropriation violated the Appropriations Clause (Article I, § 9, clause 7). The government intends to appeal.
In Georgia, prosecutor Fani Willis’s weak and overcharged election case is collapsing through a combination of dismissed charges, personal wrongdoing, and the Supreme Court’s immunity decision. That case is largely on hold as a Georgia appeals court decides whether to dismiss it because of Willis’ affair with the prosecutor she selected.
The day after his Oval Office address, Biden’s interview with NBC’s Holt left no doubt that his call to tone down the rhetoric was performative. Though it was somewhat cleansed of Biden’s malapropisms, the NBC transcript also captures Biden’s cognitive difficulties:
HOLT: Well, let’s talk about the conversation this has started. And it’s really about language, what we say out loud, and the consequences of those. You called your opponent an existential threat. On a call a week ago, you said, “It’s time to put Trump in the bullseye.” There’s some dispute about the context, but I think you appreciate that words matter.
BIDEN: I didn’t say cross-hairs. I was talking about focus on. Look, the truth of the matter was what I guess I was talking about at the time was there was very little focus on Trump’s agenda.
HOLT: Yeah, the term was “bullseye.”
BIDEN: It was—it was a mistake to use the word. I didn’t mean– I didn’t say “cross-hairs.” I meant “bullseye,” I meant focus on him. Focus on what he’s doing. Focus on– on his– on his policies. Focus on the number of lies he told in the debate.
Focus on… I mean, there’s—there’s a whole range of things. Look, I’m not the guy that said *CLEARS THROAT* I want to be a dictator on day one. I’m not the guy that refused to accept the outcome of the election. I’m not the guy who said that wouldn’t accept the outcome of this election automatically. You can’t only love your country when you win. And so the focus was on what he’s saying and, I mean, the idea.
HOLT: But have… Have you taken a step back and done a little soul searching on things that you may have said that could incite people who are not balanced?
BIDEN: Well, I don’t think—look, how do you talk about the threat to democracy, which is real, when a president says things like he says? Do you just not say anything because it may incite somebody? Look, I… I… I have not engaged in that rhetoric.
Now, my—my opponent has engaged in that rhetoric. Talks about there’d be a bloodbath if he loses. Talking about how he’s going to forgive all the—actually, I guess, suspend the sentences of all those who were arrested and sentenced to go to jail because of what happened on—in the Capitol. I’m not out there making fun of—like, remember the picture of Donald Trump when Nancy Pelosi’s husband was hit with the hammer—going—talking about—joking about it.
HOLT: This doesn’t sound like you’re turning down the heat, though. You’ve talked about the…
BIDEN: Oh, no, no, no, no. Look, what I’m turning down—we have to stop the whole notion that there are certain things that are contrary to our democracy that we’re for. The idea of saying that you “didn’t win the election” when every court in the land—every court in the land, 120 appeals said—and including this conservative Supreme Court said we won—the idea about having a loyalty pledge from all the folks who are in the Republican MAGA—not all Republicans, the MAGA Republicans saying that, “No, we lost the election,” inflaming the people to say—II—you—I mean—
HOLT: So—so—what—what can you do and what will you do—at least things you can control to lower down the temperature—the rhetoric out there?
BIDEN: Continue to talk about the things that matter to the American public. It matters whether or not you accept the outcome of elections. It matters whether or not you, for example, talk about how you’re going to deal with the border instead of talking about people as being vermin and all—I mean, those things matter. That’s the kind of language that is inflammatory.
A sniper scope uses crosshairs, and a shooter’s goal is to put the kill shot in the center of the bullseye. A difference without a distinction. Not so long ago, Sarah Palin was savaged by Democrats and mainstream media for a commercial that placed targets over competitive congressional districts.
The time when Biden’s lies can be excused because of his purported “kindness” and “well-intentioned” purpose has long passed. His family business scams, autocratic governance, lawfare, and scorched earth campaign for re-election make it clear that if that version of Biden was ever honest, it is no longer the case.
There is an old joke about lawyers. How do you know when a lawyer is lying? His lips are moving. Whether the subject is his life, his family business, or his commitment to doing the right thing, how do you know when Joe Biden is lying? His lips are moving. The only uncertainty is which lies are intentional and which are the result of dementia-based anger or a memory lapse.
(Views expressed by guest commentators may not reflect the views of OAN or its affiliates.)
Kenin M. Spivak is founder and chairman of SMI Group LLC, an international consulting firm and investment bank. He is the author of fiction and non-fiction books and has served as a director and C-suite officer of public and private companies. Spivak has written for National Review, the National Association of Scholars, and Huffington Post. He was chairman of the Editorial Board of the Knowledge Exchange Business Encyclopedia, and a long-time director of the RAND Corporation Center for Corporate Ethics and Governance. He received his A.B., M.B.A., and J.D. from Columbia University.
Stay informed! Receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. Subscribe here. https://www.oann.com/alerts
