Another "Diagnosis"

Over the weekend I ran into another quasi-medical diagnosis of Joe's condition, this one from a rabbi, of all people. We must recognize that, while rabbis are capable of deep insight into the human condition, Rabbi Barclay in this case adds the necessary disclaimer that he's not a medical professional. But his remarks do indirectly explain one major point I've observed, which is why Joe is always squinting, as he is in the photo above.

In watching Biden’s speech the other day, I was disgusted by his words, attitudes, lies, anger, and abandonment of Israel. I usually listen to him without actually watching his speeches, but seeing him this time made me do a little research about his eyes…

It is said that the eyes are the windows to the soul, and Biden’s pupils were so dilated that his eyes were solid black while he was reinterpreting the words of the special prosecutor. Looking at previous speeches, it seems that all of his “big” speeches have the same image: significantly dilated pupils. Since I don’t actually believe that he is the anti-Christ, I started doing some research about what that could mean. I am not a doctor, but there are enough studies easily available that it isn’t hard to integrate the data with the images of Biden’s eyes when he speaks.

Rabbi Barclay's vision must be a lot better than mine, because I've never noticed his pupils. What I see much more often is squinting, which could well be a version of the same thing -- if your pupils are dilated, you've got to squint to limit the light in your eyes. But others have in fact noticed the pupils:

I thought I was the only person that noticed how Joe Biden's eyes seem to consist entirely of a large black pupil. I think I noticed this during one of the debates. I thought was the only one that noticed until I saw a Reddit post on it. A lot of that post dealt with less than likely (or even sane) explanations like body doubles and deep fakes all the way to lizard people. While I won't dismiss the deep fakes as a possibility, I'm not ready to go to body doubles and certainly not lizard people lol!

But take a minute to go back and look at his photos from the 1980s up to the present. Without a doubt his eyes are blue and you can distinguish the pupils from the other areas of the eyes.

Reuters went so far as to fact check the issue in 2020 after posts on social media pointed out Joe's black pupils during a debate:

Social media users have been sharing an image online that shows Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden with his irises black and claiming that he is “on drugs.” This image was likely edited, as video and photographs from the night show Biden’s eyes to be their usual blue color.

But clearly the dilated pupils question hasn't been fact-checked away. Rabbi Barclay continues,

We all recognize Biden demonstrates the behavior of a man who is suffering with the fifth level of dementia: moderately severe cognitive decline. Some of the symptoms of this stage (there are 7 stages) include: inability to recall names; challenges with organization; verbal repetition; mood swings; denial of symptoms; wandering; aggression; and pronounced memory loss of familiar people, events, and personal details. All of these symptoms were clearly visible during his Thursday night speech.

But much of the media that supports him claim that those of us who believe he has this terribly sad disease of dementia are only looking at his words and actions through a filter that already despises the man, and maybe they are accurate. But his physiological symptoms, which are undeniable, demonstrate a similar conclusion.

Again, we've got to keep in mind he's a rabbi, not a gerontologist. But his next inference isn't completely unreasonable:

In looking at Biden’s eyes, his pupils are severely dilated. While he still has crystal blue eyes much of the time in candid photos, the pupils are so dilated in his speeches that they look black. Discounting the idea of him being possessed by a demon, there are only a few things that could cause that physiological reaction, the simplest being a reaction to a dark room. Given the bright lights, this is obviously not the cause. LSD, heroin, and cocaine also can cause dilated pupils, but again it is probably a safe assumption that Biden is not dropping acid prior to speaking publicly.

The other causes are related to dementia, and specifically to Alzheimer’s. The National Institute of Health has identified that pupil dilation while under cognitive stress is a marker for Alzheimer’s. Additionally, the most common drugs used to treat Alzheimer’s also create dilation of the pupils, whether they are anti-psychotics or other typical medications such as Rivastigmine.

Simply put, the significant dilation of Biden’s pupils during intense speaking are a definitive sign that he is suffering from Alzheimer's and/or he is taking medication for Alzheimer’s. Another side effect of the drugs is blurry vision, which would also explain his random wandering and not knowing where to go, as well as his tripping over large items or while walking up stairs.

Barclay suggests there are enough doctors in congress to demand additional information on Joe's meds, which likely won't be forthcoming. But I would say there's no necessary contradiction between people who think Joe's dilated pupils are a symptom of Alzheimer's or Alzheimer's meds, and people like me, who see other problems like slurring, hypercorrection, and vacant pauses while answering questions as symptoms of alcohol impairment. In fact, I would assume that what we could be seeing is the effect of mixing alcohol with meds.

One thing that was noticeable last Thursday night was that, if the drugs he allegedly takes to minimize his symptoms for major speeches and debates can explain his dialted pupils, they don't last as long as they did in the debates with Trump in the 2020 election. Back then, Joe was able to last through whole debates despite the viewers who questioned his dilated pupils. Last Thursday, he was able to keep up the facade for maybe ten minutes -- there was a consensus that had he ended the presser when he said he would, without taking questions, he might have brought things off.

His downfall came when he changed his mind as he was walking off the stage, turned around, and took questions, when he promptly called Sisi the president of Mexico. I don't think this can be fixed going forward, it's just going to keep happening. His handlers already know he can't do pressers, he can't do interviews, and he certainly can't do debates.

It Begins

I thought Trump was actually a little slow to roll out what looks like it's going to be his interim campaign theme:

Former President Donald Trump said on Saturday that if President Joe Biden “is too mentally incompetent to convict at a trial,” as laid out in Special Counsel Robert Hur’s damning report of the Biden classified documents probe, then he is unfit to serve as president.

. . . “Crooked Joe got off scot-free,” Trump said before quipping, “and I don’t know if you call it scot-free; they said he was a mental basket case.”

. . . “Now, I’m not looking for anything to happen to this guy. He wouldn’t know the difference,” Trump said, vowing there would be “no revenge” if he was elected as the 47th president.

This could potentially be Trump's theme for the next eight months until the election, but so far, events have unfolded much more quickly than that. The current conventional wisdom at NBC goes like this:

Washington is abuzz with fresh concerns about President Joe Biden’s fitness after a special counsel report released Thursday raised questions about his memory.

But Democrats have rallied around Biden and despite the fantasies of some pundits and anxious Democrats, the president is almost certain to be the Democratic Party’s nominee as long as he wants.

. . . No prominent Democrats have called for Biden to step aside and there's no known serious conservations about it.

“The Democratic Party is united in supporting President Biden, who will be his party’s nominee this fall and will make Donald Trump a loser a second time this November,” said Biden campaign spokesperson Daniel Wessel in a statement to NBC News.

But that doesn't make the problem go away. In the New York Post,

We need to talk about Kamala Harris.

. . . Biden could be pressured to resign.

He could be removed from office under the 25th Amendment on the grounds that he’s “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.”

All well and good, but his constitutional successor is no better, and conceivably worse.

What could Democrats possibly offer Harris to get her to step aside gracefully?

Biden won’t go, and his age and mental decline only make him more stubborn.

Harris won’t go, because there’s nowhere for her to go but down.

Nobody in the party — not even Bill Clinton or Barack Obama — seems to have the pull to make either of them step aside.

Democrats know what they need to do.

That doesn’t make it any easier to do it.

In other words, the lizard people aren't too far from the problem they had with Nixon and his vice president, Spiro Agnew. Nixon faced impeachment, but nobody seems to have been comfortable with the idea of Agnew becoming president, so they forced him out with an old bribery scandal, quickly replacing him with Gerald Ford. This prevented a Democrat House speaker from succeeding to the presidency, and the establishment appeared to be satisified with that temporary measure until the 1976 election. But this all took place with more than three years left in Nixon's term, nearly a year before Nixon himself resigned in August 1974:

On October 10th, 1973, Vice President Spiro Agnew, resigned after being indicted on charges of accepting bribes and evading income taxes while Governor of Maryland. Two days after Agnew's resignation, Nixon nominates Representative Gerald R. Ford of Michigan, who at the time is House Minority Leader, as Vice President. . . . Confirmation hearings by the Senate and House begin, soon leading to votes by both chambers to approve the nomination. Ford is sworn in as the 40th Vice President on December 6, 1973.

For Harris to resign and be replaced in an election year, unlike Agnew-Ford in 1973, would be far more contentious and unlikely to be resolved as quickly. This would increase the likelihood that if Harris were to be forced into resigning before Biden, the vice presidential slot wouldn't be filled, and the next in succession would be the House speaker, currently Republican Mike Johnson. The lizard people would find this distasteful indeed.

On the other hand, I feel certain that the deep state does have something on Harris already, likely even more effective than bribery was for Agnew. My guess is it could well involve last summer's baggie of cocaine outside the Situation Room, or any number of equivalent circumstances, and she could be eased out quickly if the need arose.

What we don't have yet is a national crisis that would actually force invocation of the 25th Amendment against Biden, but given his truly bad luck over the past several months, we simply can't rule it out. Nor can the lizard people. Contra NBC, I've simply got to assume conversations are beginning to take place.

The Hur Report And The "Stop The Steal" Subtext

A largely unspoken takeaway from Joe's Thursday night press conference has been that establishment media and government figures have conspired to conceal the reality of Joe's mental condition from the public. Democrat presidential candidate Dean Phillips said as much in his post on X earlier in the week when he apostrophized just those people:

But shame on all of you pretending everything is ok. You are leading us - and him - into a disaster, and you damn well know it.

Another post on X refers to a "gentleman's agreement" not to cover the issue:

Biden’s age is very clearly the most impt non-Trump issue in this elec. polling says so. Voters say so. It’s just the WH/DC have had a sorta gentleman’s agreement for the last year to pretend like it’s not. Maybe that ends now https://t.co/W7d6BPK9SW

— Astead (@AsteadWH) February 8, 2024

One of the movements most consistently derided in the wake of the 2020 election was "Stop the Steal". Here's the transcript of an NPR interview from 2022:

[New York Times reporter Charles] Homans says scores of groups at the state and local levels, with the help of right-wing media figures and activists, are taking aim at the electoral system. He also tells the backstory of Stop the Steal and traces its roots in the Tea Party movement that started after President Obama's election. Some Tea Party leaders were active in trying to overturn the 2020 election. The Stop the Steal movement didn't succeed in reinstating Trump, but it did succeed on another level. Homans cites polls showing that only about one-fifth to one-quarter of the Republican electorate considers Biden's presidency legitimate.

Here's commentary from The Telegraph following Joe's Thursday press conference:

Many of us had suspected it, but now we appear to have proof: Joe Biden’s presidency is an irresponsible con, perpetrated against the free world.

. . . The US establishment media largely turned a blind eye to Biden’s obvious deficiencies because they didn’t want Donald Trump to occupy the Oval Office for another four years. They glossed over Biden’s occasional incoherence and ineptitude because “no one could be worse” than the orange neanderthal who had pledged to Make America Great Again.

In other words, people who consider themselves responsible adults are starting to come over to the position that was previously held only by MAGA Republicans, that the 2020 election was a con, with the press and the elites enabling Biden's strategy of minimizing the public exposure he would otherwise have had in a traditional campaign. In short, the election was "stolen". I've already argued here that there was never anyhing improper about using the word "steal" in connection with the 2020 election:

The connotation of the word goes far beyond any literal definition of a property crime; definition 3 for "steal" in this on line dictionary is "to take or gain insidiously or artfully", as in "he stole her heart" or "she stole the spotlight".

. . . But even absent proof of electoral fraud sufficient to overturn ballot results, the use of the word "stolen" outside a specific legal context isn't a conspiracy theory; it's no more of a big lie than to claim an umpire is blind or someone can't organize a two-car funeral, when after all, if we check the facts, he quite possibly can, and for that matter, the umpire can see perfecly well.

This is one factor that's leading to Trump's quasi-incumbent status in 2024. In some measure, it explains the failure of any never-Trump candidate to gain traction in the abbreviated primary season, as well as the tendency of the electorate to discount the Democrat-driven Trump indictments. If the 2020 election was metaphorically but nevertheless in some credible way stolen, Trump ought to be the incumbent, and he's running in some part on the record of his first term.

Stop the Steal is moving to the mainstream, and it's a major, if unacknowledged, issue of the 2024 election, derived from the now fully acknowledged issue of Biden's mental capacity.

Constitutional Crisis

In light of Dean Phillips's truth-telling blurt that I talked about yesterday, Special Counsel Hur's remarks on Joe's mental state in his report on Biden's handling of classified documents suggests Washington insiders have been concealing a crisis for some time. In fact, it's beginning to shape up as a full-blown constitutional crisis.

The closest parallel I can think of is the crisis in the UK over Edward VIII's wish to marry Wallis Simpson, which came to a head throughout 1936. According to Wikipedia,

It is generally accepted that Wallis Simpson and Edward became lovers in 1934, while Lady Furness (who was also in a relationship with the prince) was visiting relatives in the United States. However, Edward adamantly insisted to his father, King George V, that he was not physically intimate with Simpson and that it was inappropriate to describe her as his mistress. . . . Edward and Simpson were secretly followed by members of the Metropolitan Police Special Branch, who produced reports on the nature of their relationship and their investigations into Wallis Simpson's private life that included the "pursuit of vicious gossip" and the identification of a "secret lover". The prospect of having an American divorcée with a questionable past having such sway over the heir apparent led to anxiety among government and establishment figures.

In the summer of [1936], the King eschewed the traditional prolonged stay at Balmoral in favour of a holiday with Simpson in the eastern Mediterranean that was widely covered in the American and continental European press, but not by the British press, which maintained a self-imposed silence. Nevertheless, Canadians and expatriate Britons, who had access to the foreign reports, were largely scandalised by the coverage.

By October, it was rumoured in high society and abroad that Edward intended to marry Simpson as soon as she was free to do so. At the end of that month, the crisis came to a head when she filed for divorce and the American press announced that marriage between her and the King was imminent. The King's private secretary, Alec Hardinge, wrote to him on 13 November, warning: "The silence in the British Press on the subject of Your Majesty's friendship with Mrs Simpson is not going to be maintained ... Judging by the letters from British subjects living in foreign countries where the Press has been outspoken, the effect will be calamitous."

In other words, the UK press kept the whole issue quiet, despite it being general knowledge among the elites and widely reported in the foreign press. Back to Wikipedia,

[T]he British press remained quiet on the subject until Alfred Blunt, Bishop of Bradford, gave a speech to his diocesan conference on 1 December, which alluded to the King's need of divine grace: "We hope that he is aware of his need. Some of us wish that he gave more positive signs of his awareness." The press took this for the first public comment by a notable person on the crisis and it became front-page news on 3 December. When asked about it later, however, the bishop claimed he had not heard of Simpson at the time he wrote the speech, and that it was an expression of disappointment at the King's conspicuous failure to attend church services regularly [cough, cough]. Acting on the advice of Edward's staff, Simpson left Britain for the south of France two days later in an attempt to escape intense press attention.

Events unrolled quickly thereafter, with Edward abdicating a week afer Simpson's departure, on December 10. If nothing else, this is an indication of how important it was for the establishment to keep the secret, and how quickly the crisis had to be solved when it was revealed. The combination of Rep Phillips, a Democrat stalwart, tweeting, "But shame on all of you pretending everything is ok. You are leading us - and him - into a disaster, and you damn well know it," followed two days later by the revelations in the Hur report, strikes me as very close to the bishop's invocation of Edward's need for divine grace -- both seem to have blown the lid off the secret.

At this point, the reaction in the establishment press has been stunned silence. YouTube seems to be throttling comments on the issue as well. Only on the right, at least so far, have we been getting intelligent assessments of what these revelations mean. For instance, at Front Page Magazine:

If there are any two things that a man ought to remember, it’s when his son died and when he ascended to the vice presidency and when he became a private citizen again.

Now a man so far gone that he does not know either one has his finger on the nuclear button.

There have been many defenses of Biden’s state made in the past. We have been told that he misspeaks because he has a problem with stuttering or that he’s prone to making up stories, but neither one explains the sheer scale and persistence of the problem which extends well beyond confusing deceased former German chancellor Helmut Kohl and former chancellor Angela Merkel or former French president François Mitterrand and Emmanuel Macron, the sitting president, as he did this week, which might be understandable if that was all there was to it.

Biden is forgetting things that no normal person in their right state of mind loses track of.

Republican Rep Rep. Claudia Tenney wrote to Attorney General Garland, arguing in part,

“It is incumbent upon you to explore proceedings to remove the President pursuant to the 25th Amendment to the United States Constitution,” she wrote. “President Biden needs to be charged, or he needs to be removed. There is no middle ground.”

NBC reported,

The Hur report strips away the defenses that Biden’s press operation has used to protect him and raises fresh doubts about whether Biden is up to the rigors of the presidency, Democratic strategists said in interviews.

“This is beyond devastating,” said another Democratic operative, speaking on condition of anonymity to talk candidly about Biden’s shortcomings. “It confirms every doubt and concern that voters have. If the only reason they didn’t charge him is because he’s too old to be charged, then how can he be president of the United States?”

Asked if Hur’s report changes the calculus for Democrats who expect Biden to be the party’s nominee, this person said: “How the f--- does it not?”

Another Biden ally called it “the worst day of his presidency.”

Speaker Johnson remarked after Joe's impromptu press conference,

"The President’s press conference this evening further confirmed on live television what the Special Counsel report outlined. He is not fit to be President," House Speaker Mike Johnson declared in response to the episode. The Speaker of the House is third in line for the presidency, positioned only behind the vice president in the order of precedence.

It's hard to avoid thinking this is a constitutional crisis on the order of the one in the UK over Edward VIII. My current estimate is that it will hasten Joe's withdrawal from the 2024 race in fairly short order, but there will be other developments as well.

Dean Phillips Goes There

I’m attacked for being honest and saying the quiet part out loud - the part DC insiders only do in private.

I admire our President. I voted for him and campaigned for him. He has visited my home and been gracious to my family and our country.

But shame on all of you pretending… pic.twitter.com/OdaKvW7vbc

— Dean Phillips (@deanbphillips) February 6, 2024

Dean Phillips, a moderate Democrat representing a largely prosperous Minnesota suburban district in the House, is running against Biden in a long-shot bid for the Democrat nomination. Since Joe's fitness to serve is currently among the top issues for the 2024 general election, Phillips has had little choice but to bring it up, which he does in the X post above.

He includes video of Joe's two most recent gaffes, the one on the left where he claims he talked to French President Mitterand after the 2020 election, when Miterrand died in 1996, and on the right the one where he struggles badly over a reporter's question about Hamas, slurring his reply. His comment:

But shame on all of you pretending everything is ok. You are leading us - and him - into a disaster, and you damn well know it.

Rep Phillips is simply echoing what Republicans have been saying since at least 2022:

A former White House physician says President Biden’s cognitive abilities have deteriorated to the point that they present a “national security issue.”

Rep. Ronny Jackson, Texas Republican, said that Mr. Biden should take a test of his mental acuity, which he said has obviously deteriorated at a time when the risk of a war with Russia requires a sharp U.S. president.

“I’m not trying to make a diagnosis,” cautioned Mr. Jackson, who was White House physician under President Trump. “But I think the whole world sees that he’s having some issues. He’s struggling cognitively.”

Speaker Johnson skirted close to the topic last weeK:

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) speculated Friday that President Biden’s staff is keeping him from taking executive action to stem the flow of migrants on the southern border.

“He knows that he has the authority. We’ve documented it for him. I’ve read to him the law myself — to the president. Read him the provisions of the law and said, ‘Mr. President, please take action,’” Johnson said on Fox Business on Friday morning.

“I don’t think he’s allowed to do it. I’m not sure Joe Biden is actually making these decisions. I think it’s staff around him, and they’re pushing him to hold the — or to keep the border open,” Johnson said.

Nobody can make a diagnosis who isn't a medical professional who's examined Joe in person, but when you think about it, police officers, who aren't medical professonals, are routinely expected to make judgments, based on their training and experience, about whether a person is too drunk to drive. I make no secret on this blog that I'm a big fan of police ride-along shows like Cops and On Patrol: Live, and those shows frequently feature DUI stops. DUI suspects, often the ones whose BAC is over .20, simply act a lot like Joe.

In the video Rep Philips posted on the right above, the one where he struggles with his answer about Hamas, Joe's behavior strikes me as remarkably similar to the typical symptoms of intoxication the Sarasota County deputy outlines in this episode of Cops on YouTube:

At 1:45, he explains, concerning the woman he'd stopped,

I would almost describe her as lethargic. She was very slow to respond to my questions. Her speech was at a slowed pattern. It was also slurred at times while she was talking. And sometimes I would ask her a question and she was nonresponsive to the question I was asking, or the answer that she would give did not correspond to the question.

All I've been able to surmise, after watching Joe over a period of years, is that notwithstanding whatever medical conditions he may have, which almost nobody is qualified to diagnose, he's also plastered pretty much all day, every day, which is a judgment most adults are capable of making, and for which trained police officers can explain reliable criteria. Joe's speech patterns correspond to those of people with alcohol impairment.

My estimate is that Joe has been an alcoholic since his early teens, just like most of the Biden family, but was able to function well enough to conceal it as long as he was just a small-state senator or vice president.

(For that matter, my mother, on Nixon's right, worked for the Republican National Committee when we lived in Washington area. Part of her job was taking donors to meet Sen Dirksen, Republican leader at the time. She was instructed to explan to them that the senator was holding a glass of iced tea, not a mint julep. I would guess that Joe is just a creature of that environment.)

In fact, Joe has been known for "gaffes" over his whole career. I submit that the "gaffes" are the coonsequence of his lifelong normal state of intoxication.

Basically, my guess is that Joe is basically checked out, the duties of the presidency are an interruption and an annoyance, and when he's forced to perform them, he's plastered. I can't disagree that this is starting to look like a national security issue. At some point, Trump is going to call him out on that.

Overtaken By Events

Trump has been moving with astonishing speed since the weekend to seize the initiative over the border. The best indicator is Joe's speech at the YouTube link above, where he struggles to control his slurring while wearing an ill-fitting suit -- note how the back of the jacket collar stands out from his neck. This is the sort of thing Dr Jill, if nobody else, should be on top of. Is he losing weight?

(I've got to say again that his slurring and his clear efforts to control it by deliberately slowing down, for instance around 0:20, are a recognized symptom of alcohol-impaired speech and suggest his blood alcohol count is somewhere well above 0.0, despite his repeated claims never to have had a drink. What time does he get started in the morning?)

The reason for Joe's sudden appearance was clear:

When asked Tuesday morning about whether any Senate Republicans would vote in favor of advancing the bill, Senate Minority Whip John Thune responded: "I think it’s unlikely because I just think our members are still — they want more time to evaluate it."

Thune also said that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is "rushing it" by pushing for a vote to be held Wednesday on whether the bill should proceed.

From other reports,

Chaos has erupted among Senate Republicans debating a sweeping bipartisan border bill so much that screaming could be heard from behind closed doors. This according to from Fox News Capitol Hill reporter Aishah Hasnie, who also reported that even one of the bill’s co-authors, Republican James Lankford, is likely to vote against his own bill in the interest of party unity.

Senate Republicans find themselves in a bit of a sticky situation as House GOP has followed the direction of former President Donald Trump — who is motivated by not giving President Joe Biden a significant win during an election year — and more moderate conservatives (like the editorial board Wall Street Journal) who are calling on passing generational legislation to secure the border.

Joe summed up his problem in yesterday's speech:

“Now, all indications are this bill won’t even move forward to the Senate floor. Why? A simple reason: Donald Trump,” Biden said during a public address on Tuesday.

He claimed that Trump thinks the bill is “bad for him politically,” and, therefore, it is being opposed by Republicans in the House and Senate.

. . . “It’s time for Republicans in Congress to show courage, to show spine, to make it clear to the American people that you work for them, not for anyone else."

As I surmised in yesterday's post, the Senate Repubican moderates are terrified of appearing to go against Trump on the biggest issue so far of this year's campaign, and both McConnell and Thune have had to give them a graceful way out of their previous support for the bill. Joe is entirely correct, the Republican moderates are terrified -- the problem is that he and his advisers were expecting them to be terrified of him, not Trump. This is how David Axelrod, who'd previously been mildly critical of Joe, viewed the state of play over the weekend:

On Friday’s broadcast of CNN’s “Inside Politics,” CNN Senior Political Commentator and former Obama Adviser David Axelrod stated that President Joe Biden has shifted positions on immigration because Democrats have moved on the issue because busing migrants to sanctuary cities “has been very effective” in getting Democrats to flip.

. . . Axelrod responded, “Yes. Two points on this: Whatever you think about what Gov. Abbott (R) has done, it was diabolically clever, because by shipping these migrants to cities that call themselves…sanctuary cities, he has created issue[s]. . . . And suddenly, Democrats are engaged in this issue in a different way than they had been. So, that has been very effective. I think that the President has responded by engaging in these very difficult negotiations. . . . And now, what we see is Donald Trump telling his people, don’t agree to that. I don’t want Biden’s name on the bottom of that bill. That will help him.

Axelrod had read the way this was going to go, at least if the Democrats were smart, but Joe let events get ahead of him, and yesterday's speech was a belated recognition that he'd been outplayed, as had Republican leader McConnell:

Republicans in the Senate are expected Wednesday to reject the deal, and McConnell's critics are slamming him for how he has handled the legislation. Tuesday, several of them held a press conference, where Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, demanded that McConnell step down from his party leadership position.

Meanwhile, with former President Donald Trump leading in the GOP primary and potentially returning to the White House next year, McConnell may find it harder to hold onto his leadership spot.

Trump, whose opposition to the border deal has reportedly led to its opposition from Republican lawmakers, has often called for McConnell to be ousted, including after the senator criticized Trump in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol violence.

This has prompted McConnell's critics to speak out more publicly against him over the bill.

Trump's effective nomination with only token resistance has, again, put him in a much stronger position than he had in either 2016 or 2020, and on the border crisis, he's controlling the agenda not only in the House, where Republicans have a very slim majority, but in the Senate, where they're in a minority. Yet without a majority -- and indeed, without necessarily evan a majority of Republicans -- he was able to defeat McConnell's bill. This has got to be a sobering development for McConnell.

Yesterday I speculated that Republican National Committee chair Ronna McDaniel had been told to resign by the end of the month. Later in the day, it looked like she did exactly that:

Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has told former President Donald Trump that she will step down from her post later this month, soon after the South Carolina primary.

Trump, 77, is expected to back North Carolina Republican Party Chairman Michael Whatley as McDaniel’s replacement after the Palmetto State’s Feb. 24 primary, sources told the Associated Press Tuesday.

The former president and GOP primary front-runner hinted on Monday that McDaniel, 50, should vacate her position after the RNC reported decade-low fundraising numbers entering the presidential election year.

One down, one to go. Trump is a phenomenon, it's unwise to underrate him.

Boom!

No sooner did I post yesterday on Trump's next tasks, which I saw as neutralizing Leader McConnell and RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel, than it looks like he has them both well in hand.

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) made the shocking decision to recommend Republicans block the advancement of the Senate pro-migration border bill.

. . . McConnell cited the overwhelming number of Senate Republicans planning to vote against the measure either on substance or because they wanted more time, according to Punchbowl News.

. . . According to Punchbowl, McConnell said the political mood in the country has changed since negotiations began months ago. At that time, McConnell and Democrat leaders agreed to pair foreign aid to Ukraine, of which McConnell is the Senate’s greatest champion, with a border compromise.

So what's changed about the political mood of the country? Just one thing, Donald Trump. In a remarkably brief period between his indictments, most of which took place last summer, and the start of the 2024 primary season, Trump began to exceed expectations in national polls, culminating in a rapid victory over his potential primary opponents, most of which withdrew from the race before New Hampshire. At this point, he's actually in a far stronger position than he was in 2016, with the nomination now out of reach for any other candidate at the start of the primaries. At the same time, his position against Biden in general election polls is steadily improving.

This has put him in the position of Republican party leader and quasi-incumbent. with an enthusiastic base. It appears that McConnell and the other Senate Republican moderates were blindsided by the strength of the Trump base when they finally unveiled the text of their "compromise", which contained every one of the elements they'd previously denounced as "internet rumors". According to the link,

Leaked details of the secretive deal, which McConnell’s chosen Republican lead negotiator Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) and other allies denied, were confirmed Sunday upon the bill’s release. The overwhelming opposition led to McConnell altering his plan Monday night.

Even Lankford, who continued championing the deal leading up to Monday night’s Senate Republican Conference meeting, would not say after the meeting if he would vote to move forward Wednesday on the deal he negotiated, according to the Huffington Post.

It looks like McConnell's only option, with the House Republican leadership refusing to take up the Senate bill, is to find a way for the Senate Republican moderates to back out without going on the record with a vote.

Meanwhile, Trump has given RNC Chair McDaniel to the end of this month to resign gracefully or be fired:

Donald Trump reportedly sat down with RNC chair Ronna McDaniel at Mar-a-Lago for more than two hours Monday to discuss the status of the party.

According to Politico, the meeting took place after Trump filmed an interview with Newsmax in which he said, "I think she knows that, I think she understands that," in response to a question from Rob Schmitt as to whether it was time for McDaniel to step aside.

According to Politico,

After the meeting, Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social that McDaniel was his “friend,” but said he would be calling for changes to the committee following the South Carolina GOP primary on Feb. 24.

“Ronna is now Head of the RNC, and I’ll be making a decision the day after the South Carolina Primary as to my recommendations for RNC Growth,” he wrote.

. . . Trump, who is the strong frontrunner to win the GOP nomination, suggested that he would push for changes during an interview that aired Sunday on Fox News.

“I think she did great when she ran Michigan for me. I think she did OK, initially, in the RNC. I would say right now, there’ll probably be some changes made,” he said.

Trump is simply beginning to drive events. A lot of people haven't woken up to that, but the primaries are over, and Trump is already beginning to anticipate the outcome of the general.