100percentfedup.com
Bill Clinton’s Comment About Biden Leaves CBS Reporter Stunned
It seems like every time Bill Clinton opens his mouth in front of a camera, he says something shocking.
He definitely left CBS Correspondent Tracy Smith shocked during her interview with the former President which dropped today. (Or… did he? Buckle in — we’re going to try to answer that question.)
She brought up Jack Tapper’s book, “Original Sin”, which purports to share all the inside information that most of us already “knew”.
(Obviously by some sort of witchcraft devilry on our part, seeing as no Democrat on the planet saw what we saw, until now.)
Smith asked the question that enrages me no matter how the top Democrats and media personalities answer at this point.
“Speaking of aging”, she said, “there’s this book…”.
She actually asked him TWICE, presumably because she couldn’t believe he just said what he said.
Here’s the clip of that moment during the interview:
Bill Clinton denies seeing Biden show any signs of cognitive decline
To be fair, he also denied the Monica Lewinsky scandalpic.twitter.com/7AwYfsDa8X
— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) June 1, 2025
I’m not sure what would have shocked me more.
If he had said he DID see issues, I probably would have blown my top — similar to how I feel about Jake ‘Book-Salesman‘ Tapper.
But hearing that answer, I don’t know whether to be incredulous… dismiss him as the liar he’s always been (probably that answer)… or just assume “takes one to know one” doesn’t COUNT in this situation?
It’s that age old question: If you suffer from cognitive decline, can you recognized cognitive decline in someone else?
Or that other age old question: If a cognitively declined person gets lost in a closet and no one is around to let them out… do they make any sound?
Shout out to Anthony’s coverage of that incredible bit of insight that just dropped:
Secret Service Whistleblower Reveals Joe Biden Would “Get Lost In His Closet” At The White House
But, back to Bill Clinton.
The fact is, Bill has been briefed, grilled, prepped, and tested to make sure he sticks to the authorized story -- no doubt about that.
I'm sure they've gone to great lengths ensuring that nothing Bill says could get him or Hillary in deeper than they already are.
There are discussions about hauling people in for sworn testimony under oath and taped transcripts and Congressional findings.
No way did they send Bill out there without a LOT of work, first.
So I'm working under the assumption that he's just lying.
And even Bill's own cognitive decline (you see it too, right???) isn't enough that it could have hidden Biden's cognitive decline from him.
That was the obvious answer to our conundrum all along, just as Defiant L deftly pointed out in this post:
Bill Clinton denies seeing Biden show any signs of cognitive decline
To be fair, he also denied the Monica Lewinsky scandalpic.twitter.com/7AwYfsDa8X
— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) June 1, 2025
He did almost get himself in trouble there at the end of that answer, though.
He said, "Some people are trying to use this as a way to blame him for the fact that Trump was re-elected."
Ah. Something slipped through the cracks that the handlers didn't quite prep for well enough.
So... in Bill Clinton's mind, it's foolish to blame Joe Biden for the reason Trump got re-elected.
That raises and interesting question. If President Trump didn't win because Joe Biden sucks -- why did he win?
There are only two primary answers to this that I can think of:
The people who voted for Trump are either bad people or deceived people. Or...
President Trump is just an all-around better choice for President.
That's the only serious options for why he won, if you're not going to BLAME it on Biden.
If you go back and watch that video again, Bill thought long and hard right before he said that. And I honestly think he was debating with himself whether or not he wanted to say it, because of those exact implications.
And I think he decided at some point -- screw it.
And he said it, because I "think" he knows option 2 was the right answer...
And as I stated -- his handlers must have failed to foresee the discussion going in that specific direction.
He also said, "I didn't know anything about any of this -- and I haven't read the book."
That phrasing isn't exactly what you would expect him to say if that was true. You'd expect something more like, "I didn't SEE... or I don't think he WAS...".
But he said "I didn't know anything about any of THIS." That simple phrasing sure seems to indicate that he acknowledges some SUBSTANCE related to "THIS".
And, oh yeah -- "And I haven't read the book".
That's so obviously the prepared and scripted line of answers he was told to give, with just enough cracks in the integrity of his delivery to reveal that it's not authentically him.
But after that he said the book didn't "register" with him because he hadn't seen any of this himself.
That doesn't sound like he didn't read it -- it sounded like he first said he didn't read it.
And then he slipped up and said it didn't "register" with him, as in he didn't AGREE with the book's take -- because... he actually DID read it.
And right after that was when CBS's reporter said "Why DIDN'T you read the book?" -- which I'm absolutely certain couldn't have possibly in a million-trillion years have been a mainstream corporate-controlled news person acting as backup for the political personality she's interviewing.
That would never happen.
Also, if he did read the book and admitted it, that would make questioning him on those same points much easier, and far more likely to get at the truth -- even if he tried to hide it.
"What book? I don't remember any book?" Riiiiiight.
He went on during the interview to say what DID concern him in terms of Biden's age.
But reading this following story from the NYP, I realized he basically reset the clock to some degree on what he knew and when.
Check out this article and notice the part I emphasized in bold, as reported by the New York Post:
Former President Bill Clinton denied explosive new claims that President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline left him unable to run the country — and insisted he was “never” worried about the 82-year-old’s competence.
“I saw President Biden not very long ago, and I thought he was in good shape,” Clinton, 78, told CBS Sunday Morning when pressed about recent allegations in the book “Original Sin,” which claimed Biden’s mental faculties were so poor that a council of confidants had to run the White House by the end of his term.
“I had never seen him and walked away thinking, he can’t do this anymore,” Clinton said, insisting there was never a moment he doubted Biden’s mental state.
Clinton added that the only doubts he ever had about Biden were during his reelection campaign, when he wondered whether the 82-year-old would be able to keep up with the grueling demands of the job until his term ended at the age of 86.
“The only concern I thought he had to deal with was, could anybody do that job until they were 86?” Clinton said. “We’d had several long talks. He was always on top of his briefs.” (Emphasis added.)
I'm not sure if that was very smart, or very dumb of Clinton.
On one hand, he just told a lie -- Joe Biden was NOT "in good shape" recently when Bill Clinton saw him.
On the other hand, was that a crafty ploy to throw off the bs meters by effectively pleading "innocent" by reason of insanity?
If Clinton's judgement can't be trusted because of his own "cognitive decline", then neither can his testimony, or anything else he might say.
That could have been on purpose.
There's also the second asking of the question by Tracy Smith that caught my attention when I saw it in black and white -- but I didn't catch it watching the video.
Again, check out my bold emphasis in this article from Huffpost:
While speaking with correspondent Tracy Smith, Clinton was asked about the bombshell book “Original Sin” written by CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios journalist Alex Thompson, which claims that Biden’s aides covered up the politician’s declining cognitive and physical health during his ill-fated reelection campaign.
A Biden spokesperson acknowledged in a statement to Axios last month that “there were physical changes as [Biden] got older,” but insisted that “evidence of aging is not evidence of mental incapacity.”
After Smith asked Clinton if he had ever had “a moment with [Biden]” where he felt that he was “unfit to run for president,” Clinton responded, “No. I thought he was a good president.”
Clinton added: “He was always on top of his briefs.”
Smith then pressed Clinton, asking again if he ever witnessed any cognitive decline in Biden, prompting Clinton to firmly reply “no.” (Emphasis added.)
Why, actually, did she ask again?
Was it because she was astonished at the first answer, as I originally concluded?
Or was it because the first answer wasn't as CLEARLY RESOLUTE as it was supposed to be?
Maybe my entire premise was wrong, and thus my headline.
Did Bill Clinton ACTUALLY leave the CBS reporter stunned?
Or was this interview all one big sham, like so many others, in an attempt to mitigate legal exposure for the high-and-mighty, and create the pretense before ANYONE gets hauled in for questioning in front of a Congressional committee... that Bill Clinton doesn't know anything?
I'll tell you the answer to that, if you can tell me what the definition of "is"... is.
See you during the hearings.
How would you approach this?
News Feed (Home)
Popular Posts 
Events 
Blog 
Market 
Forum 
Headline News
VidWatch
Game Zone
Top PodCasts
Rumble
