Non compos mentis

(10-28-2025 03:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:17 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 02:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 02:49 PM)bullet Wrote:  That's the question. Unless they testified in Congress, what laws were broken?

If they signed things, including pardons, without him knowing, yes that's criminal. But its hard to prove.

Right...and you can't indict an "administration." It would be individuals.

Well you have to have specific people, specific acts and relatively specific times.

This is what sucks about this whole situation. With our eyes alone, we saw how Biden was kept away from the press, the press was required to submit questions in advance and they practically rehearsed how the press conferences would go...looking very much like a coverup of Biden's mental state.

Based on what we've seen and the fact that there seems to be no recourse legally to hold those who covered up for Biden's decline accountable sends a strong message that it's okay to deceive the public like this and to have a shadow president making the real decisions.

Curious, are you old enough to remember the end of Reagan's presidency?

I am and mentioned it already. Can you refer me to the 4,000 pardons his staff issued on his last day in office?

(10-28-2025 02:43 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 02:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Indicted for what, exactly?

Last I checked, every president we've ever had has aged while in office...so it stands to reason they've all declined mentally over their term...it's nature. So you'd need to quantify the decline and then somehow show that it broke some law.

Good luck with that. Especially with the recent SCOTUS rulings that have pretty much made the president a king for all intents and purposes.

Understood. However, that's not what happened to Biden. It was a major cover up, and objectively he was significantly more impaired than your typical senior citizen.

There absolutely was an effort to hide Biden's decline. A concerted effort to do so. And I will disagree with rath above that there is probably worlds of evidence to show an intent to do so.

But I cant think of a criminal charge that would cover 'hiding the President's mental state.'

But the above, even without a crime, is nothing that any person or administration should have any pride in.

(10-28-2025 03:18 PM)banker Wrote:  The problem isn’t the decline. The problem is taking advantage of the decline to do things the president wouldn’t have allowed if aware. Since Joe is a veggie, he doesn’t know what he did or didn’t agree with.

We have had more than one president depart while still in office. Reagan was out of it his last year, but nobody picked up his pen and issued a record number of pardons, for example.

And thanks for the nudge, banker. If you can show a 1st person asserting undue influence or simply exercising the power of the office for self-gain, or for the gain of another with that another renumerating the 1st person -- there could absolutely be corruption charges against that 1st person.

Not a crime for 'hiding' the decline, but one for taking advantage of the decline.

Good point, banker.

(10-28-2025 03:56 PM)banker Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:17 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 02:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Right...and you can't indict an "administration." It would be individuals.

Well you have to have specific people, specific acts and relatively specific times.

This is what sucks about this whole situation. With our eyes alone, we saw how Biden was kept away from the press, the press was required to submit questions in advance and they practically rehearsed how the press conferences would go...looking very much like a coverup of Biden's mental state.

Based on what we've seen and the fact that there seems to be no recourse legally to hold those who covered up for Biden's decline accountable sends a strong message that it's okay to deceive the public like this and to have a shadow president making the real decisions.

Curious, are you old enough to remember the end of Reagan's presidency?

I am and mentioned it already. Can you refer me to the 4,000 pardons his staff issued on his last day in office?

Yes, I can. But your number is off slightly.

Quote:Who did Biden pardon his last day in office?

- Brother James Biden and his wife, Sara

- Sister Valerie and her husband, John Owens

- Brother Francis

- Dr. Anthony Fauci: Fauci was director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases at the National Institutes of Health for nearly 40 years, including during Trump's term in office, and later served as Biden’s chief medical adviser until his retirement in 2022. He helped coordinate the nation’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and raised Trump's ire when he resisted Trump's untested public health notions.

- Retired Gen. Mark Milley: Milley, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has called Trump a fascist and has detailed Trump’s conduct around the deadly Jan. 6 insurrection.

- Jan. 6. Committee members and staff: The committee spent 18 months investigating Trump. It was led by Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., and Rep. Liz Cheney, a Wyoming Republican who later pledged to vote for Democrat Kamala Harris and campaigned with her against Trump. The committee’s final report found that Trump criminally engaged in a “multi-part conspiracy” to overturn the lawful results of the 2020 presidential election and failed to act to stop his supporters from attacking the Capitol.

Here's a list of Biden's pardons on his final day in office

(10-28-2025 04:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:18 PM)banker Wrote:  The problem isn’t the decline. The problem is taking advantage of the decline to do things the president wouldn’t have allowed if aware. Since Joe is a veggie, he doesn’t know what he did or didn’t agree with.

We have had more than one president depart while still in office. Reagan was out of it his last year, but nobody picked up his pen and issued a record number of pardons, for example.

And thanks for the nudge, banker. If you can show a 1st person asserting undue influence or simply exercising the power of the office for self-gain, or for the gain of another with that another renumerating the 1st person -- there could absolutely be corruption charges against that 1st person.

Not a crime for 'hiding' the decline, but one for taking advantage of the decline.

Good point, banker.

Knowing what we know now, I don't think there is anyone left who will debate that Biden was governing at all during at least half of his term in office, probably less than half. I would think that fact alone is criminal (or should be criminal). What if Joe Biden - or anyone - was perfectly lucid and ran for the office of the presidency only to turn around and secretly not govern. Say he gave it to some other person who wasn't even on the ticket and that person is the real power of the presidency. Regardless of outcomes, isn't that fraud? Hell, we have "bait and switch" laws (locally and state level at least) that protect consumers. Wouldn't this be along those lines?

LOL, if a car dealership was misrepresenting its vehicles to consumers - everyone would want to see the owner of the business prosecuted for fraud. Do the same thing except the bait and switch occurred over the most powerful position in the world...meh, no one cares. That's FUBAR.

(10-28-2025 04:01 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:18 PM)banker Wrote:  The problem isn’t the decline. The problem is taking advantage of the decline to do things the president wouldn’t have allowed if aware. Since Joe is a veggie, he doesn’t know what he did or didn’t agree with.

We have had more than one president depart while still in office. Reagan was out of it his last year, but nobody picked up his pen and issued a record number of pardons, for example.

And thanks for the nudge, banker. If you can show a 1st person asserting undue influence or simply exercising the power of the office for self-gain, or for the gain of another with that another renumerating the 1st person -- there could absolutely be corruption charges against that 1st person.

Not a crime for 'hiding' the decline, but one for taking advantage of the decline.

Good point, banker.

XACLY!

if there was a concerted effort to collude (which I believe there was), there has to be some means to prosecute those under such by itself...

(10-28-2025 03:56 PM)banker Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:23 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:17 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 03:02 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(10-28-2025 02:51 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Right...and you can't indict an "administration." It would be individuals.

Well you have to have specific people, specific acts and relatively specific times.

This is what sucks about this whole situation. With our eyes alone, we saw how Biden was kept away from the press, the press was required to submit questions in advance and they practically rehearsed how the press conferences would go...looking very much like a coverup of Biden's mental state.

Based on what we've seen and the fact that there seems to be no recourse legally to hold those who covered up for Biden's decline accountable sends a strong message that it's okay to deceive the public like this and to have a shadow president making the real decisions.

Curious, are you old enough to remember the end of Reagan's presidency?

I am and mentioned it already. Can you refer me to the 4,000 pardons his staff issued on his last day in office?

dangerous misinformation here. Biden only granted 80 pardons

you can see a list here:
https://www.justice.gov/pardon/pardons-g...2021-2025.

The vast majority of clemencies Biden granted were commutations, which are not pardons.