Joe Biden's mental decline is a national security risk

Justin Sullivan / Staff | Getty Images

Editor's note: this article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Joe Biden’s debate performance isn’t about politics anymore. It’s about the critical state of our national security. This is the weakest our president has ever appeared. Never in my lifetime have I seen a U.S. president appear so feeble and incapable. If I'm Vladimir Putin, I am storming Europe. If I am Xi Jinping, I am invading Taiwan — right now.

I remember when Ronald Reagan was in the hospital after being shot. That was a very nerve-wracking time because, for a moment, we didn't have the president in charge. He transferred his presidential powers to the vice president while he was in the hospital at the beginning. It was terrifying because you knew the world was watching.

Joe Biden’s debate performance isn’t about politics anymore. It’s about the critical state of our national security.

Our enemies are always looking for moments of weakness. During the debate, it confirmed to our enemies that we’ve endured nearly four years of weakness.

Three categories of people watched last week’s debate.

There were those who believed the media's claim that Biden's senility was just a Republican "cheap fake" and that the president has never been sharper. This group is probably in shock after seeing his debate performance. For those in this group, here's what you should be thinking right now: I cannot trust any of my trusted sources because they all lied to me.

Then, there are those who participated in the con. Anybody who has talked to Biden, has seen him up close and personal, and has had conversations with him is culpable. Those of you who ran the con in the press, the White House, and the Democratic Party, shame on you! You have put our country in grave danger.

Then, there are those who are responding to the debate by saying, "The Democratic Party is in trouble. What are we going to do for the election? Can we get him to step down before the convention? If we do, how do we pick a new candidate?" People in the first two groups can fall in this category. But these are political questions. We need to step away from politics and the election for a second. We need to talk about the state of our country.

I'm singularly concerned with how we get this man away from the football!

We are now facing nuclear threats that we haven't faced since the 1960s. Even though the 1960s was a time of great fear and uncertainty with the Soviet Union, we had John F. Kennedy. He was in so much pain, unbeknownst to the American people. The doctors were jacking him up on drugs. But at least he was sane and sharp!

In 2024, we have Joe Biden. Do you realize the responsibility he carries to determine your fate in a national emergency? As president, he would have seven minutes to decide how to respond if any of our global enemies launched a nuclear attack. If North Korea launched a hypersonic weapon at us, he would have less than seven minutes to decide what to do. Our military wouldn't even have enough time to verify if it was a nuke or not. They open the football and take out what's called the "Black Book of Death." That's how serious this is! The president has to look through it and decide, "This city, this system, these ships, these silos will be saved." Then, the guy who is with the football acts as a kind of actuary. He takes the president's selection and says, "Mr. President, this is going to result in this many deaths."

Take this as a hypothetical example. Let's assume the president decides to retaliate against North Korea if it launches a ballistic missile at the United States. The "actuary" would point out that some of those targeted North Korean cities are up against the border of China. That means that radiation will blow into China, killing an additional 250,000 Chinese. The Chinese will look at that as aggression, and they may launch their own nuclear weapons at us. The radiation may make its way as far north as Russia, and that country will likely retaliate. The "actuary" will explain all of this to the president and ask, "Is this your selection, sir?"

Do you trust Joe Biden with that responsibility, regardless of your political affiliation?

I am so angry that I haven't heard a single person on television or in the political realm talk about the state of the country! They're all talking about the election: "How do we replace Biden before the convention? How do we get him off the ticket?"

Get him off the ticket? I'm singularly concerned with how we get this man away from the football!

Do you know what our enemies are thinking? If there were any opportunity to take advantage of the United States' weakness, it's now. Our country is in more danger than at any point possibly in my lifetime — and I grew up during the Cold War. We are weak, and the world knows it. Our enemies know it. They are threatening nuclear weapons, and we cannot have this man with the "black book of death" and the button!

Does anyone understand what we saw during the debate? You didn't see a presidential candidate. You saw the current president of the United States! That should terrify you regardless of your political affiliation.

If you are on the right and were celebrating after the debate because you thought, "This is going to be great for Donald Trump," be careful what you wish for. If you are somebody on the left thinking, "Oh well, this just played into the caricature that the right was trying to build about Biden," do you think we want our country to be destroyed? Does any American want our president to look like that? What is wrong with us?

We're in trouble, not merely because of Joe Biden. We’re in trouble because people are not recognizing the danger that is right in front of us. I've been saying a lot lately, "May God save the republic." He cannot do what we won't participate in. We must get this man out of office.

Can fear win the vote? Democrats have a dangerous strategy to demonize Trump.

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

The Democratic Party’s nominee is deliberately spreading false, fear-driven narratives to turn her base against Donald Trump, regardless of the consequences.

Have you noticed how Kamala Harris and her allies in the corporate left-wing media have become bolder in labeling Trump a “fascist”? A recent New York Times article revealed that Democrats have shed their reluctance to use the term. In fact, it has become their rallying cry as Election Day approaches.

What’s the real goal here? According to John Daniel Davidson at the Federalist, Harris and her supporters are using this rhetoric to energize their base — and more disturbingly, to prepare them for violence if Trump wins. The fearmongering isn’t just about driving people to the polls; it’s about creating an atmosphere of rage and chaos.

Let’s show the Democrats that our republic doesn’t bend to fear and certainly doesn’t bend to those who twist the truth for political gain.

Harris is deliberately spreading false, fear-driven narratives to turn her base against Trump, regardless of the consequences. This is the same Kamala Harris who, during the George Floyd riots in 2020, encouraged bailing out rioters and urged the violence to continue both before and after the election.

For example, Harris has claimed that Trump will use the Department of Justice as a weapon against his political enemies if he returns to office. But let’s pause for a second: Who is using the Justice Department as a political tool right now? Harris’ own administration, led by Joe Biden, has weaponized federal agencies against Trump and conservatives for years.

Harris also recently entertained the idea that Trump would round up people who “don’t look white” and throw them into camps. During an interview with Charlamagne tha God, a caller suggested this scenario. Instead of refuting the caller’s paranoia, Harris nodded and said, “You have hit on a really important point.

This kind of divisive rhetoric fuels fear and division in our country. Let’s not forget: Trump was president for four years, and there were no camps, roundups, or authoritarian crackdowns on dissenters. Leftists claim Trump and his supporters spread conspiracy theories, but they are the ones pushing baseless and dangerous claims.

While Democrats claim to defend democracy, they are increasingly aligning with authoritarianism. For example, the EPA funneled billions of dollars to left-wing organizations, including one tied to Stacey Abrams, for “voter mobilization” efforts. This funding came through the Inflation Reduction Act — a taxpayer-funded omnibus bill. Imagine the outrage if Republicans in Congress gave billions of taxpayer dollars to right-wing groups. The media would be in an uproar, and there would be protests at the White House gates. But because it’s Democrats doing it, the mainstream media turns a blind eye. These are the warning signs of an authoritarian regime.

This is why it’s more critical than ever for Americans to see through the left’s manipulation. Trump’s not the fascist here — he’s a threat to the left's power. The real danger lies in the left’s escalating rhetoric, which is designed to incite chaos if things don’t go its way. And let me be clear: That’s exactly what leftists are preparing for.

Don’t let them succeed.

The best way to counter their lies is by getting out to vote and encouraging others to do the same. If every single one of us does this, we won’t let the fearmongering and lies being peddled by Harris and the Democrats succeed. Let’s show them that our republic doesn’t bend to fear and certainly doesn’t bend to those who twist the truth for political gain.

America is currently standing at a fork in the road. Which path we take will determine our fate as a nation.

One path is “we try something entirely new,” as in “not the Constitution,” and the other path is “we go back towards the Constitution,” says Glenn Beck.

The stakes for this decision are higher than they’ve ever been.

“We're deciding this year whether or not our kids are going to grow up in a country that gives them the opportunity to be themselves and to move forward and chart their own course, or we're going to continue to live in a place where we're not sure if our kids are going to have a better life than we did,” Glenn warns.

Regardless of who you vote for, Glenn says that one thing applies to everyone: “You’ve got to get involved this year,” which includes voting.

Election Day is rapidly approaching, and it will undoubtedly be a night that goes down in history, which is why BlazeTV will be broadcasting it live.

“We’d love to share it with you,” says Glenn.

Go to BlazeElection.com for exclusive access to our election night broadcasting. Your BlazeTV+ subscription also gives you access to all BlazeTV content as well as Blaze News.

“Sign up and be a part of the family as we go through this together,” invites Glenn.

Get $40 off your first year of BlazeTV+ with code ELECTION.

TOP THREE craziest leftist reactions to Trump's McDonald's visit

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

Over the weekend, President Trump visited a McDonald's in Bucks County, Pennsylvania to serve up some french fries to hungry supporters.

MAGA fans from across the country came to celebrate and support Trump, quickly swamping the small town with a tide of Trump merch. With a roaring crowd outside, Trump cooked up some crispy fries and served them to a small selection of supporters through the drive-thru window, creating a light-hearted, fun momenta pleasant break from the turbulent election cycle.

Naturally, the Left quickly swooped in to rain on Trump's parade. From unsubstantiated fact-checks to overused insults, here are the craziest reactions to Trump's McDonald's trip:

Fact check on Donald Trump's claims about Kamala Harris

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

While working his brief 15-minute shift, Donald Trump quipped that he's now worked at McDonald's longer than Kamala Harris, referencing the Vice President's unsubstantiated claim that she worked at McDonald's one summer during college. McDonald's further substantiated Trump's claim by indicating that there are no existing records of Harris's employment, though they admit that records from the pre-digital age may not have survived to the present day.

Despite the lack of evidence, left-wing media outlets, such as the Washington Post, were quick to defend the Vice President. Their argument essentially put Trump's word against Harris's, suggesting that Trump was deliberately lying to defame the Vice President, while simultaneously treating Harris as a more credible source.

Pointing out the obvious fact that this was a political stunt

The Washington Post / Contributor | Getty Images

In what is likely the least informative journalistic piece of the century, MSNBC made the "shocking discovery" that Donald Trump didn't actually work at McDonald's and that the entire event was for his campaign. It's unclear what detail gave this away to the "ever-vigilant" reporters at MSNBC. Maybe it was the fact that McDonald's was closed for the event, or the lack of employees within the restaurant, or possibly it was the crowd of cheering fans outside. Thank you captain obvious, the event was a carefully coordinated and secure political event. The former President who has had several assassination attempts on his life did notwork in an unsecured restaurant, dealing with countless unknown people.

Truly "top-notch" reporting by MSNBC.

Calling Trump supporters "weird"... Again.

LOGAN CYRUS / Contributor | Getty Images

The New York Times had to really scrape the bottom of the barrel to come up with something to paint Trump's fast food fiesta in a negative light. Instead of attacking Trump, they went after his supporters who lined the street to cheer on their favorite presidential nominee. They went so far as to describe the event as a violent riot full of unhinged and uneducated fanatics. The New York Times even quoted a pro-Harris protester who showed up to the event and suggested that "Jan. 6 was maybe a trial run ... and now they’re a lot more organized — and a lot angrier.” The insults didn't stop there. They dredged up the archaic and cringeworthy Tim Walz original calling the Trump supporters "weird." This "zinger" doesn't have the punch the New York Times wanted it to have, and came across as a sad attempt to bring Trump down in one of his high points in his campaign.

RIGGED: Kamala Harris attempts to sway Fox interview in her favor, STILL falls short

Paul Morigi / Contributor | Getty Images

The election is mere weeks away and Kamala Harris just had her first adversarial interview since she began campaigning.

Last week, Harris sat down with Fox News journalist Bret Baier for an interview plagued with difficulties from the beginning. As Glenn recently pointed out, it seemed like Harris had done her best to ensure the interview was intentionally rigged against Baier. Despite being in front of Baier's diverse audience, she did not seem too interested in taking the opportunity to sell herself to a new demographic. Instead, Glenn hypothesized she was just after a quick soundbite to pander to her faltering core supporters.

However, the interview blew up in Kamala's face, and the American people took notice. Here's a rundown of Kamala's first Fox interview:

Rigged Interview

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Harris and her team did everything possible to throw Bret Baier off his game and derail the interview in her favor. It started when Harris's team informed Fox that the interview, which was originally supposed to be an hour, would be cut in half. This left Baier scrambling to reformat his interview to better fit the new time requirement. Then Harris arrived at the interview ten minutes late, further shorting the interview.

The purpose behind Harris's tardiness became apparent during the interview. Every time Baier asked a question, Harris would launch into a lengthy word salad. Baier was forced to interject just so he was able to ask more than a couple of questions. Harris even pushed back, calling out Baier's interruptions, which of course, just wasted more time. Clearly, Harris or her staff realized that she could not sustain a hostile interview for any extended period, which is why Harris tried to filibuster away as much of the interview as possible.

When the brief interview was nearing the end of its allotted time, Harris's staff began signaling to Baier to end the interview. Despite the change in plans and late arrival, her staff was determined to end the interview as quickly as possible.

Harris's Agenda

CHRISTIAN MONTERROSA / Contributor | Getty Images

From the beginning of the interview, Harris was hostile. She was immediately adversarial and would spin every question into a criticism of Trump, no matter how pointed Baier's question was. Several times Harris had emotional outbursts, spewing classic anti-Trump rhetoric, regardless of its relevance to the question asked. Glenn pointed out that this was the reason Harris took this interview. Recently, many of her core supporters have been faltering as her sudden burst of televised appearances has revealed her paper-thin platform. She took this interview to get a good clip of her passionately bashing Trump on Fox News. This would bolster her core demographic, which she desperately needs.

Harris's Fumbles

BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

Despite her best efforts to sway the interview in her favor, Baier still managed to pin Harris several times. Harris kept dodging tough questions Baier threw her way with the same tactic: she would promise to "follow the law" then deflect the question back on Trump. One of the more memorable instances of Harris's evasion strategy was when she was questioned if she supported prison inmates having access to taxpayer-funded transgender surgery. Harris insisted she would "follow the law" and then explained that Trump had followed the same law while he was in office. This response was, in essence, a non-answer. Harris was ignoring the obvious fact that as President, she would influence what the law would be and how it is enforced.

Harris's other major blunder occurred after Baier asked her how her presidency would differ from Biden's and how she would "turn the page" on our current situation. In classic Harris fashion, she immediately deflects on Trump, framing our current situation as somehow a byproduct of Trump simply existing within the political sphere. This convoluted web she spun was so twisted that Harris herself lost track of what she was saying gave up, telling Baier, "You know what I'm talking about." Baier admitted he was just as lost as she was, and she simply went back to attacking Trump.