Rep. James Comer, the Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, has just dropped a bombshell letter that could spell trouble for Joe Biden’s personal physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, as the New York Post reports.
Comer’s four-page missive to the D.C. Board of Medicine, sent on Tuesday, demands a full investigation into O’Connor for allegedly helping mask Biden’s mental decline, with potential discipline or even license revocation on the table.
Let’s rewind a bit to understand how we got here. Over Biden’s four years in office, public concerns mounted as the president stumbled -- sometimes literally -- with hard falls, verbal gaffes, and awkward freeze-ups. Polls consistently showed large majorities doubting his capacity to handle another term.
In January 2024, Biden met with a Parkinson’s disease expert at the White House, raising eyebrows about what wasn’t being said. Then, in February, special counsel Robert Hur opted not to charge Biden over classified documents, partly describing him as a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”
Also in February, O’Connor, who headed the White House medical unit and oversaw Biden’s annual physicals, penned a report calling the president a “healthy, active, robust 81-year-old male.” Parkinson’s was supposedly ruled out via a detailed neurologic exam, yet no results were ever made public.
Fast forward to July 2024, just days after Biden ended his re-election bid following a shaky debate performance against Donald Trump on June 27, and O’Connor finally spoke briefly to the Post. He insisted Biden’s mental health was “excellent,” despite admitting he never conducted a cognitive exam. That’s like a mechanic saying your car runs great without ever popping the hood.
Enter the House Oversight Committee, which launched a four-month probe into these discrepancies, seeking interviews with 14 Biden advisers and aides, including O’Connor. The doctor, however, pleaded the Fifth Amendment, refusing to answer critical questions like whether he was ever told to mislead about Biden’s health.
The committee’s report, released Tuesday, didn’t mince words, accusing O’Connor of recklessly skipping cognitive testing and alleging that Biden’s aides orchestrated a cover-up of the president’s waning faculties. Comer himself put it bluntly: “The Committee has found that President Biden’s aides coordinated a cover-up of the president’s diminishing faculties.”
Comer’s letter to Dr. Andrea Anderson, chair of the D.C. Board of Medicine, pulls no punches either, urging a deep dive into whether O’Connor issued misleading reports or flouted medical standards. The board, empowered to act against physicians who misrepresent or harm public perception of the profession, has yet to respond. One wonders if they’ll act or just file this under “too hot to handle.”
The stakes couldn’t be higher, as Comer recommends discipline, sanctions, or even stripping O’Connor of his license if found guilty of misconduct. He argues that if O’Connor knowingly concealed cognitive issues, he violated both ethical and legal standards.
Representing O’Connor, attorneys David Schertler and Mark MacDougall defend his silence, claiming it’s rooted in physician-patient privilege and ethical confidentiality. They also note that invoking the Fifth was necessary under the “unique circumstances” of the deposition. Fair enough, but when the patient is the commander in chief, shouldn’t the public get a clearer picture?
Adding fuel to the fire, other White House aides, including chief of staff Jeff Zients, admitted cognitive testing was discussed internally after the 2024 debate debacle. Yet, no action followed, and O’Connor’s reports remained suspiciously rosy. It’s hard not to see this as a coordinated effort to paper over cracks in the facade.
Critics, including congressional Republicans, have also pointed to broader White House missteps, like last-minute pardons to family and allies via autopen signatures, as evidence of questionable judgment. While not directly tied to O’Connor, it paints a picture of an administration more focused on optics than accountability.
Ultimately, the D.C. Board of Medicine holds the cards on whether O’Connor faces consequences for what Comer calls a “lack of transparency” unfit for someone tasked with safeguarding the health of the nation’s leader. Both O’Connor and Anderson are faculty at George Washington University’s School of Medicine, which might complicate matters.
As this saga unfolds, one thing is clear: trust in how the White House handles the president’s health is at an all-time low. If Comer’s allegations hold water, O’Connor’s career could be on the line, and the public’s faith in government transparency might take another bruising hit. Let’s hope the board acts with the clarity and courage that’s been missing so far.
