Washington’s latest spectacle unfolds Wednesday as Senate Republicans launch a hearing to unravel an alleged cover-up of former President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, as Fox News reports. The probe, dripping with constitutional intrigue, aims to expose who was truly steering the White House during Biden’s tenure. It’s a question that cuts to the core of democratic accountability.
Sens. John Cornyn and Eric Schmitt, both Republicans, were poised to co-chair the hearing, titled “Unfit to Serve: How the Biden Cover-Up Endangered America and Undermined the Constitution.” The session, sparked by allegations in Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson’s book Original Sin, scrutinizes claims that Biden’s allies hid his mental deterioration. This isn’t just gossip -- it’s a constitutional crisis in the making.
The book, released last month, alleges Biden’s team tightly controlled the narrative around his health, shielding signs of cognitive decline from public view. Wednesday’s hearing brings three witnesses to the stand: Theodore Wold, Sean Spicer, and John Harrison. Each is poised to dissect the murky operations of Biden’s inner circle.
Theodore Wold, a former Trump administration official, will testify about Biden’s alleged use of an autopen to sign documents. He’ll argue this mechanical signature was a ploy to mask Biden’s incapacity and dodge the 25th Amendment’s invocation. It’s a bold claim, suggesting a presidency on autopilot.
John Harrison, a legal scholar from the University of Virginia, will echo Wold’s concerns about the autopen’s implications. The device, meant for convenience, may have been weaponized to conceal a president unfit for duty. Biden, however, has denied habitually relying on it, dismissing such accusations as political noise.
Sean Spicer, who once served as Trump’s press secretary, will aim for the media’s role, alleging outlets ignored Biden’s decline while scrutinizing Trump relentlessly. His testimony paints a picture of a press complicit in a White House charade. The double standard, he’ll argue, left Americans in the dark.
Cornyn, a driving force behind the hearing, insists it’s about transparency during critical moments like the Afghanistan withdrawal and border challenges. “Whoever happened to be making those decisions … was not somebody who was authorized by the Constitution,” Cornyn said. His words sting, implying an unelected shadow presidency.
The lawmaker's focus on “landmark moments” suggests Biden’s team may have overstepped constitutional bounds. The hearing aims to expose if aides, not the president, called the shots during national crises. It’s a charge that demands answers, not deflections.
Democrats, however, aren’t buying it. Sen. Dick Durbin, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, called the hearing a “totally political undertaking” and a waste of time. His dismissal reeks of dodging accountability for a party that championed Biden’s leadership.
Durbin’s critique falls flat when stacked against the hearing’s stakes. If Biden’s aides abused the autopen to fake presidential authority, as Wold and Harrison suggest, it’s a scandal that undermines democratic trust. The 25th Amendment exists for a reason, not as a political prop.
President Donald Trump has already upped the ante, ordering Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate potential abuse of signature authority. His directive signals zero tolerance for any subterfuge in the Oval Office. The probe could ripple far beyond Wednesday’s testimony.
Spicer’s media critique adds another layer, questioning why outlets stayed mum on Biden’s faltering moments. His testimony will likely highlight clips of Biden’s stumbles that were downplayed or ignored. The silence, he’ll argue, enabled a dangerous deception.
Strikingly, Democrats on the committee opted not to call witnesses, leaving the stage to Republican allegations. This move suggests either confidence in Biden’s record or fear of what scrutiny might uncover. Either way, it’s a gamble that hands the narrative to the GOP.
The hearing’s timing, after the release of Tapper’s book, amplifies its weight. Original Sin laid bare a White House obsessed with optics over honesty, per its authors. Republicans are now capitalizing on that exposé to demand accountability.
As Wednesday’s session looms, the question lingers: Who was really running the show? Cornyn’s push to “shine a light” on Biden’s presidency could redefine how Americans view those turbulent years. One thing is certain -- this hearing is no mere political stunt; it’s a reckoning with constitutional gravity.
