CNN anchor Jake Tapper and British broadcaster Piers Morgan found themselves at the center of a political firestorm after Tapper admitted in a televised interview that efforts by Democratic insiders to hide Joe Biden’s cognitive decline could be considered “worse than Watergate.”

According to the New York Post, Tapper did not mince words when pressed by Morgan, sparking renewed debate over Democratic transparency and media accountability. The explosive nature of Tapper’s admissions is forcing lawmakers and journalists to confront uncomfortable questions about the past administration’s handling of President Biden’s fitness for office.

Tapper’s remarks have already drawn sharp criticism and praise from both sides of the aisle. While some see his statements as a long-overdue reckoning, others question whether the media failed in its duty to inform the public. The controversy has reignited partisan battles over the legacy of Biden’s presidency and the role of the press in holding power to account.

Biden’s health at the center

At the heart of the uproar lies Tapper’s assertion that Biden’s aides and Democratic operatives actively concealed the president’s declining health as he sought re-election in 2024. Tapper, speaking to Morgan on “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” emphasized that the cover-up was a “scandal” in its own right, separate but potentially even more consequential than the Watergate affair that brought down Richard Nixon.

Tapper clarified that he did not intend to “exonerate” those involved in the alleged cover-up by stating it was not identical to Watergate. Instead, he highlighted unique aspects of the Biden situation, telling Morgan, “It is a scandal. It is without question – and maybe even worse than Watergate in some ways. Because Richard Nixon was in control of his faculties when he was not drinking.” His comments have fueled a new round of scrutiny on the individuals responsible for shielding Biden from public view.

The book “Original Sin,” co-authored by Tapper and Alex Thompson, details a series of incidents that raised alarms among staff and supporters. Among the most striking claims is that President Biden failed to recognize longtime Democratic ally and actor George Clooney, leaving the Hollywood star “shaken to his core.” The authors also reveal that aides considered putting Biden in a wheelchair and took extraordinary measures to prevent him from falling during public appearances.

Critics blast mainstream media

While Tapper’s admissions have sent shockwaves through the Democratic establishment, many critics argue the mainstream media bears substantial blame for the alleged cover-up. Conservative commentators and politicians point to a pattern of downplaying or ignoring stories that called Biden’s mental fitness into question. The debate has reignited concerns about bias and selective reporting among prominent news outlets.

Some critics say Tapper’s acknowledgment comes too late, accusing him and fellow journalists of failing to scrutinize Biden’s health issues when it mattered most. Tapper himself addressed this point in a CNN interview, conceding, “I think some of the criticism is fair, to be honest. Of me, certainly. I’m not going to speak for anybody else, but knowing then what I know now, I look back at my coverage during the Biden years — and I did cover some of these issues, but not enough.”

Tapper told CNN, “I feel like I owe the American people an acknowledgment that I wish I had covered the story better.” The fallout has spurred renewed calls for greater transparency and accountability in the media. Political observers say the controversy underscores the need for journalists to ask tough questions regardless of party affiliation, especially when the stakes involve the health and competence of the nation’s leader.

Watergate comparisons spark debate

Tapper’s comparison of the Biden cover-up to Watergate has proven particularly divisive. While both scandals center on efforts to conceal damaging information from the public, key differences remain—and partisans on each side have seized on these distinctions to make their case.

Supporters of Tapper’s position argue that concealing a sitting president’s cognitive decline from voters undermines democracy and trust in government. They note that Nixon’s Watergate scandal, while grave, did not involve questions of the president’s mental capacity. On the other hand, some Democrats insist the analogy is overblown and dismiss the cover-up allegations as partisan posturing.

Morgan pressed Tapper directly, stating the cover-up was “arguably …worse” than Nixon’s Watergate scandal. Tapper, for his part, repeatedly emphasized that the two situations are separate but comparable in their seriousness, saying, “Maybe even worse … maybe even worse.” The comparison has sparked a fresh round of historical reflection about the standards of conduct expected from those in the highest offices.

Fallout for Biden’s legacy and next steps

The controversy over the Biden cover-up allegations is reshaping public perceptions of his presidency and the Democratic Party. Tapper and Thompson’s book, released last week, chronicles the mounting health challenges Biden faced and the extraordinary efforts of his inner circle to keep those struggles hidden. Biden’s re-election campaign ended abruptly after a poor debate performance in June 2024, lending credence to questions about his fitness for office.

Key figures cited in “Original Sin” include aides who debated placing Biden in a wheelchair and orchestrated his appearances to avoid any public missteps. The revelations about Biden’s failure to recognize George Clooney and the efforts to shield him from scrutiny have added fuel to the fire. Lawmakers and media figures now face mounting pressure to address the issues raised by Tapper’s book and public statements.

What happens next remains to be seen. As calls for transparency and accountability grow louder, the Biden cover-up story appears far from over. Lawmakers, journalists, and voters alike are left to grapple with the implications for trust in government and the media’s role in safeguarding democratic institutions.