The Justice Department has found transcripts of President Joe Biden's conversations with a biographer, becoming part of an ongoing criminal investigation concerning his handling of classified material.

Politico reported that The Department of Justice recently informed a federal judge that transcripts of President Joe Biden’s talks with a biographer had been located.

These transcripts are linked to a criminal probe examining Biden’s management of classified documents prior to his presidency.

The findings were highlighted in special counsel Robert Hur’s February report, which described President Biden as “a well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” Since then, the DOJ has experienced a surge in Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and lawsuits from media outlets and conservative groups seeking access to records related to Hur’s investigation.

Heightened Requests for Information

Concerns about President Biden’s cognitive abilities and overall fitness for office were amplified following his recent poor debate performance against former President Donald Trump. On the heels of these concerns, Biden announced on Sunday that he would no longer pursue reelection.

The Justice Department has resisted demands to release audio recordings of Biden's discussions, arguing that doing so would encroach upon his privacy, risk potential abuse, and discourage future witnesses from consenting to recorded interviews.

In defense, Biden invoked executive privilege over these recordings, aiming to prevent House Republicans from holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt.

During a hearing on June 18, DOJ attorney Cameron Silverberg stated, “We don’t have some transcript that’s been created by the special counsel that we can attest to its accuracy.” Silverberg emphasized the immense effort required to process the 70 hours of interviews between Biden and writer Mark Zwonitzer.

Discovery and Handling of Transcripts

On Monday night, Silverberg confirmed that Hur’s office had indeed produced transcripts of segments of these interviews. Biden’s discussions with Zwonitzer, part of his work on memoirs published in 2007 and 2017, contained sensitive information.

The DOJ located six electronic files comprising 117 pages of verbatim transcripts of some of these Biden-Zwonitzer recordings. However, due to the DOJ's policy and the indeterminate nature of Biden’s recollections, prosecutors chose not to press charges.

Recently, the DOJ backtracked on its previous resistance to contacting Hur about the materials integral to his report. This move was followed by conversations with another unnamed individual involved in Hur’s investigation before finally communicating with Hur directly.

Hur's involvement went beyond utilizing the Biden-Zwonitzer audio; he also referenced Biden’s handwritten notes on an Afghanistan memo. Silverberg indicated he would discuss with parties requesting access to Hur’s materials about processing Biden’s notes for public release.

Conclusion

As these developments unfold, U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich has scheduled a hearing on the matter for Tuesday morning.

In summary, the Justice Department's discovery of transcripts involving President Joe Biden and a biographer has become a focal point amid heightened scrutiny over Biden's crisis with classified material.

The DOJ is navigating numerous FOIA requests and legal hurdles, while Biden's mental acuity and fitness for office remain in the spotlight following his decision to withdraw from the 2024 presidential race.

Special counsel Robert Hur's investigation continues to impact the discourse, with Biden’s executive privilege and privacy concerns playing a critical role in the handling of these sensitive materials.

President Joe Biden's recent call to former campaign staff has raised questions about his health after an unusual exchange with Vice President Kamala Harris.

The Daily Mail reported that the call comes just days after Biden's isolation due to COVID-19 and his surprising decision to step down from the presidential race was announced on social media.

Joe Biden, from COVID isolation in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, spoke to his staffers on Monday.

At 81 years old, Biden addressed Vice President Kamala Harris with the phrase, "I'm watching you, kid," during the call.

Speculation Arises Over Peculiar Details

Notably, Kamala Harris referred to Biden during the call, saying "rec..." before correcting herself to "call." This slip has led Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene to speculate if Biden's comments were prerecorded.

Charlie Kirk labeled Harris's slip as "very strange," and Representative Lauren Boebert questioned Biden's location. Meanwhile, campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez's body language during Biden's remarks deepened suspicions of possible prerecorded audio or AI involvement.

Biden has been in COVID isolation since testing positive last week. His doctor, Dr. Kevin O'Connor, reported that Biden's symptoms have almost fully resolved and his vital signs, including oxygen saturation, remain normal.

Since his announcement via social media on Sunday, Biden has remained unseen publicly for five days, last appearing at a U.S. airbase in Dover, Delaware. He plans to return to the White House on Tuesday afternoon.

During the call, Biden expressed regret for not physically supporting his staff due to COVID. "If I didn’t have COVID, I’d be standing there with you," he mentioned.

Boebert demanded a "proof of life" from Biden by 5:00 pm Monday, and Glenn Greenwald criticized Biden's absence, describing it as "strange and wrong" under the important circumstances.

Internal Power Struggles and Concerns

Marjorie Taylor Greene linked Biden's withdrawal to internal power struggles, increasing health concerns after his brother Frank Biden cited illness as a factor. However, a Biden family source dismissed Frank Biden's claims, attributing them to his alcoholism.

Biden’s announcement to withdraw comes at a crucial time for the Democratic party, with Biden endorsing Kamala Harris as the Democratic nominee. Harris's campaign quickly raised $81 million in donations following the announcement.

Despite the surprising news, Biden assured his campaign staff that their jobs are secure, as confirmed by campaign staffer O'Malley Dillon. He also pledged to remain involved in the reelection fight and support Harris’s campaign.

Biden's call included a heartfelt plea for continued support. “I’m hoping you’ll give every bit of your heart and soul that you gave to me to Kamala,” he stated, reaffirming his commitment to stay engaged even after stepping down from the race.

With just six months left of his presidency, Biden emphasized his determination to accomplish as much as possible in both foreign and domestic policy. He assured his team, "So let me be real clear. We're still fighting in this fight together. I'm not going anywhere."

Conclusion

The President’s unexpected withdrawal and the ensuing speculation have undoubtedly stirred public and political reactions.

As uncertainty looms, the nation awaits Biden's return to the public eye and his continued support for Harris’s campaign future.

The peculiar interaction on the call, coupled with Biden’s health and disappearance from public view, continues to feed speculation and concern about the internal dynamics and leadership within the Democratic Party.

Democratic senators are taking steps to counter a Supreme Court decision that restricts federal agencies' regulatory authority.

NBC News reported that the new bill aims to reinstate the previous standard, allowing agencies more flexibility in interpreting ambiguous statutes.

On Tuesday, Democratic senators will introduce legislation to reverse the recent Supreme Court ruling.

The ruling imposes new constraints on federal agencies' regulatory powers.

Bill Targets Supreme Court Decision

The Supreme Court decision, made last month, affects various sectors including environmental and consumer protection regulations. The legislation, known as the Stop Corporate Capture Act, is spearheaded by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass.

The bill has garnered support from nine other Democratic senators and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt. It aims to restore the standard that permitted agencies some discretion in interpreting vaguely written laws.

This discretion was abused by federal agencies for years which was a large part of why the Supreme Court ruled to overturn it and force Congress to do its job.

The Supreme Court's ruling overturned the "Chevron deference" principle from the 1984 Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council case. Conservatives and business interests have long opposed Chevron deference, while liberals favored it for its regulatory flexibility.

Sen. Warren criticized the Supreme Court's decision, stating, "Giant corporations are using far-right, unelected judges to hijack our government and undermine the will of Congress." She emphasized the bill's role in bringing transparency and efficiency to the rule-making process.

She added that the legislation would "make sure corporate interest groups can’t substitute their preferences for the judgment of Congress and the expert agencies." The bill also includes measures to streamline the rule-making process.

One significant provision aims to defend independent scientific expertise. It requires the disclosure of industry-funded research and potential conflicts of interest.

House Committee to Discuss Adaptation

The House Administration Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing on Tuesday, coinciding with the introduction of the bill. The committee will discuss how to adapt to the Supreme Court's decision.

The Stop Corporate Capture Act addresses concerns raised by the Supreme Court's limitations on agency power. The ruling has implications for various regulatory areas, prompting a legislative response.

Democratic senators are rallying behind the bill to counteract the perceived negative impact of the Supreme Court's decision. The legislation seeks to reinforce the ability of federal agencies to regulate effectively.

Sen. Warren's bill reflects a broader effort to maintain robust regulatory oversight. By overturning the recent Supreme Court ruling, Democrats aim to preserve the regulatory flexibility that was provided by Chevron deference.

The legislation represents a clash between different ideological perspectives on the role of federal agencies. Conservatives argue for limited agency power, while liberals advocate for broader regulatory authority.

The outcome of this legislative push could significantly influence future regulatory practices and the balance of power between the judiciary and federal agencies.

Conclusion

In summary, Democratic senators are moving to overturn a Supreme Court ruling that limits federal agencies' regulatory powers.

The Stop Corporate Capture Act, led by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, seeks to restore previous regulatory standards and ensure transparency and efficiency in the rule-making process. The House Administration Committee will discuss adapting to the ruling in a hearing scheduled for the same day.

Rep. Andy Ogles (R-TN) has introduced articles of impeachment against Vice President Kamala Harris, claiming her negligence in enforcing federal immigration laws.

Breitbart reported that Ogles asserts that Harris's inaction has intensified the border crisis, triggering numerous tragic incidents involving illegal aliens. He believes that as Biden's border czar, she has liability for the crisis.

The articles of impeachment were introduced by Rep. Andy Ogles on Tuesday following the news that Harris would be taking over from President Biden after he suddenly bowed out of the presidential race.

Ogles Alleges Harris's Negligence

Ogles alleges that Vice President Kamala Harris has “willfully and systematically” neglected her duty to enforce federal immigration laws. He claims her failure has resulted in a breach of public trust.

The impeachment resolution accuses Harris of “high crimes and misdemeanors” related to the border crisis and illegal immigration. According to Ogles, Harris has shown a consistent “refusal to uphold existing immigration laws” and demonstrated “palpable indifference” to Americans affected by the crisis.

Harris reportedly “consistently refused to visit the southern border to evaluate this ongoing national crisis,” except for one visit in June 2021, which was “hundreds of miles away from the epicenter of the migrant crisis.”

President Joe Biden assigned Harris to handle illegal immigration in March 2021, tasking her with cooperating with Central American nations to address the root causes of the problem. Despite this, Ogles alleges that her inaction has exacerbated the situation.

Ogles highlights several tragic incidents purportedly connected to illegal immigration. These incidents include the August 2023 rape and murder of Rachel Morin, a mother of five, by an illegal alien.

In September 2023, another illegal alien allegedly attacked a woman and her 9-year-old daughter in Los Angeles. In February 2024, 22-year-old nursing student Laken Riley was killed by an illegal alien.

Escalating Tragedies and Crisis

Additional incidents cited by Ogles include the May 14, 2024, rape of a 15-year-old New York girl by an illegal alien from Turkey and the June 2024 rape of a 13-year-old girl in Queens park. In June 2024, 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray from Houston was killed by two illegal aliens.

Ogles also mentions that five illegal aliens were charged with kidnapping a 14-year-old Indiana girl. These incidents are presented as evidence of the negative impacts of what Ogles describes as Harris's “palpable indifference.”

Ogles states that December 2023 witnessed nearly 302,000 encounters with illegal aliens at the border, the highest number ever recorded in a single month. Furthermore, the first five months of Fiscal Year 2023 saw the seizure of 106 pounds of drugs, including 11,000 pounds of fentanyl.

Aside from the border crisis, Ogles's resolution includes claims that Harris has misled the public regarding President Biden’s physical and cognitive health. This, he argues, is another breach of public trust.

Ogles maintains that Harris has committed “high crimes and misdemeanors,” impacting American women and girls disproportionately due to the ongoing border crisis. He emphasizes the need for accountability and better enforcement of immigration laws.

Conclusion

The impeachment articles brought forth by Ogles mark a significant escalation in the political discourse surrounding the U.S. border crisis. The outcome of this move remains to be seen.

Rep. Andy Ogles has launched impeachment articles against Vice President Kamala Harris, accusing her of failing to enforce federal immigration laws and breaching public trust.

The resolution points to Harris's handling of the border crisis and a series of tragic incidents as evidence of her alleged high crimes and misdemeanors.

Concerns continue to mount over President Joe Biden's health as he has yet to make an appearance since suddenly announcing he was exiting the presidential race.

Western Journal reported that despite assurances from his physician, the President has not been visible in public since his COVID diagnosis, raising questions about his capability to fulfill presidential responsibilities.

White House physician Kevin O’Connor delivered an update on President Biden’s recovery from COVID-19 on Monday.

According to O'Connor, Biden is recuperating well and is still performing his presidential tasks.

President Not Seen Since Wednesday

The reassurances, however, have not alleviated anxiety. Biden has not been seen in public since last Wednesday, when he was spotted disembarking Air Force One and entering a motorcade heading to his vacation residence in Rohoboth Beach, Delaware.

Adding to the uncertainty, Biden recently announced via a written social media post on platform X that he would refrain from seeking re-election. He assured the public that a formal address would follow this week.

Reports on Monday suggested that Biden telephoned Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign headquarters to express gratitude for her support. Yet, the lack of a visible presence adds a layer of mystery.

Kevin O’Connor's update was shared on social media but was notably bereft of any accompanying photos or videos of the President, prompting more speculation. Conservative commentator Byron York suggested that a public appearance from Biden would quell rising skepticism.

“Would be a good thing for him to appear in public today,” York remarked, capturing the spirit of the public’s demand for more transparency.

The media landscape has been rife with speculation and queries, all set against the backdrop of O’Connor’s reassurances.

Meeting With Netanyahu In Limbo

Adding another layer of complexity, The New York Post previously reported that an upcoming meeting between President Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu scheduled for Tuesday was called off. However, later reports indicated the meeting’s status was uncertain, adding yet another wrinkle to this ongoing situation.

The public remains uncertain about the President's immediate plans, especially given his retreat from a re-election bid and vague promises of addressing the nation. The need for visual proof of his activities and health seems paramount in quelling doubts.

As Monday's reports filtered in, Biden’s phone call to Vice President Harris’ campaign headquarters served as a lifeline to his supporters but did little to curb the rising tide of public concern.

The overarching worry is that with Biden not being publicly visible, concerns about his health and capacity are growing louder.

Even the validity of O'Connor’s claims is under scrutiny due to the absence of visuals.

Conclusion

As the situation remains fluid, questions about Biden’s health and visibility remain at the forefront of public discourse.

All eyes are on the White House, awaiting more concrete evidence of his well-being and ability to govern effectively.

The call for transparency is not limited to one side of the political spectrum. Both conservatives and liberals alike are urging the President for a public appearance to dispel these growing concerns.

As the nation waits for the President to make his promised address later this week, the narrative is dominated by his health status and future capabilities in his presidential role. The forthcoming days will be crucial in providing clarity to an increasingly worried public.

The father of Thomas Matthew Crooks made his first public appearance on Monday following the shocking shooting incident according to Fox News.

Thomas Matthew Crooks opened fire at a rally for former President Donald Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13, injuring Trump and killing a bystander before being shot and killed by snipers.

Thomas Matthew Crooks’ father, whose name has not been disclosed, was seen in public for the first time since his son’s actions made headlines. On July 13, Crooks, 20, targeted a rally for former President Donald Trump, resulting in Trump’s ear being nicked, the death of Corey Comperatore, and injuries to two others.

Investigators have been turning their focus to Crooks' background and motives. They have repeatedly visited the Crooks' home in Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, where they are conducting ongoing inquiries. Crooks was ultimately taken down by snipers after the incident.

Father Requests Privacy Amid Investigation

Appearing with a masked woman, Crooks’ father declined to provide any immediate comments.

“We're going to release a statement when our legal counsel advises us to do so – until then, we have no comment,” he stated. He added, “We just want to try to take care of ourselves right now. Please, just give us our space.”

The authorities have confirmed Crooks' family is cooperating fully with the ongoing FBI investigation.

Investigators aim to comprehend how Crooks avoided tight security measures to position himself on the roof of an AGR manufacturing building, armed with his father's AR-15 rifle.

The motives for Crooks' actions remain unclear. However, his online activity included searches on political conventions, images of politicians, and mental health issues.

Notably, hours before the attack, his parents, both licensed professional counselors, had contacted law enforcement out of concern for their son's whereabouts.

Mystery Surrounds Shooter’s Motive

Crooks was accepted to several universities and had recently graduated from the Community College of Allegheny County with an associate's degree in engineering. Despite these academic achievements, something led him to make that fateful decision on July 13.

A former classmate of Crooks revealed to Fox News Digital that Crooks had questioned him years ago over his support for Trump and exhibited a strong distaste for politicians in general. This revelation adds another layer to the investigation as authorities work to piece together any potential motive behind the attack.

In addition, Crooks was a registered member of a local gun club, where he had revisited just before the attack to buy ammunition. Law enforcement agencies discovered that ahead of the incident, Crooks was seen using a rangefinder – a device typically used to measure distance accurately, indicating premeditation.

In the aftermath, lawmakers and authorities, including Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle, have visited the shooting site. Director Cheatle testified before Congress, addressing the troubling security breaches highlighted by the attack.

While the primary investigation into Crooks' actions continues, this incident has spurred broader discussions around rally security and preventive measures. The community in Butler, Pennsylvania, remains deeply shaken by the sudden violence that erupted during what was meant to be a routine political rally.

Conclusion

To recount, Thomas Matthew Crooks, on July 13, carried out a shooting at a Trump rally, injuring Trump, killing Corey Comperatore, and wounding two others before being neutralized by snipers.

Despite extensive academic accomplishments and acceptance to universities, Crooks' motives remain obscured, enveloping the investigation in mystery.

His father’s first public appearance since the shooting, alongside the ongoing scrutiny of security lapses, underscores the tragic consequences of Crooks’ actions. Investigators continue to delve into his background, seeking clarity on how he orchestrated his deadly plan and what drove him to act that day.

Billionaire Bill Ackman has sparked intense controversy by sharing alarming theories regarding President Joe Biden's health.

The Daily Mail reported that Ackman's claims follow Biden's decision to step down from the 2024 presidential race, prompting widespread debate and speculation.

On his X account, Bill Ackman, previously a significant Democratic donor, shared numerous posts about President Joe Biden's health.

Ackman suggested that Biden might be terminally ill, a claim that has caused a significant stir.

Speculation Fueled By Biden's Letter

The speculation escalated after Biden announced he would not run for re-election, citing health reasons. Ackman pointed to Biden's letter and questioned its authenticity, suggesting the signature looked photocopied.

Adding to the controversy were comments made by Biden's youngest brother, Frank Biden. Frank's remarks about "enjoying whatever time we have left" were seen by many as further evidence of the president's declining health.

Frank Biden's public comments caused many to question if Joe Biden's health concerns were more serious than initially thought. Ackman went on to contrast past signatures of Biden, noting they often did not include an underline, unlike the letter's signature.

Ackman also shared a post drawing parallels between the unverified signature and Soviet Regime Change tactics. This comparison further fueled conspiracy theories surrounding Biden's letter and decision to step down.

Frank Biden tried to quell fears by praising his brother, stating, "I'm incredibly proud of my brother. Selfishly, I will have him back to enjoy whatever time we have left." Despite his attempts, the speculation continued to grow.

Joe Biden's letter announcing his decision to withdraw was shared on social media on a Sunday afternoon. At the time, Biden was isolating due to a Covid-19 diagnosis, which some speculated might have influenced his decision.

There were more factors at play beyond Biden's health. Democratic donors had started withdrawing funds, and internal campaign polls showed a decreasing chance of Biden beating former President Donald Trump in the upcoming election.

On the day of the announcement, several of Biden's advisers, including Steve Ricchetti and Mike Donilon, presented data indicating he could no longer win against Trump. This revelation was a crucial factor in Biden's decision to step down.

With Biden out of the race, Vice President Kamala Harris declared her candidacy for the Democratic presidential nomination. Prominent Democrats, including California Governor Gavin Newsom, quickly rallied behind Harris.

Polling Numbers And Future Prospects

Despite Trump's remark that Harris would be easier to defeat than Biden, national polls showed a tight race. Harris trailed Biden slightly in national polling averages, with Biden leading 48% to Harris's 46%.

Notably, Harris performed better than Biden in key swing states, such as Pennsylvania and Virginia. She was also closer to Trump in Pennsylvania and led by a larger margin than Biden in Virginia.

These poll numbers were collected before an assassination attempt on Trump and prior to Biden's withdrawal from the race, which could shift the dynamics further.

The speculation surrounding President Joe Biden's health has stirred significant debate, fueled largely by billionaire Bill Ackman's public posts. Ackman's claims and Frank Biden's comments added to the speculation about the president's well-being.

Biden's decision to step down amid declining polling numbers, withdrawing donor funds, and health concerns has reshaped the Democratic primary race, with Vice President Kamala Harris stepping in and prominent Democrats voicing their support.

A House panel has approved a resolution condemning Vice President Kamala Harris' handling of the border after a special session according to Fox News.

This development follows President Biden's announcement that he will not seek re-election, leading Harris to announce her candidacy for the White House.

The House Rules Committee convened on Tuesday to vote on the resolution, initiated in response to growing concerns about Harris' approach to border security. The meeting was slated on Monday night, catching many by surprise due to its sudden scheduling.

President Biden, at 81 years old, revealed on Sunday that he would not pursue a second term, bowing to pressure from within his party. His decision set the stage for Vice President Harris to declare her intention to run for president.

Political Timing and Accusations

The resolution passed along party lines, with House Rules Committee Chairman Michael Burgess, R-Texas, acknowledging the political nature of the timing. "Everything's gonna be political this year," he remarked, asserting that the significance of border security transcends political timetables.

Republicans have long criticized Harris for her handling of border issues, particularly in her role as the designated "border czar" since 2021. Despite multiple visits to Latin America, including a trip to Honduras in 2022, her efforts have been deemed insufficient by her critics.

Adding to the scrutiny, it was revealed that Harris has not communicated with Border Patrol Chief Jason Owens since he assumed his role last year. This lack of direct engagement has raised eyebrows and further fueled Republican allegations of mismanagement.

White House spokesman Andrew Bates countered these criticisms, accusing Republicans of deliberately obstructing vital resources for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Border Patrol. He emphasized that the Biden-Harris Administration's executive actions have successfully reduced unauthorized crossings compared to the previous administration.

White House Defends Harris’ Performance

"As we speak, congressional Republicans continue their months-long blockade of critical resources for ICE and the Border Patrol in the tough bipartisan border security agreement supported by the Biden-Harris Administration," Bates stated. He accused Republicans of prioritizing their allegiance to former President Donald Trump over national security.

Burgess, however, pointed to recent tragedies involving American citizens and individuals who had entered the country unlawfully. In June, six Americans were reportedly killed by people who "had no business being here," according to Burgess, underscoring what he views as a failure of the current administration to protect the borders.

The passage of the resolution condemning Harris marks a significant political maneuver as she prepares for her presidential bid. The Republicans' action is likely to be a contentious issue in the upcoming election cycle.

The Biden-Harris Administration remains steadfast in their belief that their approach to border security has been effective. They assert that their policies have resulted in a notable decrease in unauthorized border crossings compared to when Trump left office.

The emergency session on Tuesday highlights the ongoing, deeply polarized debate over border management. It also illuminates the broader political landscape, where every action is scrutinized and often politicized, especially in an election year.

Conclusion

To conclude, a key House panel passed a resolution criticizing Vice President Kamala Harris' handling of the border.

This occurred during an emergency session convened on Tuesday, following President Biden's announcement of not seeking re-election and Harris' subsequent announcement of her candidacy.

The House Rules Committee's decision came along party lines, with Republicans accusing Harris of failing in her "border czar" responsibilities. Harris' lack of direct communication with Border Patrol Chief Jason Owens and her criticized trips to Latin America further complicated her position.

The White House defended its actions, blaming Republicans for blocking essential resources. Burgess highlighted the urgency with recent tragic incidents involving unauthorized individuals. The resolution's passage is a pivotal moment as Harris embarks on her presidential campaign.

In a series of escalating political skirmishes, allies backing Donald Trump have launched an attack ad targeting Vice President Kamala Harris.

The Daily Mail reported that the ad accuses Harris of covering up President Joe Biden's cognitive decline and links her to the administration's policy failures.

The 30-second advertisement, titled "Paid the Price," debuted on Monday morning. It claims that Harris has been complicit in hiding Biden’s mental health issues, while tying her to the administration's beleaguered policies.

Advertisement Targeted Key Swing States

The ad was released in crucial swing states Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania. This strategic move came on the heels of Biden’s announcement that he would not seek re-election.

According to AdImpact, MAGA Inc., Trump's super PAC, has allocated a staggering $123.8 million on political advertisements. The ad targets Harris directly, accusing her of lying about Biden’s cognitive abilities.

In the ad, the narrator charges, “Kamala was in on it. She covered up Joe's obvious mental decline.” The video portrays Harris as stepping in for an incapacitated Biden, thereby implicating her in the administration's so-called failures.

Trump Campaign Demands Biden's Resignation

The advertisement has accused Harris of exacerbating issues like immigration and inflation. Prior to its release, the Trump campaign openly demanded that Biden resign due to his cognitive state.

Top Trump campaign officials Chris LaCivita and Susie Wiles expressed serious concerns, stating, “Biden is a national security threat in great cognitive decline and a clear and present danger to every man, woman, and child in our country.”

The statement identified Biden’s continued presidency as a significant risk, despite his stepping away from the re-election bid. This narrative has geared Republican efforts to portray the Democratic Party as being in disarray.

Accusations on Policy and Responsibility

The ad accuses Harris of mismanaging critical policies. Specific focus is placed on what they describe as a border crisis, inflation, and the diminishing American Dream.

Highlighting her involvement, the narrator asserts, “But Kamala knew Joe couldn't do the job, so she did it. Look what she got done... They created this mess.” This strong rhetoric suggests that Harris should own up to the administration's record.

Alex Pfeiffer, a spokesman for MAGA Inc., called on Harris to disclose the truth about Biden’s health. “Kamala Harris has lied for years now about Joe Biden's mental condition and America suffered for it,” Pfeiffer said.

Harris Defends Administration’s Record

Vice President Kamala Harris has stood firmly by Biden, defending his capability and health. She recently declared, “Our president is in good shape, in good health, tireless, vibrant, and I have no doubt about the strength of the work that we have done.”

Despite the Trump campaign’s fierce accusations, Harris remains unwavering in her support of Biden’s presidency. She continues to champion the administration’s accomplishments.

The unfolding political battle underscores deepening divisions ahead of the upcoming election season. Both sides appear geared up for a tumultuous campaign period.

Trump’s camp is preparing its strategy should Harris become the focal point of the Democratic ticket. These developments suggest that further ads and political offensives are likely forthcoming.

The revelations and criticisms in the current political climate emphasize the high stakes of the impending elections. Both parties' attempts to sway public opinion reflect the critical nature of their rhetorical tactics.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Donald Trump’s allies have directly attacked Kamala Harris, casting doubt on President Joe Biden's cognitive health.

The advertisement slams Harris for alleged complicity and policy failures, particularly in the realms of immigration and inflation.

With Biden stepping away from re-election, the political landscape promises to be fiercely contested, with Trump’s supporters actively seeking to capitalize on perceived Democratic upheaval. Both Harris and Biden's responses reflect a steadfast defense of their administrative record, setting the stage for a highly charged election campaign.