Connect with us

Politics

Column: 'Retire and go back under a rock': Biden loyalists push back on my call for Joe to get tested

Published

on

Column: 'Retire and go back under a rock': Biden loyalists push back on my call for Joe to get tested

Just like the man they stand behind, backers of President Biden can be a feisty bunch.

Even as more prominent supporters jump ship — Hollywood high rollers George Clooney and Rob Reiner say it’s time for Biden to step aside, and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi stopped short of saying she wants Biden to stay in the race — true Bidenistas are digging in.

There’s California Gov. Gavin Newsom, of course, and various House and Senate members who believe Biden should stay the course. But I’m hearing directly from readers ticked off about my column suggesting that Biden undergo a full battery of neurological testing (based on assessments by doctors I spoke to) to reassure the public that he’s OK, as he defiantly insists.

“You should get tested and the results be made public,” said Dan Cordova of Albuquerque. “You should also retire and go back under a rock.”

“SHAME ON YOU for adding to the Biden media feeding frenzy,” wrote Marcy Rothenberg of Porter Ranch. “It’s already been reported that President Biden has arthritis; his back is stiff so he walks slowly. He still can ride a bike. Can Donald? No. He can’t even walk a golf course.”

Advertisement

Even former state legislator and L.A. County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl shook a stick at me.

“Instead of joining an echo-journalism ignorant drumbeat, perhaps you might have, as [history professor and essayist] Heather Cox Richardson did, revealed the letter from the President’s actual doctor, Dr. [Kevin] O’Connor, on his neurological exam at the end of February. I hope you will read her as thousands do every day and reveal this in a column.”

I understand and respect Biden loyalty. As I’ve said before, he seems to be a decent and civil man and he’s been a good president.

I also believe, and have often stated, that former President Trump is a menace, and I don’t know who the greater threat to the republic is — him, or all the lemmings in line to hand a second term to a lying, hateful, vindictive, narcissistic felon who failed to deliver on virtually all of his campaign promises (look it up if you don’t believe me).

Readers have asked how I could write a column saying Biden should undergo testing, but not Trump, who has had his own particular set of behavioral issues. I assumed it went without saying that Trump ought to have his head examined. But sure, I’ll get on board with both of them getting a full diagnostic workup.

Advertisement

I loved the suggestion by Terry Spencer of Highland Park that Biden and Trump should have to take the intentionally confusing California DMV license renewal test, and whoever scores highest wins the election.

The Biden backers seem to fall into one or more of three categories. Those who think his health is good enough to handle the job going forward. Those who think it’s too late to switch to a replacement candidate. And those who would vote for a bean and cheese burrito before they vote for Trump.

“I never give much credence to polls, but Biden still does better against Trump than others,” said Kuehl, who added that the chaos of “changing horses in midstream” would do more damage to the party “than sticking with Joe, who, I think, will win.”

Plausible, but the stream is deep, and the horse’s head is barely above water.

A reader named Mark Richardson, of Encinitas, is banking on a passing of the torch, but not just yet.

Advertisement

“We’ll see how the next couple of months go, and if he gets elected, he can resign a month after inauguration day, January 2025 and [Vice President Kamala] Harris can take over,” Richardson said.

Also plausible, but the key words are “if he gets elected.” I have serious doubts, and said earlier this month that Biden should pass the baton and walk away with pride, dignity and grace. Not because of his age (lots of older people are fully functioning), but because of his health.

The president didn’t improve his chances with his stiff gait, slack expressions and word stumbles in the June 27 debate. His judgment wasn’t sharp, either. Instead of getting lured into a silly back-and-forth about which candidate is the best golfer, Biden should have said that as the planet melts and women’s reproductive rights have been stolen by Trump’s Supreme Court, he’d rather talk about saving the country than playing golf.

Things did not get much better for Biden in the televised ABC interview a few days later. And as for the doctor’s report cited by Kuehl and countless others, based on a physical Biden had in February, it leaves a lot of questions unanswered.

“An extremely detailed neurologic exam was again reassuring in that there were no findings which would be consistent with any cerebellar or other central neurological disorder, such as stroke, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson’s or ascending lateral sclerosis, nor are there any signs of cervical myelopathy,” said the report from Biden’s doctor.

Advertisement

I’m not taking any statement from the White House as gospel truth, regardless of who’s in office, and I have questions.

When exactly was the neurologic exam taken and by whom? What is meant by “extremely detailed?” And given the progressive nature of memory and movement disorders, isn’t it possible Biden’s condition has changed in the last six months, and will continue to do so?

As Kuehl noted, there’s a big difference between the opinions of physicians making a diagnosis from a distance and those who actually see the patient in question. I couldn’t agree more, and in fact, I wrote a column chastising people who thought they could diagnose dementia in Biden by watching him on CNN. Dementia is not some catch-all phrase for a memory lapse, which could be caused by any number of things.

But no matter how much you love Biden, hate Trump, or both, I don’t know how anyone could have watched that debate and not be worried about Biden’s health.

Neurological movement disorders are often accompanied by specific symptoms that doctors can spot. Several reached out to me after the debate to say they saw signs of Parkinson’s or a related condition. Two neurologists took note of Biden’s blink rate, facial expressions, stiffness and speech patterns.

Advertisement

One, Dr. Michael Mahler, a neurology specialist and UCLA faculty member, said he suspected something in the “Parkinsonian” paradigm.

Dr. Jack Florin, who has been a USC professor and had research fellowships at Stanford and Harvard, said he thinks Biden suffers from a Parkinson’s variant called progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP), which can involve cognitive impairment that worsens over time and impact mental processing speed, attention and concentration.

The White House report on Biden’s health didn’t convince Mahler or Florin that we know the full story, or that their own impressions of Biden’s condition are off base. Florin suggested that an MRI, if there hasn’t already been one, would be helpful in supporting his theory that Biden has PSP.

Mahler said “some of the disorders in the realm of Parkinsonism are inherently variable,” meaning that they change over time. And “having a normal neurological exam in February (or earlier) means nothing if a person had a stroke or series of small strokes in March.” But he was cautious about making a specific diagnosis, and said medication for certain disorders can produce symptoms that mimic Parkinson’s.

“One thing that Biden has repeated is that functioning as president is a harder test than asking him to draw a clock or recall five words, and that is probably true,” Mahler said. “Yet it is also true that neurologists around the country saw something during the debate other than reassurance that the president was neurologically fit.”

Advertisement

What I saw was a sad moment in U.S. political history.

A tyrant counting on victory in November.

A weakened president trying to stand tall.

Some of his supporters abandoning him and others doubling down.

It may be that neither candidate gets tested, but come November, all of us are going to be.

Advertisement

steve.lopez@latimes.com

Politics

Video: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

Published

on

Video: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

new video loaded: Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

transcript

transcript

Fed Chair Responds to Inquiry on Building Renovations

Federal prosecutors opened an investigation into whether Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, lied to Congress about the scope of renovations of the central bank’s buildings. He called the probe “unprecedented” in a rare video message.

“Good evening. This new threat is not about my testimony last June or about the renovation of the Federal Reserve buildings. This is about whether the Fed will be able to continue to set interest rates based on evidence and economic conditions, or whether instead, monetary policy will be directed by political pressure or intimidation.” “Well, thank you very much. We’re looking at the construction. Thank you.”

Advertisement
Federal prosecutors opened an investigation into whether Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, lied to Congress about the scope of renovations of the central bank’s buildings. He called the probe “unprecedented” in a rare video message.

By Nailah Morgan

January 12, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

San Antonio ends its abortion travel fund after new state law, legal action

Published

on

San Antonio ends its abortion travel fund after new state law, legal action

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

San Antonio has shut down its out-of-state abortion travel fund after a new Texas law that prohibits the use of public funds to cover abortions and a lawsuit from the state challenging the city’s fund.

City Council members last year approved $100,000 for its Reproductive Justice Fund to support abortion-related travel, prompting Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton to sue over allegations that the city was “transparently attempting to undermine and subvert Texas law and public policy.”

Paxton claimed victory in the lawsuit on Friday after the case was dismissed without a finding for either side.

WYOMING SUPREME COURT RULES LAWS RESTRICTING ABORTION VIOLATE STATE CONSTITUTION

Advertisement

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton claimed victory in the lawsuit after the case was dismissed without a finding for either side. (Hannah Beier/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

“Texas respects the sanctity of unborn life, and I will always do everything in my power to prevent radicals from manipulating the system to murder innocent babies,” Paxton said in a statement. “It is illegal for cities to fund abortion tourism with taxpayer funds. San Antonio’s unlawful attempt to cover the travel and other expenses for out-of-state abortions has now officially been defeated.”

But San Antonio’s city attorney argued that the city did nothing wrong and pushed back on Paxton’s claim that the state won the lawsuit.

“This litigation was both initiated and abandoned by the State of Texas,” the San Antonio city attorney’s office said in a statement to The Texas Tribune. “In other words, the City did not drop any claims; the State of Texas, through the Texas Office of the Attorney General, dropped its claims.”

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said he will continue opposing the use of public funds for abortion-related travel. (Justin Lane/Reuters)

Advertisement

Paxton’s lawsuit argued that the travel fund violates the gift clause of the Texas Constitution. The state’s 15th Court of Appeals sided with Paxton and granted a temporary injunction in June to block the city from disbursing the fund while the case moved forward.

Gov. Greg Abbott in August signed into law Senate Bill 33, which bans the use of public money to fund “logistical support” for abortion. The law also allows Texas residents to file a civil suit if they believe a city violated the law.

“The City believed the law, prior to the passage of SB 33, allowed the uses of the fund for out-of-state abortion travel that were discussed publicly,” the city attorney’s office said in its statement. “After SB 33 became law and no longer allowed those uses, the City did not proceed with the procurement of those specific uses—consistent with its intent all along that it would follow the law.”

TRUMP URGES GOP TO BE ‘FLEXIBLE’ ON HYDE AMENDMENT, IGNITING BACKLASH FROM PRO-LIFE ALLIES

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a law in August that blocks cities from using public money to help cover travel or other costs related to abortion. (Antranik Tavitian/Reuters)

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The broader Reproductive Justice Fund remains, but it is restricted to non-abortion services such as home pregnancy tests, emergency contraception and STI testing.

The city of Austin also shut down its abortion travel fund after the law was signed. Austin had allocated $400,000 to its Reproductive Healthcare Logistics Fund in 2024 to help women traveling to other states for an abortion with funding for travel, food and lodging.

Continue Reading

Politics

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta opts against running for governor. Again.

Published

on

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta opts against running for governor. Again.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta announced Sunday that he would not run for California governor, a decision grounded in his belief that his legal efforts combating the Trump administration as the state’s top prosecutor are paramount at this moment in history.

“Watching this dystopian horror come to life has reaffirmed something I feel in every fiber of my being: in this moment, my place is here — shielding Californians from the most brazen attacks on our rights and our families,” Bonta said in a statement. “My vision for the California Department of Justice is that we remain the nation’s largest and most powerful check on power.”

Bonta said that President Trump’s blocking of welfare funds to California and the fatal shooting of a Minnesota mother of three last week by a federal immigration agent cemented his decision to seek reelection to his current post, according to Politico, which first reported that Bonta would not run for governor.

Bonta, 53, a former state lawmaker and a close political ally to Gov. Gavin Newsom, has served as the state’s top law enforcement official since Newsom appointed him to the position in 2021. In the last year, his office has sued the Trump administration more than 50 times — a track record that would probably have served him well had he decided to run in a state where Trump has lost three times and has sky-high disapproval ratings.

Advertisement

Bonta in 2024 said that he was considering running. Then in February he announced he had ruled it out and was focused instead on doing the job of attorney general, which he considers especially important under the Trump administration. Then, both former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) announced they would not run for governor, and Bonta began reconsidering, he said.

“I had two horses in the governor’s race already,” Bonta told The Times in November. “They decided not to get involved in the end. … The race is fundamentally different today, right?”

The race for California governor remains wide open. Newsom is serving the final year of his second term and is barred from running again because of term limits. Newsom has said he is considering a run for president in 2028.

Former Rep. Katie Porter — an early leader in polls — late last year faltered after videos emerged of her screaming at an aide and berating a reporter. The videos contributed to her dropping behind Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco, a Republican, in a November poll released by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times.

Porter rebounded a bit toward the end of the year, a poll by the Public Policy Institute of California showed, however none of the candidates has secured a majority of support and many voters remain undecided.

Advertisement

California hasn’t elected a Republican governor since 2006, Democrats heavily outnumber Republicans in the state, and many are seething with anger over Trump and looking for Democratic candidates willing to fight back against the current administration.

Bonta has faced questions in recent months about spending about $468,000 in campaign funds on legal advice last year as he spoke to federal investigators about alleged corruption involving former Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao, who was charged in an alleged bribery scheme involving local businessmen David Trung Duong and Andy Hung Duong. All three have pleaded not guilty.

According to his political consultant Dan Newman, Bonta — who had received campaign donations from the Duong family — was approached by investigators because he was initially viewed as a “possible victim” in the alleged scheme, though that was later ruled out. Bonta has since returned $155,000 in campaign contributions from the Duong family, according to news reports.

Bonta is the son of civil rights activists Warren Bonta, a white native Californian, and Cynthia Bonta, a native of the Philippines who immigrated to the U.S. on a scholarship in 1965. Bonta, a U.S. citizen, was born in Quezon City, Philippines, in 1972, when his parents were working there as missionaries, and immigrated with his family to California as an infant.

In 2012, Bonta was elected to represent Oakland, Alameda and San Leandro as the first Filipino American to serve in California’s Legislature. In Sacramento, he pursued a string of criminal justice reforms and developed a record as one of the body’s most liberal members.

Advertisement

Bonta is married to Assemblywoman Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), who succeeded him in the state Assembly, and the couple have three children.

Times staff writer Dakota Smith contributed to this report.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending