Liberal Media Finally Admits Biden Wasn’t Fit for Reelection—Post-Election

In a move that reeks of “too little, too late,” the New York Times has finally conceded what conservatives have known all along: Joe Biden wasn’t fit to serve another four years as president.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, the liberal paper, infamous for shielding Biden from criticism, decided to drop this revelation a month after the 2024 election.

The Times, which spent much of the past year running interference for Biden, now admits that the aging president was simply incapable of handling the demands of the presidency.

Celebrate Trump’s Historic 2024 Victory with the Exclusive Trump 47th President Collection!

Their sudden epiphany stands in stark contrast to their pre-election defense of Biden, where they accused conservatives of manipulating his image to make him seem frail and unfit.

Back in June, the Times wrote:

“President Biden has many adversaries in this year’s election. There are his Republican opponent, former President Donald J. Trump, and the independent candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

And then there is the distorted, online version of himself, a product of often misleading videos that play into and reinforce voters’ longstanding concerns about his age and abilities.

In the last two weeks, conservative news outlets, the Republican National Committee and the Trump team have circulated videos of Mr. Biden that lacked important context and twisted mundane moments to paint him in an unflattering light. Among other things, they created the impression that the president…”

At the time, the paper accused conservative outlets of twisting video clips to make Biden appear older and more feeble than he was. The narrative was clear: Biden’s stumbles and gaffes resulted from deceptive editing, not a reflection of his actual capabilities—or lack thereof.

The Times four months ago: “Those videos of Joe Biden falling asleep and slurring his words are cheap fakes. Of course he can serve another four years.”

The Times now: “How could anyone have imagined Joe Biden could ever serve another four years?”

Conservatives: pic.twitter.com/WEsA3zBkkW

— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) December 18, 2024

By December, the New York Times acknowledged concerns about Biden’s age and mental sharpness—issues many on the right had raised long before. In their latest piece, the Times appears to reverse its earlier dismissals of these concerns as exaggerated or politically motivated.

What a difference 179 days make for The New York Times.

From: “videos of Mr. Biden circulating during this year’s campaign are clearly manipulated to make him look old and confused.”

To: “it is hard to imagine that he seriously thought he could do the world’s most stressful… pic.twitter.com/2k7gZETQr4

— Steve Guest (@SteveGuest) December 18, 2024

This shift raises questions about timing. Why wait until after the election to address such significant issues? Some might see this as an effort to preserve their credibility now that the election cycle has concluded and their preferred outcomes are secured.

During the campaign, the media consistently portrayed Biden as capable and dismissed critiques of his fitness as baseless attacks. Those who highlighted his lapses were often accused of bias or spreading misinformation. Now, the Times’ acknowledgment contrasts sharply with its pre-election narrative.

Conservatives have long pointed to these concerns, and the delay in addressing them underscores the media’s role in shaping public perception. The question remains: Why acknowledge it now when the opportunity to inform voters has already passed fully?