Watergate-Style Hearings for the Biden Coverup

Wall Street Journal ^ | May 30, 2025 | Kenneth L. Khachigian

[karpov]

The massive coverup of Joe Biden’s mental decline has stimulated plenty of indignant commentary. Missing from the hand-wringing is a demand for accountability, which brings to mind the quip: “Everybody talks about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.” This newspaper and recently published books have exposed the trickery and lies of Mr. Biden’s minions and Democratic allies, who attempted to wield power in a leaderless vacuum. It was perfectly described in Tunku Varadarajan’s review of Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson’s book, “Original Sin,” as resembling “a hush-hush leftist capture of an infirm president.”

A White House cadre, with media connivance, hoped to drag their puppet over the electoral line to win four additional years of power, dangerously undermining the institutional integrity of the presidency. Memorial Day has come and gone, and Washington’s elite is already enabling the machinery to which the Democratic left turns in the face of scandal—elevating sideshows such as insupportable claims that Republicans are destroying Medicaid or rants regarding President Trump’s dispute with Harvard, all to make this latest deceit disappear like April’s cherry blossoms.

Republicans will end up rewarding this duplicity if they elevate cheap talk over accountability. House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer is holding aggressive hearings on the coverup, but they have been too narrowly aimed. Mr. Biden’s using an autopen and Attorney General Merrick Garland’s declining to release the audio of the president’s interview with Robert Hur are small potatoes amid this vast whitewash of history.

If Congress takes seriously that it should act when Americans are cynically hoodwinked, it must begin an investigation into the coverup that matches or exceeds the Senate Watergate Committee hearings.

Key names central to the coverup—often referred to as the “Politburo”—have appeared in books and news articles. They include Jennifer O’Malley Dillon, the campaign manager

[laplata]

I’m going on 75 and I also remember it. Rotten bastards.

[Colinsky]

I was rabidly anti-Nixon during Watergate and cheered when he was ousted. But my opinion changed as I saw what he did with his post-Presidential career. And today I realize the Watergate caper was a scam just as much as the Steele dossier.

[daler]

I suspected at the time (and still do) that Nixon the unapologetic anti-communist winning by a landslide simply wasn’t acceptable to the Democrats and their media, not dissimilar to the Trump scenario fifty years later.

The difference being that Trump, unlike Nixon, refused to let them get away with it.

[BenLurkin]

Who signed Hunter Biden’s pardon?

[datricker]

I think this is the key question to keep coming back to - dementia and illegal use of the autopen could undo lots of things pardons, judicial appointments if nothing else keep the Democrats on defense for several years.

[PrairieLady2]

Obviously they didn’t want the vice president to take over. Neither they nor we, want Kameltoe.

[JohnBovenmyer]

The 25th doesn't specify "The Cabinet," but rather the "principal officers of the executive departments." I posted the list of those responsible and thus arguably guilty of dereliction of duty here before. And its very next words, "or of such other body as Congress may by law provide" provide all the Constitutional justification required for hearings investigating Biden's incompetence. Harris and ALL then principal officers should testify publicly as to whether they saw any sign of incompetence, and if so had a duty to report it, or not. The latter claim defending the proposition that 25th§4, as currently established, works fine and no "other body" is needed.

Joe should be politely invited to testify in public that he has no problem. That remains his official position. Over his long public career he has not only participated in but chaired numerous Congressional hearings. He certainly understands, or at least once understood, their value and should be very comfortable with the format. He's always been quick to defend any attack against himself or his family. If this whole mess is the nonsense Joe claims nothing could end it quicker than a great performance (perhaps with an attached timely negative toxicology report) by Joe. Refusal to testify by Joe, after a suitably buttery invitation, wouldn't comport with his preferred legacy and would feed the fire. Having Jill or other family members testify, even if felt to be guilty as sin, is apt to be a bad look, a worse precedent and backfire.

[JohnBovenmyer]

> It is hard to polish a turd

Oddly, MythBusters disproved that.

[_Jim]

Can we get Senator Sam Ervin out of retirement? (Or resurrected?)

[mewzilla]

Speaking of Watergate, something just occurred to me...

I’ve always wondered why, if Deep State wanted Nixon gone and used Watergate to do it, what the thinking behind that was. What Nixon had done that made Deep State so desirous of getting rid of him.

Was it Nixon’s use of impoundment...?