Bill Clinton insists Biden was in ‘good shape’ despite bombshell claims of ex-prez’s mental, physical decline from insiders (VIDEO)

Former President Bill Clinton said he never once doubted Joe Biden’s mental fitness and rebuked a new book’s claimsCBS

| Published June 2, 2025

In a recent CBS News interview, former President Bill Clinton staunchly defended President Joe Biden against allegations of cognitive and physical decline detailed in the book Original Sin by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson. Clinton asserted that he had “never seen [Biden] and walked away thinking he can’t do this anymore,” emphasizing that Biden was “always on top of his brief” and appeared to be in “good shape” during their recent encounters.

Clinton dismissed the book’s claims, stating he hadn’t read it and suggesting that such allegations are politically motivated attempts to undermine Biden’s presidency and shift blame for Donald Trump’s reelection. He acknowledged concerns about the challenges of serving as president at an advanced age but maintained that Biden was well-prepared and informed throughout his term.

The release of Original Sin coincided with reports of Biden’s aggressive prostate cancer diagnosis and his subsequent withdrawal from the 2024 presidential race following a poorly received debate performance. Despite these events, Clinton praised Biden’s decision to step down, comparing it to George Washington’s voluntary relinquishment of power and suggesting it would enhance Biden’s legacy.

Clinton’s remarks have sparked discussions about the portrayal of Biden’s health and leadership in political discourse, highlighting the complexities of assessing a president’s fitness for office amid partisan narratives.

Bill Clinton’s defense of Joe Biden carries several significant implications, many of which reinforce skepticism and criticism toward Democratic leadership and media narratives:

1. Perceived Gaslighting of the Public

We may view Clinton’s statements as part of an ongoing effort by Democratic elites and mainstream media to deny or downplay Biden’s visible decline—something many on the right have pointed out for years. Clinton saying he never saw signs of decline may be seen as dishonest or willfully blind.

2. Validation of Insider Accounts

The book Original Sin—with claims of Biden’s cognitive and physical deterioration—is likely seen by conservatives as long-overdue confirmation of what they’ve been warning about. Clinton’s denial can appear, from this perspective, as a desperate attempt to save face rather than address the substance of the concerns.

3. Framing Biden’s Exit as Heroic

Clinton comparing Biden’s exit to George Washington’s resignation may strike conservatives as laughable or manipulative. From their view, Biden didn’t step down voluntarily out of noble intent but because he was unfit and politically unsalvageable.

4. Continued Mistrust of Legacy Institutions

Clinton’s comments may further reinforce conservative distrust in political institutions and the mainstream press. If CBS News allows such defenses without challenging inconsistencies, it feeds the narrative that legacy media is complicit in shielding Democratic leaders.

5. Deflection from Accountability

Conservatives could argue that Clinton’s attempt to shift blame for Trump’s 2024 win onto media leaks or disloyal insiders ignores the real issue—Democratic policies and Biden’s record. This perceived lack of accountability can energize calls for reform or restructuring of establishment politics.

Overall Takeaway:

Bill Clinton’s public defense of Joe Biden—amid serious allegations of decline—reveals deep divides in how leadership, accountability, and truth are interpreted across the political spectrum.

For Democrats, Clinton’s remarks are an attempt to preserve Biden’s legacy, promote party unity, and shift focus away from internal doubts. For conservatives, however, the defense is seen as a last-ditch effort to rewrite reality, dismiss credible warnings, and deflect blame for political failures.

Ultimately, the clash over Biden’s condition—and Clinton’s spin on it—highlights a larger struggle: not just over who holds power, but over who gets to define political truth in America.