What's scary about this story is not that Biden was lying, but that he has no awareness of what he's saying or doing
/
Time for the 25th: Biden goes over the edge with new remarks on student bailout.
Biden did a forum for “Now This with young “changemakers,” to answer some of the questions that they might have for him. One of those questions was about student debt. Biden showed his ignorance on the subject. But what was so astounding was that he said, “I’ve just signed a law that’s being challenged by my Republican colleagues.”
Biden then described the “law” he said he signed, saying if you have a Pell Grant you qualify for “2,000…excuse me…$20,000 in debt forgiveness.” If you don’t have a Pell Grant, Biden said, “You just get 10,000 written off. It’s passed. I got it passed by a vote or two…It’s in effect.”
Wait, what? There is no “law” — Biden signed an executive order for the student debt bailout. He didn’t even bother to go through Congress; there was nothing that was passed. Yet, there he is in front of these young people completely making up a law, saying it passed, even that he got it passed by a “vote or two.”
He’s completely over the edge at this point and doesn’t know the difference between something legal passed by Congress and executive orders? ….
This is an alternate reality, and it’s scary when Biden gets this bad — he’s just imagined a whole bill passage that never happened.
By the way, and speaking of this student bailout, you might have wondered why Biden’s caretakers reversed themselves two weeks ago and changed his executive order to exclude the 700,000 students loans owed to private lenders, rather than the government itself. What did those students do wrong to deprive them of the taxpayer bailout offered their peers? Nothing, of course; they were kicked to the curb in an attempt to defend the executive order from challenges by depriving potential plaintiffs of their standing to sue. The Washington Examiner explains:
Whenever a major partisan proposal is unveiled these days, lawsuits quickly pop up to try to block it in court. But, when Biden announced his student loan bailout, a legal headache emerged. At first glance, it was hard to see who would be able to challenge the plan in court because of a legal doctrine known as “standing.”
“Under current Supreme Court precedent, plaintiffs have to meet three requirements to get standing to file a lawsuit in federal court: They must 1) have suffered an ‘injury in fact,’ 2) the injury in question must be caused by the allegedly illegal conduct they are challenging, and 3) a court decision should be able to redress the injury,” law professor Ilya Somin explained .
Basically, in order to sue, you have to have been directly harmed by the program. And, on paper, it’s hard to see who is harmed by the bailout because, unfortunately, just generally being a taxpayer whose money is being illegally wasted is not considered sufficient justification to bring a lawsuit.
So, for a while, it seemed that even though Biden’s plan was glaringly constitutionally suspect, nobody would be able to challenge it in court, meaning it wouldn’t be struck down even if it was unconstitutional. Thankfully, various right-of-center plaintiffs have come up with creative ways to challenge the plan in court. One such lawsuit that has emerged is a suit by six states claiming that their finances would be harmed by Biden’s bailout because they’re heavily invested in private companies that service loans and will take a big hit from the president’s cancellation initiative.
The White House panicked. It responded by immediately changing the details of its plan to exclude these types of “privately backed” loans, removing the eligibility of more than 700,000 potential beneficiaries. This was clearly intended to prevent the lawsuit from moving forward.
"By getting rid of the privately-backed loans, they probably cut off the right to sue from certain investors, financial institutions, and state governments who could argue they would be negatively impacted by the proposal," Heritage Foundation legal policy analyst Jack Fitzhenry told Fox News. "This makes it a lot harder for states and companies managing the privately-held debt to sue over lost revenue."
There’s really only one reason Biden and his administration would so drastically change their plan: They know it won’t hold up in court if a challenge is allowed to move forward. That’s right. Biden is knowingly pushing an unconstitutional policy and simply hoping he can evade scrutiny by the courts.
So, this is no longer just about bad policy or wasted taxpayer money. Biden’s legal tactics are a national disgrace — and a flagrant, partisan attempt to avoid the checks and balances built into our constitutional order.
And an admission by the cabal that it knows the order to be unlawful.
That was yesterday; here’s his performance on the day before, a display of senility so alarming that it must be beginning to alarm even Biden’s most ardent supporters, and have Kampallawalla Ding Dong packing her bags in preparation for moving up the street. These incidents have been reported by some of the media since Ol’ Dependables announced his run for the nomination*, but they’ve been ignored by the Democrats’ press arm. Sunday’s collapse happened on mainstream media, and a different audience has now seen the poor man’s condition.
Who knows? maybe they’ll now start airing Fetterman’s behavior as well, though that’s doubtful.
*In fact, at least as far back as 2011, when he was Vice President.
April 13, 2011. No wonder he slept; it was a speech by his president about deficit spending and inflation. Proof of his inattention would come twenty years later.
