JOE BIDEN’S office has announced that he has prostate cancer. Following the statement, mainstream media channels and publications rushed to comment. Under the heading ‘Joe Biden has “aggressive” prostate cancer’, the BBC reported:
‘Former US President Joe Biden, 82, has been diagnosed with prostate cancer that has spread to his bones, a statement from his office said on Sunday.
‘Biden, who left office in January, was diagnosed on Friday after he saw a doctor last week for urinary symptoms.
‘The cancer is a more aggressive form of the disease, characterised by a Gleason score of 9 out of 10. This means his illness is classified as ‘high-grade’ and the cancer cells could spread quickly, according to Cancer Research UK.’
So clearly, even according to mainstream media, Biden’s cancer is at a highly advanced stage. It’s a terminal diagnosis, despite the media also adding that the condition can be ‘managed’.
The BBC article does everything it can to frame the narrative this way:
- Biden’s cancer was only very recently discovered: ‘was diagnosed on Friday’. Referring only to this very recent diagnosis strongly implies that the cancer was previously undetected. This is deliberate, of course;
- This cancer is a particularly ‘aggressive form’. Note how ‘aggressive form’ is emphasised in every media article on this. This implies that the cancer is spreading very rapidly, but only since this very recent diagnosis. This is to prep everyone for an imminent death and again direct attention away from how long Biden has had this cancer;
- No mention is made of prior cancer claims, Biden’s general ill health, the extensive health checks Presidents undergo, or any similarity with the way mainstream media and the Democrat Party first denied Biden’s cognitive decline and then, following the failed Presidential TV debate and the George Clooney ‘revelation’ of cognitive decline, admitted precisely the thing they had been actively denying for years.
Many mainstream media articles announced the ‘news’ in the exact same way, using identical or near identical headlines. They all front and centre two things – very recent diagnosis, and very aggressive form of cancer.
They all completely ignore all of the contextual elements that would go into a real report, such as the length of time that cancer claims have existed regarding Biden and the similarity between the period of cognitive decline denials and the sudden ‘he has cognitive decline’ admissions that came when Democrat Party leaders decided to ditch Joe and run with Kamala in 2024.
You aren’t supposed to notice the glaringly obvious pattern of total media dishonesty here, and you are supposed to have the message drummed into your head that this cancer has only just been spotted and will advance very rapidly, thereby explaining a potential short gap between the public announcement and, let us be honest here, Biden’s demise.
Now a few contextual points. Yes, many people end up in the unfortunate position of cancer being missed or diagnosed very late, leading to it only being detected at a very developed stage, when it is has for example spread from a point of origin to other parts of the body. Not every cancer even in the very best healthcare system is going to be spotted early. This happened with both my own parents. Many readers will have experienced this with loved ones.
But here is the wider context that pertains to Joe Biden or any other POTUS, which exists in four parts:
1. The medical attention given to a US President is not the same as that given to the average citizen. A President’s health is under intense expert scrutiny. Presidents receive very extensive and regular medical check-ups. They have immediate access to the very best doctors in the US. If anyone is going to have the kind of regular checks that detect cancer early, and the kind of expert examination and advice that is most likely to both detect early and treat early, it is a President of the United States of America. It is inconceivable that a President’s cancer would be detected only at a very, very late stage.
2. The US Constitution invests the President with supreme executive and military authority. He is the Chief Executive of the entire federal government and executive branch. He is entrusted with nuclear weapon codes and launch authority. He is the Supreme Commander of all US military forces. As the ultimate authority of the executive branch (no matter how much Democrat federal district court judges and the Supreme Court suddenly seem unaware of this) he can shape everything the elected government does. Given the degree of power invested in the Presidency and the authority conferred on one man (or woman), it is vital that he be physically and mentally competent. This is also of course why the Presidential Removal Clause exists:
‘The 25th Amendment of the US Constitution includes a clause that allows for the removal of a president on medical grounds. Specifically, Section 4 of the amendment states that if the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or another body designated by Congress determine that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of their office, they can declare the President incapacitated, and the Vice President will assume the role of Acting President. The President can then contest this declaration, and Congress must decide the issue within 21 days if it is in session, or within 21 days after it is required to assemble if not in session. If Congress determines by a two-thirds vote of both Houses that the President is indeed unable to serve, the Vice President will continue as Acting President; otherwise, the President will resume their duties.’
In this context, anyone aware of the law and the importance of the Presidency should have an interest in knowing the President is mentally and physically capable of being the President, or conversely knowing if he isn’t capable. The structure of how a President is removed in such circumstances clearly confers a legal and moral duty on other members of his administration who are in close contact with him and would see any evidence of unfitness to serve, to act on that knowledge for the good of the nation.
Ironically, if Biden had cancer at an advanced stage and cognitive decline at an advanced stage and they knew it (all if which seems like the most likely scenario) Kamala Harris was empowered within the law to remove Biden. The Vice President and the Cabinet can write to Congress and declare the President mentally or physically unfit, but they have to do that publicly, and they have to declare and prove it’s for reasons of incapacity. They had every legal right to remove Biden that way, but np legal right to force him from office for the purposes of securing an election victory or their own ambitions in that regard.
The first (which didn’t happen, but should have) would have been both legal and moral. The second (which did happen, but should not have) was unconstitutional, immoral and illegal because it didn’t follow the required constitutional steps and didn’t declare a legitimate legal reason.
3. The public and media scrutiny of the health of a serving President is also intense. His mental and physical competence to discharge his duties is a matter of public interest and, indeed, public safety. It sits at the heart of whether there is the kind of honest media scrutiny a democracy depends on. The entire professional purpose of an honest media would be to reveal this kind of information. Breaking news of a President not being physically or mentally fit to discharge his duties would be a huge scoop and the exact kind of thing an investigative journalist would be excited to report and would see as a professional duty to report.
It is almost as inconceivable to imagine that the media could really be ignorant of Biden’s physical and mental condition as it is to imagine that his doctors were.
In both cases it is astonishingly unlikely that this decline (either the mental one or the effects of cancer) were recognised only very recently. Prostate is one of the most common cancers. Prostate cancers are not generally known for very short periods between recognition and end-stage development. These cancers can be detected early, and almost always take years to get to the stage of cancer that Biden is at. We are talking about a cancer with typically a five-year period between grades 1 and 5 in its size and virulence.
Here is a comment reflecting a urologist’s view of how likely it is that Biden’s cancer has only just been discovered:
So it’s highly unlikely bordering on impossible for the condition to have been genuinely unknown, and it’s highly unlikely bordering on impossible for nobody in mainstream media to have detected this either.
And thousands and thousands of full-time professional journalists did not share this story. Only alternative media sources like Laura Loomer did so. Loomer declared that Biden had terminal cancer over a year ago.
4. The final contextual aspect of this is even more important. If the President is mentally and physically incapable of performing his duties and people knew that and did not invoke the Removal Clause or publicly declare it, then those people are guilty of treason and insurrection. Because with a serving President absent from the discharge of his duties, together with the number of Executive Orders ‘he’ was signing via an autopen, this means the duties of the elected President were being discharged by other people. People who had not earned the powers of the Presidency in an election. People who were not the President and not even agents of the President’s will. People who could completely substitute their intent for whatever intent the President had when still mentally and physically competent.
The entire term makes a mockery of elections, even if you don’t believe 2020 was stolen. Either way, through electoral fraud or the assumption of power by people other than Joe Biden after the election controlling Joe and his autopen, Biden was a Zombie Puppet President with undisclosed figures actually running the country having no legitimate authority to do so.
People speak of course of a Deep State, headed by the intelligence agencies and secretly running the country. They talk of a Permanent Administrative State, centred on departments and agencies and staffed with bureaucrats who remain in post regardless of changes of administration. What these groups depend on for their free action regardless of the Constitution is a weak, neutered or totally controlled President. For shadowy governance, you need a Shadow of a President. Nobody fits that bill better than a dementia- and cancer-riddled President pumped full of drugs, under constant supervision and ‘care’, whose autopen does the work he cannot do.
Now finally, let us show just how disgusting the mainstream media position on all this has been, and how focusing on this ‘aggressive form’ narrative while ignoring the fact that many people must have been fully aware for years of Biden’s cancer is an attempt at mainstream media recovery from their own crimes.
Because in 2022 Biden, in his addled confusion, publicly announced that he had cancer. Newsweek produced an article headed: ‘Does Joe Biden Have Cancer? President’s History With Melanoma Explained’. At a climate change event in Massachusetts in 2022, Biden said: ‘That’s why I and so damn many other people I grew up with have cancer.’ Newsweek and other mainstream media outlets rushed to fact-check the Zombie President, all backing the swiftly released White House explanation that ‘what Joe really meant’ was a reference to a past melanoma removal (with Joe, the WH, and all mainstream media apparently unaware that the past tense of have is ‘had’).
Astonishingly the Daily Mail has rushed to double down on the old lie in an article headed ‘Biden conspiracy theorists leap on video of him saying he has cancer in 2022’.
Since some of us have spotted that Biden said he had cancer in 2022 and those who noticed it were all told very firmly that he categorically didn’t, the existence of that 2022 clip and quote and mainstream media debunking of it at the time now seems incredibly damning.
But not to the Daily Fail. No, no, no. Heaven forbid that prostate cancer normally having a five-to-ten year period of developing to the stage it’s now at with Biden should influence your thinking of whether or not anyone knew earlier than this ‘yeah, we discovered all this yesterday’ crap. Heaven forbid too that you should remember the bare-faced lying of 2022 and all of mainstream media saying ‘Joe Biden does not have cancer’ after Joe Biden said ‘I have cancer’.
Because if you have any cognitive function of your own, if you are capable of noticing what Biden said and remembering what mainstream media said now that they are admitting he has cancer (in a very advanced stage), well, it’s obvious, isn’t it?
You are a ‘conspiracy theorist’.
It has to be the perfection of dishonesty, surely, to take categorical proof of your dishonesty as the basis of an article declaring those who notice it dishonest.
There’s almost something weirdly admirable in the chutzpah and shamelessness of that, like a red-handed axe murderer declaring ‘it’s not an axe, it’s a pencil’ while still hacking away at you.
This article appeared in Jupplandia on May 19, 2025, and is republished by kind permission.
