Democrat Senators Snub Hearing on Biden’s Decline—What Are They Hiding?

Biden mental health concerns, Senate hearing boycott, political coverup allegations

In recent political discourse, a significant event has surfaced involving a boycott by democrat Senators concerning a hearing that addresses allegations of a cover-up related to President Joe Biden’s mental decline. This situation has raised eyebrows and sparked discussions across various platforms, particularly on social media, where the implications of such actions are being fervently debated.

Background of the Hearing

The hearing in question was set to examine claims about President Biden’s cognitive abilities. Critics have pointed to various instances where they believe the President has exhibited signs of mental decline, which they argue could impact his capacity to effectively lead the nation. While supporters of Biden dismiss these claims as unfounded, the decision by democrat Senators to boycott the hearing has fueled further speculation and controversy.

The Boycott Explained

The refusal of democrat Senators to attend the hearing has been interpreted by some as an indication that they may have something to hide regarding the President’s condition. This sentiment was echoed in a tweet from the popular account Libs of TikTok, which emphasized the perceived secrecy surrounding the matter. The tweet suggested that the absence of these Senators could be indicative of attempts to obscure the truth about Biden’s mental acuity.

Political Implications

The political ramifications of the boycott are significant. Critics argue that the refusal to participate in such a crucial hearing undermines the senate’s role in providing oversight and accountability for the executive branch. This situation brings to light broader concerns about transparency in government and the responsibilities of elected officials to address serious allegations raised against their leaders.

Public Reaction

Public response to the boycott has been polarized. Supporters of Biden often express their belief that the claims regarding his mental decline are exaggerated or politically motivated. They argue that the focus should remain on policy and governance rather than personal attacks on the President. Conversely, those who oppose Biden view the boycott as a troubling sign of a lack of accountability, suggesting that it raises questions about the competency of the current administration.

The Role of Social Media

Social media plays a pivotal role in shaping public opinion on this issue. The tweet by Libs of TikTok gained traction, resonating with users who are skeptical of the Democratic Party’s handling of the situation. The virality of such posts highlights how quickly information—and misinformation—can spread, influencing the narratives surrounding political events. It also underscores the power of social media to galvanize opinion and mobilize supporters on both sides of the aisle.

Broader Context of Mental Health in Politics

The discussion about mental health, particularly in the context of political figures, is not new. Mental fitness has long been a topic of concern when it comes to leaders, especially those in high-pressure positions like the presidency. Past presidents have faced scrutiny regarding their mental health, and the conversation often intersects with issues of age, experience, and capability.

Conclusion

The democrat Senators’ boycott of the hearing on President Biden’s mental decline has ignited a firestorm of debate regarding transparency, accountability, and the political strategies employed by both parties. As this situation unfolds, it remains to be seen how it will impact public perception of Biden’s presidency and the Democratic Party as a whole. The discourse surrounding mental health in politics will likely continue to be a focal point in the lead-up to future elections, underscoring the importance of addressing such sensitive topics with both care and clarity.

In summary, the boycott reflects not just a response to a specific event, but a broader struggle over narratives in American politics. As citizens engage with these discussions, it’s crucial to consider the implications of such actions on the democratic process and the vital role of elected officials in maintaining transparency and accountability for the American public.

Democrat Senators are boycotting a hearing on the coverup of Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline and have REFUSED to show their faces.
It’s almost as if they have something to hide…pic.twitter.com/ST3i61dSMu

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) June 18, 2025

The political landscape in the United States has always been tumultuous, with issues of mental health and leadership often becoming hot topics. Recently, a situation has arisen where democrat Senators have boycotted a hearing that addresses concerns over President Joe Biden’s mental decline. The refusal of these Senators to participate has led to rampant speculation, accusations, and discussions about transparency in government.

The Context Behind the Boycott

To understand the implications of the boycott, we need to delve into the context surrounding it. The hearing in question was intended to investigate not just the President’s mental capabilities, but also the potential implications of leadership when mental health is in question. As Americans, we look to our leaders to guide us, and any signs of decline can raise concerns about their ability to fulfill their duties effectively.

The boycott from democrat Senators has raised eyebrows. Critics argue that their absence is a clear indication that they are trying to mask an issue they know is serious. The question arises: What are they trying to hide? For many people, this boycott signifies a lack of accountability and transparency, especially when it comes to the mental fitness of the President.

The Allegations of a Cover-Up

The term “cover-up” is a strong one and often evokes images of secrecy and deceit. In this case, the allegations suggest that there is a concerted effort among some Democrats to protect President Biden from scrutiny regarding his mental health. This has led to a larger conversation about the responsibilities of public officials to be honest about their leaders’ capabilities.

It’s essential to differentiate between genuine concern for a leader’s mental health and political maneuvering. Some argue that Democrats are prioritizing party loyalty over the well-being of the nation. This perspective raises questions about the ethical responsibilities of lawmakers and their duty to their constituents.

Public Reaction and Backlash

Public reaction to the boycott has been mixed. Supporters of the President often defend the decision, arguing that it’s a tactic to avoid what they see as unnecessary political theater. However, critics are less forgiving. Many feel that by boycotting the hearing, these Senators are dismissing the legitimate concerns of the American people regarding President Biden’s mental fitness.

Social media has become a battleground for opinions on this issue. For instance, the tweet from Libs of TikTok highlights the frustration many feel about the lack of accountability. The phrase “almost as if they have something to hide” resonates with those who believe that mental health should not be a taboo subject, especially when it comes to leadership.

The Importance of Mental Health in Leadership

Mental health is a critical factor in leadership efficacy. Leaders who are not in optimal mental health can make decisions that impact millions of lives. In the case of President Biden, concerns about his mental acuity have been discussed in various forums, from news outlets to social media platforms.

This situation serves as a reminder that mental health discussions are not just personal issues; they have profound public implications. Mental fitness can influence policy decisions, national security, and overall governance. Therefore, it is vital for lawmakers to engage openly in discussions regarding the mental health of those in power.

The Media’s Role in Shaping the Narrative

The media plays a significant role in shaping public perception, especially in politically charged situations like this one. Outlets may choose to highlight the boycott as a sign of weakness within the Democratic Party or alternatively, as a protective measure for President Biden.

The framing of this story can significantly influence how the public perceives the actions of the Senators involved. Consequently, it is essential for consumers of news to approach these narratives critically and seek out multiple perspectives.

The Future of the Democratic Party

Looking ahead, the Democratic Party faces a crucial moment. The internal dynamics may shift depending on how this situation is handled. If the party continues to support the boycott, they may galvanize their base, but they risk alienating moderate voters who seek accountability.

Moreover, the question of leadership will be at the forefront as we approach future elections. The mental fitness of candidates will inevitably become a talking point, and Democrats may need to address these concerns head-on to maintain public trust.

The Broader Implications for Governance

This boycott raises larger questions about governance and the standards we hold our leaders to. Should mental health be a factor in determining a leader’s ability to govern? If so, how do we approach this sensitive topic without stigmatizing mental health issues?

The answer lies in open dialogue. Politicians, regardless of their party affiliation, must be willing to discuss mental health transparently. Citizens deserve to know that their leaders are fit for office, and a culture of silence surrounding mental health can lead to disastrous consequences.

Moving Beyond Politics

While this situation is steeped in political implications, it also opens the door for broader discussions about mental health in our society. Stigmatization of mental health issues can often prevent individuals from seeking help, whether they are in politics or not.

It is crucial for all of us to advocate for a society where mental health is taken seriously and discussed openly. This includes supporting initiatives that promote mental health awareness and encouraging those in leadership to be transparent about their challenges.

Conclusion: A Call for Transparency

As the situation unfolds, one thing is clear: transparency is essential. Whether you support the President or oppose him, the mental fitness of our leaders should never be a topic that is swept under the rug.

Democrat Senators boycotting the hearing raises valid concerns about accountability and the need for open discussion about mental health in leadership. It is time for all parties to confront this issue head-on, ensuring that the voices of concerned citizens are heard and that our leaders are fit to govern effectively.

The discourse surrounding this issue will likely continue to evolve, and it is up to each of us to stay informed and engaged. Let’s advocate for a political landscape where mental health is prioritized, and honesty reigns supreme.

Democrat Senators are boycotting a hearing on the coverup of Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline and have REFUSED to show their faces.

It’s almost as if they have something to hide…

Democrat Senators Snub Hearing on Biden’s Decline—What Are They Hiding?

Biden mental health concerns, Senate hearing boycott, political coverup allegations

In recent political discourse, a significant event has surfaced involving a boycott by democrat Senators concerning a hearing that addresses allegations of a cover-up related to President Joe Biden’s mental decline. This situation has raised eyebrows and sparked discussions across various platforms, particularly on social media, where the implications of such actions are being fervently debated.

### Background of the Hearing

The hearing in question was set to examine claims about President Biden’s cognitive abilities. Critics have pointed to various instances where they believe the President has exhibited signs of mental decline, which they argue could impact his capacity to effectively lead the nation. While supporters of Biden dismiss these claims as unfounded, the decision by democrat Senators to boycott the hearing has fueled further speculation and controversy.

### The Boycott Explained

The refusal of democrat Senators to attend the hearing has been interpreted by some as an indication that they may have something to hide regarding the President’s condition. This sentiment was echoed in a tweet from the popular account Libs of TikTok, which emphasized the perceived secrecy surrounding the matter. The tweet suggested that the absence of these Senators could be indicative of attempts to obscure the truth about Biden’s mental acuity.

### Political Implications

The political ramifications of the boycott are significant. Critics argue that the refusal to participate in such a crucial hearing undermines the senate’s role in providing oversight and accountability for the executive branch. This situation brings to light broader concerns about transparency in government and the responsibilities of elected officials to address serious allegations raised against their leaders.

### Public Reaction

Public response to the boycott has been polarized. Supporters of Biden often express their belief that the claims regarding his mental decline are exaggerated or politically motivated. They argue that the focus should remain on policy and governance rather than personal attacks on the President. Conversely, those who oppose Biden view the boycott as a troubling sign of a lack of accountability, suggesting that it raises questions about the competency of the current administration.

### The Role of Social Media

Social media plays a pivotal role in shaping public opinion on this issue. The tweet by Libs of TikTok gained traction, resonating with users who are skeptical of the Democratic Party’s handling of the situation. The virality of such posts highlights how quickly information—and misinformation—can spread, influencing the narratives surrounding political events. It also underscores the power of social media to galvanize opinion and mobilize supporters on both sides of the aisle.

### Broader Context of Mental Health in Politics

The discussion about mental health, particularly in the context of political figures, is not new. Mental fitness has long been a topic of concern when it comes to leaders, especially those in high-pressure positions like the presidency. Past presidents have faced scrutiny regarding their mental health, and the conversation often intersects with issues of age, experience, and capability.

### Conclusion

The democrat Senators’ boycott of the hearing on President Biden’s mental decline has ignited a firestorm of debate regarding transparency, accountability, and the political strategies employed by both parties. As this situation unfolds, it remains to be seen how it will impact public perception of Biden’s presidency and the Democratic Party as a whole. The discourse surrounding mental health in politics will likely continue to be a focal point in the lead-up to future elections, underscoring the importance of addressing such sensitive topics with both care and clarity.

In summary, the boycott reflects not just a response to a specific event, but a broader struggle over narratives in American politics. As citizens engage with these discussions, it’s crucial to consider the implications of such actions on the democratic process and the vital role of elected officials in maintaining transparency and accountability for the American public.

Democrat Senators are boycotting a hearing on the coverup of Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline and have REFUSED to show their faces.

It’s almost as if they have something to hide…pic.twitter.com/ST3i61dSMu

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) June 18, 2025

The political landscape in the United States has always been tumultuous, with issues of mental health and leadership often becoming hot topics. Recently, a situation has arisen where democrat Senators have boycotted a hearing that addresses concerns over President Joe Biden’s mental decline. The refusal of these Senators to participate has led to rampant speculation, accusations, and discussions about transparency in government.

The Context Behind the Boycott

To understand the implications of the boycott, we need to delve into the context surrounding it. The hearing in question was intended to investigate not just the President’s mental capabilities, but also the potential implications of leadership when mental health is in question. As Americans, we look to our leaders to guide us, and any signs of decline can raise concerns about their ability to fulfill their duties effectively.

The boycott from democrat Senators has raised eyebrows. Critics argue that their absence is a clear indication that they are trying to mask an issue they know is serious. The question arises: What are they trying to hide? For many people, this boycott signifies a lack of accountability and transparency, especially when it comes to the mental fitness of the President.

The Allegations of a Cover-Up

The term “cover-up” is a strong one and often evokes images of secrecy and deceit. In this case, the allegations suggest that there is a concerted effort among some Democrats to protect President Biden from scrutiny regarding his mental health. This has led to a larger conversation about the responsibilities of public officials to be honest about their leaders’ capabilities.

It’s essential to differentiate between genuine concern for a leader’s mental health and political maneuvering. Some argue that Democrats are prioritizing party loyalty over the well-being of the nation. This perspective raises questions about the ethical responsibilities of lawmakers and their duty to their constituents.

Public Reaction and Backlash

Public reaction to the boycott has been mixed. Supporters of the President often defend the decision, arguing that it’s a tactic to avoid what they see as unnecessary political theater. However, critics are less forgiving. Many feel that by boycotting the hearing, these Senators are dismissing the legitimate concerns of the American people regarding President Biden’s mental fitness.

Social media has become a battleground for opinions on this issue. For instance, the tweet from Libs of TikTok highlights the frustration many feel about the lack of accountability. The phrase “almost as if they have something to hide” resonates with those who believe that mental health should not be a taboo subject, especially when it comes to leadership.

The Importance of Mental Health in Leadership

Mental health is a critical factor in leadership efficacy. Leaders who are not in optimal mental health can make decisions that impact millions of lives. In the case of President Biden, concerns about his mental acuity have been discussed in various forums, from news outlets to social media platforms.

This situation serves as a reminder that mental health discussions are not just personal issues; they have profound public implications. Mental fitness can influence policy decisions, national security, and overall governance. Therefore, it is vital for lawmakers to engage openly in discussions regarding the mental health of those in power.

The Media’s Role in Shaping the Narrative

The media plays a significant role in shaping public perception, especially in politically charged situations like this one. Outlets may choose to highlight the boycott as a sign of weakness within the Democratic Party or alternatively, as a protective measure for President Biden.

The framing of this story can significantly influence how the public perceives the actions of the Senators involved. Consequently, it is essential for consumers of news to approach these narratives critically and seek out multiple perspectives.

The Future of the Democratic Party

Looking ahead, the Democratic Party faces a crucial moment. The internal dynamics may shift depending on how this situation is handled. If the party continues to support the boycott, they may galvanize their base, but they risk alienating moderate voters who seek accountability.

Moreover, the question of leadership will be at the forefront as we approach future elections. The mental fitness of candidates will inevitably become a talking point, and Democrats may need to address these concerns head-on to maintain public trust.

The Broader Implications for Governance

This boycott raises larger questions about governance and the standards we hold our leaders to. Should mental health be a factor in determining a leader’s ability to govern? If so, how do we approach this sensitive topic without stigmatizing mental health issues?

The answer lies in open dialogue. Politicians, regardless of their party affiliation, must be willing to discuss mental health transparently. Citizens deserve to know that their leaders are fit for office, and a culture of silence surrounding mental health can lead to disastrous consequences.

Moving Beyond Politics

While this situation is steeped in political implications, it also opens the door for broader discussions about mental health in our society. Stigmatization of mental health issues can often prevent individuals from seeking help, whether they are in politics or not.

It is crucial for all of us to advocate for a society where mental health is taken seriously and discussed openly. This includes supporting initiatives that promote mental health awareness and encouraging those in leadership to be transparent about their challenges.

Conclusion: A Call for Transparency

As the situation unfolds, one thing is clear: transparency is essential. Whether you support the President or oppose him, the mental fitness of our leaders should never be a topic that is swept under the rug.

Democrat Senators boycotting the hearing raises valid concerns about accountability and the need for open discussion about mental health in leadership. It is time for all parties to confront this issue head-on, ensuring that the voices of concerned citizens are heard and that our leaders are fit to govern effectively.

The discourse surrounding this issue will likely continue to evolve, and it is up to each of us to stay informed and engaged. Let’s advocate for a political landscape where mental health is prioritized, and honesty reigns supreme.

Democrat Senators are boycotting a hearing on the coverup of Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline and have REFUSED to show their faces.

It’s almost as if they have something to hide…

Democrat Senators Snub Hearing on Biden’s Decline—What Are They Hiding?

Biden mental health concerns, Senate hearing boycott, political coverup allegations

In recent political discourse, a significant event has surfaced involving a boycott by democrat Senators concerning a hearing that addresses allegations of a cover-up related to President Joe Biden’s mental decline. This situation has raised eyebrows and sparked discussions across various platforms, particularly on social media, where the implications of such actions are being fervently debated.

Background of the Hearing

The hearing in question was set to examine claims about President Biden’s cognitive abilities. Critics have pointed to various instances where they believe the President has exhibited signs of mental decline, which they argue could impact his capacity to effectively lead the nation. While supporters of Biden dismiss these claims as unfounded, the decision by democrat Senators to boycott the hearing has fueled further speculation and controversy. For more on this contentious issue, you can check out the article by Fox news.

The Boycott Explained

The refusal of democrat Senators to attend the hearing has been interpreted by some as an indication that they may have something to hide regarding the President’s condition. This sentiment was echoed in a tweet from the popular account Libs of TikTok, which emphasized the perceived secrecy surrounding the matter. The tweet suggested that the absence of these Senators could be indicative of attempts to obscure the truth about Biden’s mental acuity. Such actions have led to suspicions and allegations about what the Democrats might be covering up.

Political Implications

The political ramifications of the boycott are significant. Critics argue that the refusal to participate in such a crucial hearing undermines the senate’s role in providing oversight and accountability for the executive branch. This situation brings to light broader concerns about transparency in government and the responsibilities of elected officials to address serious allegations raised against their leaders. The implications could be far-reaching, affecting public trust in the government as a whole.

Public Reaction

Public response to the boycott has been polarized. Supporters of Biden often express their belief that the claims regarding his mental decline are exaggerated or politically motivated. They argue that the focus should remain on policy and governance rather than personal attacks on the President. Conversely, those who oppose Biden view the boycott as a troubling sign of a lack of accountability, suggesting that it raises questions about the competency of the current administration. The division in opinions showcases how emotionally charged this topic is for many Americans.

The Role of Social Media

Social media plays a pivotal role in shaping public opinion on this issue. The tweet by Libs of TikTok gained traction, resonating with users who are skeptical of the Democratic Party’s handling of the situation. The virality of such posts highlights how quickly information—and misinformation—can spread, influencing the narratives surrounding political events. It also underscores the power of social media to galvanize opinion and mobilize supporters on both sides of the aisle. To see the tweet that sparked this conversation, check out Libs of TikTok.

Broader Context of Mental Health in Politics

The discussion about mental health, particularly in the context of political figures, is not new. Mental fitness has long been a topic of concern when it comes to leaders, especially those in high-pressure positions like the presidency. Past presidents have faced scrutiny regarding their mental health, and the conversation often intersects with issues of age, experience, and capability. For more context on this, visit news/political-mental-health-why-it-matters-who-leads-n1286670″>NBC news.

Conclusion

The democrat Senators’ boycott of the hearing on President Biden’s mental decline has ignited a firestorm of debate regarding transparency, accountability, and the political strategies employed by both parties. As this situation unfolds, it remains to be seen how it will impact public perception of Biden’s presidency and the Democratic Party as a whole. The discourse surrounding mental health in politics will likely continue to be a focal point in the lead-up to future elections, underscoring the importance of addressing such sensitive topics with both care and clarity.

In summary, the boycott reflects not just a response to a specific event, but a broader struggle over narratives in American politics. As citizens engage with these discussions, it’s crucial to consider the implications of such actions on the democratic process and the vital role of elected officials in maintaining transparency and accountability for the American public.

Democrat Senators are boycotting a hearing on the coverup of Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline and have REFUSED to show their faces.

It’s almost as if they have something to hide…pic.twitter.com/ST3i61dSMu

— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) June 18, 2025

The political landscape in the United States has always been tumultuous, with issues of mental health and leadership often becoming hot topics. Recently, a situation has arisen where democrat Senators have boycotted a hearing that addresses concerns over President Joe Biden’s mental decline. The refusal of these Senators to participate has led to rampant speculation, accusations, and discussions about transparency in government.

The Context Behind the Boycott

To understand the implications of the boycott, we need to delve into the context surrounding it. The hearing in question was intended to investigate not just the President’s mental capabilities, but also the potential implications of leadership when mental health is in question. As Americans, we look to our leaders to guide us, and any signs of decline can raise concerns about their ability to fulfill their duties effectively. Such concerns can lead to broader discussions about leadership and responsibility.

The boycott from democrat Senators has raised eyebrows. Critics argue that their absence is a clear indication that they are trying to mask an issue they know is serious. The question arises: What are they trying to hide? For many people, this boycott signifies a lack of accountability and transparency, especially when it comes to the mental fitness of the President.

The Allegations of a Cover-Up

The term “cover-up” is a strong one and often evokes images of secrecy and deceit. In this case, the allegations suggest that there is a concerted effort among some Democrats to protect President Biden from scrutiny regarding his mental health. This has led to a larger conversation about the responsibilities of public officials to be honest about their leaders’ capabilities. Concerns have been raised about whether party loyalty is being prioritized over national interests, which raises ethical questions for lawmakers.

Public Reaction and Backlash

Public reaction to the boycott has been mixed. Supporters of the President often defend the decision, arguing that it’s a tactic to avoid what they see as unnecessary political theater. However, critics are less forgiving. Many feel that by boycotting the hearing, these Senators are dismissing the legitimate concerns of the American people regarding President Biden’s mental fitness. This divide highlights how this issue resonates differently across the political spectrum.

Social media has become a battleground for opinions on this issue. For instance, the tweet from Libs of TikTok highlights the frustration many feel about the lack of accountability. The phrase “almost as if they have something to hide” resonates with those who believe that mental health should not be a taboo subject, especially when it comes to leadership.

The Importance of Mental Health in Leadership

Mental health is a critical factor in leadership efficacy. Leaders who are not in optimal mental health can make decisions that impact millions of lives. In the case of President Biden, concerns about his mental acuity have been discussed in various forums, from news outlets to social media platforms. This situation serves as a reminder that mental health discussions are not just personal issues; they have profound public implications. Mental fitness can influence policy decisions, national security, and overall governance. Therefore, it is vital for lawmakers to engage openly in discussions regarding the mental health of those in power.

The Media’s Role in Shaping the Narrative

The media plays a significant role in shaping public perception, especially in politically charged situations like this one. Outlets may choose to highlight the boycott as a sign of weakness within the Democratic Party or alternatively, as a protective measure for President Biden. The framing of this story can significantly influence how the public perceives the actions of the Senators involved. Consequently, it is essential for consumers of news to approach these narratives critically and seek out multiple perspectives.

The Future of the Democratic Party

Looking ahead, the Democratic Party faces a crucial moment. The internal dynamics may shift depending on how this situation is handled. If the party continues to support the boycott, they may galvanize their base, but they risk alienating moderate voters who seek accountability. Moreover, the question of leadership will be at the forefront as we approach future elections. The mental fitness of candidates will inevitably become a talking point, and Democrats may need to address these concerns head-on to maintain public trust.

The Broader Implications for Governance

This boycott raises larger questions about governance and the standards we hold our leaders to. Should mental health be a factor in determining a leader’s ability to govern? If so, how do we approach this sensitive topic without stigmatizing mental health issues? The answer lies in open dialogue. Politicians, regardless of their party affiliation, must be willing to discuss mental health transparently. Citizens deserve to know that their leaders are fit for office, and a culture of silence surrounding mental health can lead to disastrous consequences.

Moving Beyond Politics

While this situation is steeped in political implications, it also opens the door for broader discussions about mental health in our society. Stigmatization of mental health issues can often prevent individuals from seeking help, whether they are in politics or not. It is crucial for all of us to advocate for a society where mental health is taken seriously and discussed openly. This includes supporting initiatives that promote mental health awareness and encouraging those in leadership to be transparent about their challenges.

A Call for Transparency

As the situation unfolds, one thing is clear: transparency is essential. Whether you support the President or oppose him, the mental fitness of our leaders should never be a topic that is swept under the rug. Democrat Senators boycotting the hearing raises valid concerns about accountability and the need for open discussion about mental health in leadership. It is time for all parties to confront this issue head-on, ensuring that the voices of concerned citizens are heard and that our leaders are fit to govern effectively. The discourse surrounding this issue will likely continue to evolve, and it is up to each of us to stay informed and engaged. Let’s advocate for a political landscape where mental health is prioritized, and honesty reigns supreme.

Democrat Senators are boycotting a hearing on the coverup of Joe Biden’s obvious mental decline and have REFUSED to show their faces.

It’s almost as if they have something to hide…