Biden appeared almost 10 years to the day after he was a guest on the first “Late Night” show with Meyers when he was vice president in 2014.
President Joe Biden made an appearance Monday on “Late Night with Seth Meyers,” where he answered questions about topics ranging from his age and the Israel-Hamas war to the conservative conspiracy about Taylor Swift.
The interview comes almost 10 years to the day after Biden was a guest on the first “Late Night” show with Meyers, which aired on Feb. 24, 2014, when Biden was vice president. It also follows a decision this month to skip a Super Bowl interview that had a much larger audience.
During Monday’s Q&A, Biden was asked early on how he addresses voter concern over his age.
“Take a look at the other guy, he’s about as old as I am," said Biden, who at 81 is four years older than former President Donald Trump.
“It’s about how old your ideas are. Look, I mean, this is a guy who wants to take us back,” Biden added, pointing to Trump’s positions on abortion rights, which he suggested were outdated.
Aww. Seth put on a suit for Biden.
It was the 10th anniversary of the show
Did Biden jump out of a cake?
Happy anniversary Mr late night
Where my jackals at?
Here, anxiously awaiting for Friday.
Just enjoying my negroni.
Can’t wait to see if the negroni encased in a giant fake ice cube was the climax of that bit or if there’s something even more delightfully unhinged waiting for us.
It’s Mac Tonight night
Yoooooo
Drinking from my jackel mug right now!
Am i missing something or is the actual video of his full appearance not even in this article?
I tried posting on Lemmy, downvoted to oblivion in an hour. 😦
Do you have link to the full interview?
Thx
2014 was 10 years ago already? Dang. Remember to go out there and live life.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
President Joe Biden made an appearance Monday on “Late Night with Seth Meyers,” where he answered questions about topics ranging from his age and the Israel-Hamas war to the conservative conspiracy about Taylor Swift.
During Monday’s Q&A, Biden was asked early on how he addresses voter concern over his age.
Look, I mean, this is a guy who wants to take us back," Biden added, pointing to Trump’s positions on abortion rights, which he suggested were outdated.
Pressed by Meyers about calls for an immediate cease-fire in the Israel-Hamas war, Biden said, “There is a path forward, with difficulty,” and he commented on the ongoing hostage situation.
Biden made a similar remark before the interview aired, telling reporters in New York, “My hope is by next Monday we will have a cease-fire."
In a more lighthearted exchange, Meyers asked Biden about whether he was involved in an “active conspiracy” with Swift after a conspiracy theory on that right claimed the pop star’s relationship with Kansas City Chiefs player Travis Kelce was manufactured to boost Democrats in the 2024 elections.
The original article contains 399 words, the summary contains 178 words. Saved 55%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
“It’s about how old your ideas are. Look, I mean, this is a guy who wants to take us back,” Biden added, pointing to Trump’s positions on abortion rights, which he suggested were outdated.
Biden saying this is a joke
He is Catholic and Roe versus Wade happened on Biden’s watch
Did not even try an executive order or anything
His ideas are old as well just look at his other policies such as his and prosecutor Kamala’s outdated cannabis stance
Yeah, he absolutely should have replaced the supreme Court judges trump placed that made the ruling! Or at least he should have ordered them to rule differently by executive order!
Maybe he should have pushed for something to happen when he happen to be VP during a super majority 🤔
Why didn’t he, as VP, push to legalize something that was already legal and viewed as settled law when the president was focused on the ACA during the, what was it, like 2 weeks they had a super majority?
Come on man.
Removed by mod
You mean they had been using it to raise money and get people to the polls for 30 years but no one thought they were dumb enough to actually overturn it.
There were more pressing issues at the time.
Yes precisely. It had been part of their platform for THIRTY YEARS, for THIRTY YEARS they told you they would do this. And in those THIRTY YEARS, including TWO super majority none of the Dems thought “you know, maybe we should make sure it doesn’t happen.”
As I said, inaction is as complicit as omission is a lie. Omission is a “lesser” lie, but it’s still a lie.
no one thought they were dumb enough to actually overturn it.
Surely the leopard won’t eat my face!
Pretty sure the left has been telling you guys this for THIRTY YEARS.
Ok, what’s your solution then? Because 1 of 2 people are going to be president in February of 2025 and one of them actually appointed the judges responsible for the decision while the other one didn’t do enough to stop it (in your opinion) while he was VP.
Surely the leopard won’t eat my face!
Not sure you understand that expression if you think it applies here. I certainly didn’t vote for anyone who was in favor of overturning Roe.
Go look up how long the Democrats had a supermajority. I’ll wait.
You should at least try to educate yourself on things you are absolutely furious about.
Removed, rule 3:
“Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (perjorative, perjorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (perjorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!”
Maybe he should’ve. It looked like a settled issue at that point with the duration of precedent. It might have been better if he did, during the brief window that supermajority existed, but that doesn’t mean it happened on his watch. Those judges were put in office when he was out of office and could do nothing, and when the ruling happened it was entirely out of his hands.
Again, the issue of judges is something the Dems, including him, could have fixed in period of super majorities. Biden was part of at least two. VP during one. They could done in 1993 with Clinton, it was already well established that the constitution of the supreme Court was an issue and that the Republicans were trying to take control of it.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/ronald-reagans-big-impact-on-the-supreme-court
That’s entirely on them. You know how ommission is still a lie? Well inaction works the same.
And that makes him just as bad as the people who actively campaigned for and carried this out. On the same level, with no discernable difference between them, and that’s why we should let the guy who nominated the judges who actually did this back into office so he can carry out the vengeance he’s promising. I expect that’ll work out great. Virtually identical to another Biden term.
You know how ommission is still a lie? Well inaction works the same.
Yup. 1:1 identical.
Look. The Dems are not good enough. 100% agree. But there’s still a vast difference between “inadequately good” and “actively malicious”, and it’s pretty clear which party is which here. There’s no comparison between the people who failed to protect abortion, and the people who want to send women to jail for miscarriages and herd trans people into camps, and if the inadequately good party had held power through the trump years instead of the actively malicious party, we wouldn’t have the fucked up dobbs ruling, we wouldn’t have the fucked up IVF ruling, we wouldn’t have Tennessee making it legal to refuse to conduct marriage.
The Dems are weak. The Republicans hate us and want us to suffer and die.
Seriously… what are they teaching in schools today?
The state of our education is really sad that you failed civics so hard. No executive order can reverse R.v.W. This has to be a troll or a child.
why?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_order
Large policy changes with wide-ranging effects have been implemented by executive order, including the racial integration of the armed forces under President Truman.
Two extreme examples of an executive order are Franklin Roosevelt’s Executive Order 6102 “forbidding the hoarding of gold coin, gold bullion, and gold certificates within the continental United States”, and Executive Order 9066, which delegated military authority to remove any or all people in a military zone (used to target Japanese Americans, non-citizen Germans, and non-citizen Italians in certain regions). The order was then delegated to General John L. DeWitt, and it subsequently paved the way for all Japanese-Americans on the West Coast to be sent to internment camps for the duration of World War II.
President George W. Bush issued Executive Order 13233 in 2001, which restricted public access to the papers of former presidents. The order was criticized by the Society of American Archivists and other groups, who say it “violates both the spirit and letter of existing U.S. law on access to presidential papers as clearly laid down in 44 USC 2201–07”, and adding that the order “potentially threatens to undermine one of the very foundations of our nation”. President Barack Obama subsequently revoked Executive Order 13233 in January 2009.[19]
Show us how an executive order can reverse a supreme court decision. None of these examples have anything to do w what is being asked.
SO glad to see this nonsense downvoted. I have hope for the future of lemmy not being full-tilt communist.
They dont like what youre sayin. Neither do i, truth be told. but it is the truth.
