For years, concerns about President Joe Biden’s mental sharpness circulated quietly — discussed in private conversations, brushed aside publicly, and dismissed as partisan attacks.
Now, those concerns are no longer confined to whispers. A senior Republican official is demanding a formal investigation, arguing that the United States may have been governed not by its elected president, but by unelected aides acting in his name.
Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey has formally called on the Department of Justice to investigate whether key decisions made during Biden’s final months in office were authorized by a president capable of giving informed consent.
In a letter sent Tuesday to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz, Bailey alleges that Biden’s inner circle may have exploited signs of cognitive decline to push radical policy actions without lawful authority.
“If the president lacked the mental capacity to understand or approve these actions, then their legality must be questioned,” Bailey wrote, warning that the Constitution provides safeguards for presidential incapacity — safeguards he claims were deliberately ignored.
Bailey argues that the 25th Amendment exists precisely to prevent such scenarios. Rather than invoking it, he suggests senior officials may have shielded Biden from public scrutiny while effectively assuming control over executive power themselves.
The concerns are not new. Doubts about Biden’s cognitive health intensified long before he withdrew from the 2024 presidential race. They were further magnified by Special Counsel Robert Hur’s report on Biden’s handling of classified documents, which described the president as an “elderly man with a poor memory” — language that sent shockwaves through Washington.
House Speaker Mike Johnson added fuel to the fire in a January interview with The Free Press, claiming Biden appeared unaware that he had personally approved a moratorium on U.S. energy exports to Europe. Johnson said the president seemed genuinely surprised when questioned about the policy.
A separate Wall Street Journal investigation in December reported that Biden’s staff increasingly restricted access to him, tightly controlled his schedule, and assumed responsibilities traditionally reserved for the president as his condition worsened.
Bailey’s letter asks federal investigators to determine which executive actions were knowingly approved by Biden himself — and which may have been executed without his meaningful involvement.
Among the most controversial decisions were a flurry of pardons and commutations issued in Biden’s final days. These included a pardon for his son, Hunter Biden, as well as clemency for multiple family members. Just hours before President Donald Trump’s inauguration, Biden also issued preemptive pardons for Dr. Anthony Fauci, Gen. Mark Milley, and members of the January 6 congressional committee.
Bailey also highlighted Biden’s decision to commute the sentences of approximately 2,500 individuals described as nonviolent drug offenders.
Subsequent reporting revealed that the list included individuals linked to the death of a police officer and another convicted of murdering an eight-year-old child and his mother.
According to an internal Justice Department email cited by The Wall Street Journal, Biden overruled DOJ recommendations when granting clemency to some violent offenders — a move Bailey argues raises further questions about who was truly making these decisions.
In one of his final acts, Biden declared that the Equal Rights Amendment was officially part of the U.S. Constitution — a claim later rejected by the National Archives, which stated the amendment was never properly ratified.
Bailey’s letter ends with a blunt question that cuts to the heart of the controversy: “Who has actually been running the country?”
He warns that Biden may have served as president in title only, while unelected ideological operatives exercised real authority behind closed doors. “If that is the case,” Bailey wrote, “the American people deserve transparency — and accountability.”
Closing Perspective
Bailey’s call for investigation places unprecedented scrutiny on the final chapter of the Biden presidency. Should his allegations prove credible, the implications would be seismic — calling into question the legitimacy of executive actions, the use of constitutional safeguards, and the integrity of democratic governance itself.
At stake is not just a political legacy, but a fundamental question of who truly held power at the highest level of government.