Cillizza Makes Apology On Social Media

In a moment of rare media introspection, former CNN editor-at-large Chris Cillizza has publicly admitted to failing in his journalistic duty by not pushing harder on questions surrounding President Biden’s mental and physical fitness. Following damning reports from The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal exposing concerning details about Biden’s ability to govern, Cillizza took to his YouTube channel with a mea culpa that’s as revealing about the media landscape as it is about Biden himself.

"I should have pushed harder earlier for more information about Joe Biden's mental and physical well-being and any signs of decline," Cillizza confessed. It’s a candid admission, but one that arrives years too late and only after the evidence has become undeniable.

Cillizza detailed how Republican voices would frequently raise concerns about Biden’s cognitive state during his tenure at CNN, only for him to dismiss them outright because he hadn’t seen “evidence.” And therein lies the rub—journalists aren’t supposed to wait for a smoking gun; they’re supposed to ask the tough questions when smoke starts rising. Instead, Cillizza admits he took the White House’s word for it and allowed himself to be shamed into silence by accusations of “ageism.”

He described a coordinated effort by Biden’s inner circle to suppress these concerns, creating an environment where even raising the question of the president’s fitness was portrayed as an act of disrespect. The strategy worked, at least for a while. As Cillizza put it, “They did a very good job, at least until they couldn't hide it anymore, of hiding it.”

But let’s pause here—should it really have taken a disastrous debate performance on June 27 for mainstream media figures to finally sound the alarm? Biden didn’t suddenly begin showing signs of decline on that stage; these were long-brewing concerns that many journalists were either unwilling or unable to address for fear of being labeled partisan or insensitive.

Cillizza’s admission raises serious questions about the media’s role in shielding Biden from scrutiny. If reporters knew—or at least suspected—that the president was being “insulated” and “bunkered in” by his team, why wasn’t there more aggressive reporting earlier? The implication is clear: the shame campaign worked, and journalists like Cillizza backed off instead of leaning in.

To his credit, Cillizza acknowledges that this isn’t a partisan issue but a “journalism thing.” If Donald Trump wins in 2024 and becomes the oldest president in history, will reporters show the same hesitancy in questioning his fitness for office? Or will they learn from this glaring oversight?

But not everyone is buying Cillizza’s late apology. Conservative commentator Meghan McCain didn’t mince words, pointing out the hypocrisy in his sudden change of heart. McCain recalled how Cillizza relentlessly questioned her father, Sen. John McCain, over his age during his 2008 presidential run—when he was 71. By contrast, Biden, who’s now 81 and visibly showing signs of decline, was largely given a pass by the same media class. McCain’s rebuke stings because it rings true: if age was fair game for her father, why wasn’t it for Biden?

This entire saga isn’t just about Biden’s mental state—it’s about the failure of powerful media figures to do their jobs without fear or favor. When journalists start letting shame campaigns and political narratives dictate their reporting, they stop being watchdogs and start being lapdogs.