In a striking and unfiltered interview, Hunter Biden has broken his silence over what many have called one of the most pivotal moments in the 2024 US presidential election: Joe Biden’s disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump. Speaking with journalist Andrew Callaghan in an interview released July 21, Hunter offered a surprisingly candid explanation-Ambien.

According to the younger Biden, the now-former president’s poor showing during the June 27 debate was not due to cognitive decline, as many critics had alleged, but rather a combination of exhausting international travel and the use of prescription sleeping pills. “He flew around the world basically,” Hunter explained, describing his father as “tired as s**t” and reliant on Ambien to fall asleep. The result, he said, was a stage presence that resembled “a deer in the headlights.”

This revelation comes too late to change the trajectory of the election, but it raises new questions about how the Biden team managed-or mismanaged-the president’s health, optics, and readiness in the final stretch of his campaign. More importantly, it underscores the fragility of Democratic leadership during one of the most consequential elections in modern US history.

The June 27 debate was a turning point. Joe Biden appeared frail, frequently stumbling over his words, speaking in a hoarse and barely audible tone, and at times seeming lost. Viewers across the political spectrum were visibly rattled, and Democratic insiders reportedly went into full crisis mode. Trump, who had long derided Biden as “Sleepy Joe,” appeared alert and combative-qualities that played well to a nervous electorate already concerned about Biden’s advanced age.

Though the White House initially chalked up Biden’s performance to a “bad cold,” it wasn’t enough to calm the panic. Donors balked, allies hedged, and media outlets ran op-eds calling for Biden to step aside. The damage was immediate, and despite Biden’s efforts to reassure the public-claiming, “I know how to do this job”-the perception that he was no longer fit to serve had crystallized.

Further complicating Biden’s standing during this critical juncture was his health. In mid-May, the president had privately disclosed that he had been diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer. Though his office stated that the cancer appeared to be “hormone-sensitive,” which allows for effective treatment, the timing of the announcement-coupled with the later disclosure of Ambien use-only amplified concerns about transparency in the Biden administration.

Supporters pointed to the president’s optimism and the relatively positive prognosis, but critics noted the parallels with earlier periods of opacity in presidential health history, such as Franklin D. Roosevelt’s concealed heart condition or John F. Kennedy’s chronic illnesses.

Hunter Biden’s remarks appear to be an attempt at both candor and damage control. By offering a concrete explanation-Ambien-induced grogginess-for his father’s unsettling appearance, he may be trying to shift the conversation from mental decline to poor staff management or medical oversight. Yet in doing so, he inadvertently stirs deeper questions about judgment and preparedness at the highest levels of government.

Why was an 81-year-old incumbent president, recently diagnosed with cancer, subjected to a grueling travel schedule just days before a high-stakes debate? Why was he using a sedative known to cause next-day drowsiness and cognitive impairment? And perhaps most importantly, why were these issues concealed from the American public until after his campaign imploded?

The Democratic Party, already fractured by internal generational and ideological divides, is unlikely to find closure in Hunter’s comments. For many rank-and-file members and strategists, the damage has already been done.

Following weeks of mounting pressure, Biden officially withdrew from the 2024 race on July 21, endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris as his successor. The transition was swift, but it lacked the momentum needed to reset the race. Harris, facing her own issues with public perception and polling deficits, could not overcome the late-stage chaos within the Democratic camp.

Donald Trump, meanwhile, capitalized on the disarray. Running a campaign focused on immigration, economic insecurity, and law and order, he reassembled much of his 2016 base and added swing voters disillusioned with the Democrats’ leadership vacuum. On election night in November, Trump clinched a decisive victory, marking his return to the Oval Office.

Hunter Biden’s interview may bring clarity to a chaotic chapter, but it also serves as a stark reminder of the stakes of presidential politics. The decision to keep Biden in the race despite growing concerns-whether driven by loyalty, fear of internal party collapse, or sheer inertia-may have cost Democrats the election.

The party now faces an existential reckoning. With Trump returning to power and Democratic leadership in flux, many are calling for a generational shift and greater transparency moving forward. The 2024 campaign’s implosion will likely be studied for decades as a case study in political miscalculation and communication failure.

As for the elder Biden, he exits the political stage under a cloud of regret and controversy, his legacy complicated not only by policy achievements and global diplomacy but by a final act marred by illness, misjudgment, and perhaps too much trust in a pill meant for rest.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel