Concerns about Senator Dianne Feinstein's mental fitness are unfortunately making
headlines yet again.
And I say it's unfortunate because this has been an ongoing issue that
the Democratic Party just refuses to address.
At least they refused to address it by revealing their identities because
the San Francisco Chronicle spoke to several of them.
And they were willing to talk about just how concerned they are about
Senator Feinstein.
As long as the paper agreed to avoid printing their names, they're worried
that that could lead to falling out with the senator and some of her allies.
But the story here just gets into more details,
more evidence of what Feinstein has been dealing with.
It's really a tragic story, not only for
people in California who are supposed to be represented by her.
But also for her, it's terrible to hear that she's going through this and
she should resign.
That's my take, let me give you the details.
So, one lawmaker who spoke to the San Francisco Chronicle said that they had to
reintroduce themselves to Feinstein multiple times
during an interaction that they had.
The interaction was a debate,
just a one on one debate they were having on proposed legislation.
It lasted several hours and rather than delve into policy,
Feinstein 88 repeated the same small talk questions.
Like asking the lawmaker what mattered to voters in their district?
They said, with no apparent recognition,
the two had already had a similar conversation.
So this is a new account, but we've heard similar stories from others as well.
The conversation took place a few weeks before the death of Feinstein's husband.
He had passed away in February.
But I bring that up because some of her defenders are using her husband's death
to provide cover for the obvious fact that she is experiencing mental decline.
Now, her term doesn't end until 2024,
which is why this is an important story to cover.
And it's really critical that the Democratic Party be real about this and
it seems like they're unwilling to be real about it.
One other anonymous congress person said this, I have worked with her for
a long time and long enough to know what she was like just a few years ago.
Always in command, always in charge, on top of the details basically
couldn't resist a conversation where she was driving some bill or some idea,
all of that is gone.
She was an intellectual and political force not that long ago.
And that's why my encounter with her was so jarring,
because there was just no trace of that.
Now look, I obviously have my political disagreements with Dianne Feinstein and so
there are certain elements of that quote, that statement, that I don't agree with.
I never really saw her as a political powerhouse.
But whatever, putting that aside, there clearly is a difference in the way
that she's able to interact with her colleagues.
And this piece really goes into great detail about the extra work extra help
that she needs from her staffers, in order to be part of Senate hearings,
in order to make decisions about legislation.
Obviously, staffers helped to brief lawmakers on legislation, but
what the paper went to great lengths to explain is that no these staffers
have to go much further.
So four US Senators including three democrats as well as three former
Feinstein staffers and the California Democratic member of Congress,
told the Chronicle in recent interviews that her memory is rapidly deteriorating.
She's 88, let me just remind you all of that.
They said it appears that she can no longer fulfill her job duties without her
staff doing much of the work required to represent the nearly 40 million people of
California.
So there's only 100 senators and Dianne Feinstein happens to be one of them and
she represents a densely populated state.
This is not a small job, this is not a joke.
The people of California deserve appropriate representation and
if someone is not mentally fit to carry out these duties,
then it doesn't really make sense for her to stay in this role.
I think that it's cruel to the voters, but I also think it's incredibly cruel to her,
which is why I argue that it's important for democrats to be real about this.
To obviously sit down and be incredibly kind when sending this message,
but she needs to understand that she can't just remain in the Senate till 2024.
There's more, two senators who have served with Feinstein for
years said that they believe she does not always fully recognize them.
They said they get the sense that Feinstein recognizes or
realizes she knows them.
But isn't able to quickly recall their names or even home state.
One Senate staffer said they've seen their boss on a few occasions greet
Feinstein in Hallways with a preemptive self introduction.
So they know that she's gonna be a little confused about who they are.
So they just preemptively introduced themselves knowing full well
that they've interacted with her.
They've worked with her, she should know them.
But because of the conditions she's dealing with,
because of the mental decline she can't remember them.
One quoted as saying it's bad and it's getting worse.
This is from a democratic senator.
This person said that within the Senate she has difficulty keeping up with
conversations and discussions.
And there was one recent case outlined where she engaged in like this fierce
debate about this antitrust legislation that was proposed by
Senator Amy Klobuchar.
And so they have this debate.
Okay, there's footage of it, they're going back and forth.
Klobuchar wants to ensure that some of these online platforms,
whether it's Google, Amazon.
Some of the platforms that also provide a space for vendors,
aren't going out of their way to basically provide favoritism for
the products that they themselves are selling.
And I think that's good legislation.
Feinstein, for some reason, seemed to be a little against it and was going back and
forth with Klobuchar.
Later, reporters caught up with Feinstein to ask her to elaborate on her views,
her beliefs in regard to that legislation and
she had no idea what they were talking about.
So it kinda gives you a sense of how much this has had an impact on her ability
to do her job.
And it's starting to have an impact on how she's performing in the polls as well.
A March survey from the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California
found that 36% of likely voters approved of the way she was doing her job.
That's down from 44% a year ago.
So she has responded to the reporting the accusations that she's experiencing
memory loss, mental decline and she does seem to be a little in denial about it.
She told the San Francisco Chronicle the following.
The last year has been extremely painful and distracting for me, flying back and
forth to visit my dying husband who passed just a few weeks ago.
But there's no question I'm still serving and delivering for
the people of California.
And I'll put my record up against anyone.
But there are other examples of her really struggling,
including her inability to do what democrats love to do most fundraise.
I'll get to the details on that in just a second.
But something that I've had a huge problem with,
is how certain things get weaponized in order to provide cover.
Whether it's to provide cover for bad behavior, provide cover for
someone who is ineffective in their jobs.
And Pelosi chimed in on this and said that it's unconscionable.
Unconscionable that just weeks after losing her beloved husband of
more than four decades.
And after decades of outstanding leadership to our city and state,
she's being subjected to these ridiculous attacks that are beneath
the dignity in which she has led and the esteem in which she is held.
I actually think that it's incredibly cruel to provide cover and
to have her end her career the way that it's likely to end.
I mean, if I actually cared about her as Nancy Pelosi claims
to as these democratic colleagues claim to.
I would do her a solid and have a frank conversation with her because
it's not fair to her to end her political career like this.
And to cite the death of her husband, listen,
I don't wanna come off as callous at all.
I can't even imagine how difficult it is for her to go through that,
to lose your nearly lifetime partner, they were together for like four decades.
I can't imagine how hard that is.
But we also have to be honest about the fact that these stories were breaking
well before her husband passed away.
And it seems like her condition has deteriorated further.
And again, it's not fair to the people she's supposed to be representing.
It's not fair to her.
And when we're talking about something as incredibly important as the US Senate,
where right now democrats have the slimmest imaginable margin, right?
You have a 50 50 split with Vice President Kamala Harris serving as a tie
breaking vote.
If they try to pass something through reconciliation,
why would democrats just settle for someone who clearly is not fit to serve?
And honestly, this article on its own is a huge problem.
Because it shows you that they don't even have the courage to speak out
publicly without hiding their own identities.
They're so terrified of retaliation.
They're so terrified that they'll be like blacklisted by their democratic colleagues
if they tell the truth.
And to me what that represents is more of the same, more democratic lawmakers,
putting all sorta other unnecessary nonsensical things.
Having those things take priority over the best interests of the people they're
supposed to be serving.
So other examples of her really struggling to do her job include the fact
that staff turnover has been incredibly high since 2017.
That's when you started seeing signs of her condition and
the staffers have to do a lot to prep her that she's always with a staffer.
She's not ever willing to do interviews with the media.
The only time you'll get a statement from Feinstein is if she's walking the halls
of Congress and a reporter manages to run into her and
ask her some questions about legislation.
But she's never alone.
She's always with a staffer, she won't do interviews,
she hasn't done a town hall since 2017.
That's a problem.
And listen, I don't care too much about fundraising, but
I know the Democratic Party does.
And I find it fascinating that when it comes to the issue,
they seem to care about the most they're willing to give Diane Feinstein a pass.
So Patrick Leahy, who is around the same age as her,
raised about a million dollars last year,
Feinstein said that she raised 5,566 bucks.
She's not able to do it, she's not able to do the Town hall,
she's not able to sit down with the press for an interview.
She's not able to represent the people who put her in a position of power.
And when you consider the seriousness of that role, when you consider how important
it is for us to have real representation, eventually, real leadership in Congress.
It doesn't make sense to continue providing cover for someone who is clearly
experiencing tragic mental decline and again, not to be callous about it.
But what are our priorities here?
What is the government for?
Like our lawmakers just meant to be there to fundraise trade,
individual stocks, essentially do insider trading enrich themselves.
Like what's the point of Congress?
And how is the Democratic Party gonna explain their incessant excuses for
poor leadership, bad representation and an unwillingness to change any of it?
It's incredibly shameful.
It really is.
But that's where we are.
That's what's happening with Dianne Feinstein, and I hate to hear it.
I hate to talk about it, but that's where we're at.