This last week has been a bit of a doozy for anyone paying attention to politics. From what may have been the two worst Presidential debate performances in American political history to a slew of highly publicized Supreme Court rulings, pundits and politicians alike have had no shortage of soundbites to peddle over the last week.

But many of these talking heads have various motives, and giving you an accurate representation of the state of politics is not one of them. Two major news stories demonstrate this quite clearly.

Biden’s age is showing, and his enablers are playing a cynical game

On Thursday, Joe Biden and Donald Trump met for the first debate of the 2024 Presidential campaign. Trump did terribly. But fortunately for him, Biden did so, so much worse.

It was awful.

Biden performed so poorly, that most analysis and conversation about the debate rapidly became a discussion of whether he should drop out of the race.

The answer, quite simply, is yes. He should. A recent poll shows why:

New Hampshire, which Biden won in 2020 and led by ten points at the end of 2023, is now leaning toward Trump. And while there have only been a handful of polls since the debate, they have all told a very similar story: Trump is gaining.

But wait, Biden’s defenders cry—there’s no other Democrat who is polling as highly as he is! This Data for Progress poll shows that he’s the best shot for Democrats defeating Trump! Right?

Wrong. Think about what you’re seeing for a second. You’re not seeing results from a poll showing Biden as the best shot against Trump; you’re seeing the results of a poll showing that Biden—who has been a notable public figure for a decade and a half and has been President for four years—is polling almost the exact same as the Governor of Illinois.

If you put two candidates in front of me with similar polling numbers, but one of them hasn’t spent hundreds of millions of dollars trying to sway public opinion and gain supporters, give me that guy! Forget the schlub who is “polling better” by a tiny margin, and give me the candidate with upside.

People keep arguing that the debate didn’t hurt Biden’s polling that badly, but it needs to be understood that he’s already behind in the horse race. If Biden were leading and had a bit of a bad night, that would be forgivable. But he’s behind. He needs to perform better. And he just doesn’t have it in him.

It seems that even Nancy Pelosi may agree:

Biden needs to step out of the race. This isn’t even just about winning reelection—is he even physically or mentally fit to serve in office today? The job of the Presidency often takes a toll on those who perform it. An 81 year-old with memory problems is simply not up to the task anymore.

Renominating Biden would not just give Trump a better chance of winning, but reelecting him would potentially put our country in great danger. And any pundit who is encouraging Biden to stay in the race is playing a cynical game for their own benefit.

Presidents can still be prosecuted, and no, they can’t start assassinating people.

Another hot news item was the Supreme Court decision in Trump v United States. Trying to avoid prosecution for the crimes he committed in the leadup to January 6th, Donald Trump’s attorneys argued that he was immune from prosecution by nature of him having occupied the White House at the time.

So when the court ruled that the President of the United States cannot be prosecuted for official conduct for which they are authorized by the Constitution, a lot of pundits lost their minds. After all, at first glance, it kind of reads like the court siding with Trump.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor claimed that this ruling gave the President king-like powers to rule and kill with reckless abandon:

I don’t think Sonia Sotomayor is uneducated about the Constitution or about the ruling to which she dissented; I think she, along with the justices who signed on to her opinion, are engaging in petty politics disguised as jurisprudence.

No, of COURSE the President can’t assassinate a political rival. But let’s not take it from me—let’s walk through this great infographic from Just Law:

Now, the President ordering military action does count as official conduct, but that’s not the end of the analysis.

The ruling gives absolute immunity for official conduct that is fits within his core constitutional authority. Targeting Americans with assassinations or staging a coup does not fit within the President’s core constitutional authority. Therefore, the President has presumptive immunity, which means that there is a second test for us: does prosecuting the President pose a danger to the constitutional authority of future Presidents? In our assassination/coup examples, obviously it doesn’t, because the office of the President has no authority to assassinate or enact a coup.

In a concurring opinion, Justice Amy Coney Barrett writes:

In short, nothing has really changed. Trump may get a few charges dismissed here and there, but he is otherwise still going to have to stand trial and potentially be convicted for his crimes.

Anyone telling you otherwise is either lying to you or buying someone else’s lie.

Political actors are unreliable narrators.

Take everything they say with a metric ton of salt and do your own research. It’s that simple.