Thursday night was the first and probably only debate between Donald Trump, former President of the United States, and Joe Biden, the current President of the United States.

Before this debate, I said it was going to be one of the only debates in my lifetime that really, really mattered; it was going to be a turning point because there has been no new information added to this process for legitimately a year. It would go one way or the other.

The worst possible thing that could happen for Joe Biden was for him to show up on stage and fall apart.

And that is precisely what happened.

Trump was disciplined, gave the best debate performance of his career, and did it on a night when Biden assumed room temperature.

Joe Biden effectively died on the stage last night.

I don’t even mean that in terms of a figurative performance. I mean that he looked as though he was physically going to die on the stage. It was pretty horrifying on an emotional level to watch an 81-year-old man being trotted out by his team, the Democratic Party, and his family to be humiliated on national television in front of the whole world.

As an American, it was deeply depressing and disturbing because the most evil people around the world are looking at this and licking their chops. They believe they have a window between now and when Trump presumably takes office in January where they have to go ahead.

The world just became a much more dangerous place.

WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show

The feeling everyone experienced when watching this was stunned disbelief, just absolute stunned disbelief. I think everybody thought, “Ok, they’ll shoot Biden full of some cocktail, and he’ll probably just make it through. It’ll probably be OK. And then the question will be about whether Trump is too volatile or blew right past the moderators or whatever.”

But Trump’s performance was outstanding. This was easily the best performance of his life. He kept himself contained. He kept himself restrained. He was pointed when he needed to be.

But this debate was not about Donald Trump. It was all about Joe Biden. And that is why this race is now all about Joe Biden.

The sheer panic breaking out among Democrats this morning is astonishing to watch. Nearly every major Democrat in the media, including public officials, are talking openly — not just behind closed doors — about whether they have the capacity to remove Biden from the ticket.

We are less than two months out from the Democratic National Convention. All the delegates have already been pledged. They would have to force Biden to either resign the office to Kamala Harris, declare that he is not going to run again, and thereby free up his delegates, or they would have to wrest it from him in some sort of coup.

And by the way, it really isn’t the Democratic National Committee; the DNC is all for optics. They have a somewhat fake DNC, a virtual convention, where they are going to ensure the nominee is nominated 40 days from now. There is no time for any of this.

The state of insane panic that is breaking out in the Democratic Party is amazing.

The conclusion after last night is that Trump absolutely crushed Biden because Biden is not alive. He is not with it. He is senile.

Which brings about another subject: The media are some of the most abject liars in modern history. We all knew this already. We knew this about COVID, Black Lives Matter, the 2016 election, and the 2020 election.

The legacy media should be ashamed of themselves. What the legacy media have done is humiliating and sick. They have spent three years declaring Biden is mentally fit, doing back handsprings, and reciting Virgil in Latin. They have declared Biden is definitely “with it.” They’ve been telling you not to believe your eyes, not to believe your ears, not to believe your brain, that the things that you are seeing are all fake; they’re just “cheap fakes.”

When clips surfaced of Biden wandering off into the woods, falling upstairs, or spacing out as he stared into the darkness like Simon and Garfunkel, they continued to proclaim that it was all fake. It was all in your minds, all in your brains, all in your head, because you were the crazy one.

After a Wall Street Journal article expressed concern over Biden having become “slower now,” a variety of Democratic commentators ran to praise Biden’s mental stability and fitness. A few include:

MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough: “Start your tape right now because I’m about to tell you the truth. And eff you if you can’t handle the truth. This version of Biden is the best Biden ever. In fact, I think he’s better than he’s ever been.”

Democratic Rep. Dan Goldman: “President Biden has a photographic memory. His understanding and mastery of a complicated geopolitical situation, remarkable.”

Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas: “He is sharp, intensely probing, and detail-oriented and focused.”

But during the presidential debate, we were all watching Biden fall apart in real time. And all these people had been telling us that we were crazy.

Abjectly destroyed by their own lies, they are now in a state of panic, not just because they think Trump is going to win or that it’s obvious to everyone that Joe Biden is senile.

They’re panicking because their own credibility just exploded into tiny bits of shrapnel last night.

All of which means the threat the media posed to the country is very real because it is clear someone else has, in fact, been running the country for the past several years. The person we saw on stage last night is not capable of running a country. He is not capable of walking to the bathroom.

Someone else has been running the country. It is not Joe Biden. It might be Jill Biden, Edith Wilson-style. Maybe it’s all the Obama holdovers.

Whoever it is, it is not Joe Biden. And you know who knows that?

All of America’s enemies. The world became so much more dangerous — regardless of the election — when the President of the United States performed like a befuddled Alzheimer’s patient at an early bird dinner at the nursing home.

Do you think Iran is more scared now or if Trump were president? Right now, Iran is going to accelerate the process of seeking a nuclear weapon dramatically before January. If China is thinking about blockading Taiwan, they’re going to do it before January. If Russia is considering a massive war move, they will do it before January because the President of the United States is non compos mentis, of unsound mind.

The media are actively seeking Biden to be removed from the ticket, which is insane. It is currently the end of June. Only July, August, September, and October remain. That’s it. There are four months until the election. And the people who are talking about removing the incumbent president and major party nominee from the ticket are not those of us on the Right; they are the people on the Left.

The rest of the world is looking. Our enemies are licking their chops. We are entering an exceptionally dangerous period in American history.

But Democrats won’t change course. They won’t change course because they’re ready to play. They’ve got the brake on the accelerator, but this sucker is headed for the cliff.

The federal government engaged in a stunning deception by secretly shaping a medical association’s transgender policy for political aims — then arguing in court that red states were not allowed to diverge from that policy, because it would be putting politics over scientific expertise.

The findings could deal a crippling blow to the Biden administration’s efforts to stop Republican-led states from banning the genital mutilation of children, and prove embarrassing for the judges — including an appointee of Donald Trump — who appeared to accept the argument that medical associations are above politics and should be deferred to by red-state politicians.

The Biden administration sued states including Tennessee, Alabama, and Kentucky, with transgender guidance from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) as its key piece of evidence. But the documents obtained via discovery in an Alabama lawsuit show that, in fact, the WPATH guidance was crafted in close collaboration with the Biden administration specifically with an eye to influence such lawsuits and block legislation.

Rachel Levine, a transgender Biden political appointee in the Department of Health and Human Services, pressured WPATH not to recommend that gender surgeries be limited to a specific age, fearing that spelling out the age — which would be low — would make it easy for citizens to object to them as radical and lead to a backlash.

“She liked the SOC-8 very much but she was very concerned that having ages (mainly for surgery) will affect access to health care for trans youth and maybe adults too. Apparently the situation In the USA is terrible and she and the Biden administration worried that having ages in the document will make matters worse. She asked us to remove them,” a WPATH email said.

WPATH complied, with officials noting that they were still suggesting surgeries for minors, just making it more difficult to get a “headline” out of it by obscuring it.

Some in WPATH chafed at letting politics govern a medical document, with one noting that it was a “global document” that should not be contorted for one country’s politics and saying, “I am a little surprised that we would be asked to do this after all the care and endless discussion by experts to reach this consensus on ages for surgeries.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

“I’m concerned about the headline: SOC 8 changes at last minute at request of USA official,” one wrote. Another said: “It is frustrating to have to have politics in our brains as we make these decisions. But it is what it is!”

After Tennessee state lawmakers voted to ban the gender conversion of minors, private individuals sued the state in federal court, and the Biden administration intervened, taking their side. The administration argued that “Standards of care for treating transgender youth diagnosed with gender dysphoria have been published by several well-established medical organizations, including the World Professional Association for Transgender Health” and, “The standards of care published by these organizations provide a framework that is based on the best available science and clinical experience.” Of 60 footnotes, eight cite directly to WPATH.

Judge Eli Richardson, a Trump appointee hearing the case in the Middle District of Tennessee, relied on WPATH’s SOC to block enforcement of the law, saying that the state only has a compelling interest in banning something if it is harmful, and WPATH says transgender procedures are safe.

“WPATH is the leading association of medical and mental health professionals in the treatment of transgender individuals. … The guidelines are based on scientific research and clinical experience,” he wrote. “The Court thus evaluates Defendants’ evidence in light of the prevailing standards of care and conclusions contained in the WPATH and Endocrine Society guidelines.”

Tennessee argued that children may regret not being able to procreate as a result of their gender surgeries, but Richardson relied on WPATH, writing, “Indeed, the WPATH guidelines explain that ‘there is evidence that fertility is still possible for individuals taking estrogen and testosterone…’ The Court is therefore not convinced that possible negative impacts on fertility warrant an outright ban on procedures used to treat gender dysphoria in minors.”

He noted that he is not the only judge who has made law based on the SOC, saying, “The Court finds further support for its reliance on information contained in the guidelines in the fact that several courts in cases similar to this have relied on these guidelines.”

Tennessee lawmakers similarly explained, as an example of harms averted by a ban, that people undergoing gender surgery are often unable to have sexual function, but Richardson said that the WPATH guidelines say that “gender affirming care can help [transgender individuals] improve their sexual function and increase their sexual pleasure and satisfaction.” (Richardson might have been embarrassed to know that in leaked documents, WPATH President Marci Bowers said she had never seen a single boy whose puberty was blocked achieve orgasm as a transgender woman.)

Richardson’s ruling was ultimately overturned by an appeals court. But the Supreme Court has agreed to take up the Tennessee case, a move that the DOJ is attempting to use to stall a similar ban in Alabama, where a lawsuit resulted in the unearthing of the WPATH documents.

Stanley Goldfarb, a longtime professor of medicine and chairman of Do No Harm, a group that opposes injecting leftist politics into medicine, told The Daily Wire, “It is shameful and wrong that Levine and allies manufactured the outcome they needed to corner politicians into endorsing dangerous and experimental medical treatments for children” and “used the power of the federal government to bully WPATH into disguising bad politics as independent, evidence-based science.”

Attorneys general in the conservative states argued that WPATH standards were based on flimsy science. The emails obtained in discovery in the Alabama case showed that WPATH members themselves agreed.

One reason some members were willing to give into Levine’s demands to remove recommended ages for surgery was because, they acknowledged, there was little medical evidence supporting WPATH’s recommendations in the first place. “I’m concerned about the headline: SOC 8 changes at last minute at request of USA official. The one reason I might be ok changing is we don’t have exact data/studies in recommending the ages,” one WPATH member said. “I do wonder how they will be defended in court cases, but it should be done.”

Jon Arcelus Alonso, the co-chair of the SOC initiative, chided WPATH President Marci Bowers for internally acknowledging that the group’s recommendations were often based on scant scientific evidence. Instead, Bowers said they were based on the “consensus” of members. “In the last few days I have heard from Marci that the ages don’t have any scientific backup. Our guidelines are not only evidence based but they are primarily consensus based. There are many recommendations in the SOC that don’t have direct evidence,” he wrote.

He urged WPATH to confidently profess to be the embodiment of medical science regardless. “We need to believe that we are the experts and we know what we are saying and no being shaken by others,” he added.

Another WPATH member dismissed the need for scientific precision, writing, “My hope with these SoC is that they land in such a way as to have serious effect in the law and policy settings that have affected us so much recently; even if the wording isn’t quite correct for people who have the background you and I have.”

Meanwhile, Loren Schechter, an expert witness in some of the lawsuits who was involved in WPATH, advocated for removing language in which the group characterized how strong the scientific evidence was for each of its statements.

“I am concerned about language such as ‘insufficient evidence,’ ‘limited data,’ etc… I say this from the perspective of current legal challenges in the US. Groups in the US are trying to claim that gender-affirming interventions are experimental and should only be performed under research protocols (this is based on two recent federal cases in which I am an expert witness). In addition, these groups already assert that research in this field is low quality (ie small series, retrospective, no controls, etc…). My specific concern is that this type of language (insufficient evidence, limited data, etc…) will empower these groups,” she wrote.