MSNBC host Joe Scarborough faced a virtual onslaught after he claimed in a Wednesday morning X post that President Joe Biden was “sharper” than former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA).

Scarborough began with that comparison — between Biden and McCarthy — and then doubled down, saying that Biden was in better shape than any Republican House Speaker with whom he’d spoken in the last three decades.

“I have spent a good bit of time talking to Kevin McCarthy through the years and hours with Biden in 2024. There is no comparison. Biden is far sharper, more intellectually curious, and far more insightful on global affairs than any House GOP speaker I have met over 30 years,” Scarborough said.

I have spent a good bit of time talking to Kevin McCarthy through the years and hours with Biden in 2024. There is no comparison. Biden is far sharper, more intellectually curious, and far more insightful on global affairs than any House GOP speaker I have met over 30 years.

— Joe Scarborough (@JoeNBC) June 5, 2024

Critics immediately pointed out the fact that Scarborough’s assessment directly contradicted not only most of their own observations, but also the determination of Special Counsel Robert Hur, who had only opted not to charge Biden for allegedly mishandling classified documents because he would likely be seen as just a forgetful old man.

“The entire justification for him not being charged with federal crimes was that he’s too old and forgetful. Sounds like he’s good to be indicted,” @sunnyright posted.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

The entire justification for him not being charged with federal crimes was that he’s too old and forgetful.

Sounds like he’s good to be indicted! https://t.co/J0aXZni9vx

— Sunny (@sunnyright) June 5, 2024

“They keep telling us how sharp he is and Biden keeps letting them down because we all have eyes and ears,” Stephen Miller added.

They keep telling us how sharp he is and Biden keeps letting them down because we all have eyes and ears. https://t.co/S1XcXlDGSY

— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) June 5, 2024

“Keep in mind, Joe Biden is the worst foreign policy mind in American history. His career is a 50-year-long string of failures. That Joe Scarborough finds him ‘insightful on global affairs’ says a lot about him,” RedState’s Bonchie posted.

Keep in mind, Joe Biden is the worst foreign policy mind in American history. His career is a 50-year-long string of failures.

That Joe Scarborough finds him “insightful on global affairs” says a lot about him. https://t.co/kr6vpkl0Ai

— Bonchie (@bonchieredstate) June 5, 2024

“Democrats who met with Biden privately voiced concerned yesterday about his cognitive decline. Two-thirds of American voters believe Biden’s age and acuity is a major issue in this campaign. Yet…” Joe Concha said.

Democrats who met with Biden privately voiced concerned yesterday about his cognitive decline. Two-thirds of American voters believe Biden’s age and acuity is a major issue in this campaign.

Yet… https://t.co/JU3uIsBM7v

— Joe Concha (@JoeConchaTV) June 5, 2024

Noam Blum turned the argument on Scarborough, saying, “If Biden loses, a lot of stories are going to come out about how bad his state was prior to the election as part of the finger pointing game, and comments like this are going to look so utterly slimy and dishonest in retrospect.”

If Biden loses, a lot of stories are going to come out about how bad his state was prior to the election as part of the finger pointing game, and comments like this are going to look so utterly slimy and dishonest in retrospect. https://t.co/dl3yMBeKUI

— Noam Blum (@neontaster) June 5, 2024

A former Yale University student who was accused of sexual assault but acquitted at trial is suing 15 women’s organizations he says defamed him after the verdict.

Saifullah Khan was found not guilty in March 2018 but was subsequently expelled from Yale anyway. He sued the university and his accuser – and is now suing women’s organizations he says defamed him in post-verdict filings.

While suing Yale and his accuser, who has not been named in court or the media, the 15 organizations applied to file an amicus brief with the Connecticut Supreme Court. The filing included a proposed brief, which Khan says included “several false and defamatory statements.”

Those statements include the opening sentence, which stated as fact, “When Jane Doe was in college, the Plaintiff raped her,” even though Khan was acquitted. The brief also claimed that “her rapist invented an ambiguity in Connecticut law and subjected her to years of costly and traumatic retaliatory litigation.”

Throughout the brief, the organizations referred to the accuser as a “victim” and noted in a footnote that “Jane Doe was raped…”

When Khan and his attorney objected to the organizations’ application to file the amicus brief, the groups defended their claims as “supported by the record.”

The Connecticut Supreme Court disagreed with the claim, denying the application but allowing them to refile. In its denial, the court argued that any refiling must be “shorn of all facts not supported by the record.”

When the organizations refiled their brief, the opening sentence was changed to say: “Jane Doe, while a student at Yale University, engaged in Yale’s legally-obligated reporting and disciplinary procedures to report that plaintiff had sexually assaulted her.”

As Khan notes in his lawsuit, the original proposed brief is still permanently available on the Connecticut Supreme Court website.

Khan filed professional ethics complaints against Jennifer Becker, an attorney associated with the initial brief. When answering the complaint, Becker apologized for the language, saying, “I first want to acknowledge and apologize for the offending language that was included in the draft amicus brief.” She added that her language “was over-zealous and unnecessarily forceful.” She also directly addressed the use of the word “rape,” saying it was used “without qualification that it was an allegation…”

She claimed, however, that “any overzealousness on my part was ameliorated by the Court’s order and there is no resulting harm to Mr. Khan.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

Khan disagrees and is suing Becker and 15 women’s organizations who signed on to the amicus brief: Jewish Women International, Legal Momentum, The Fierberg National Law Group, Chicago Alliance Against Sexual Exploitation, Connecticut Coalition Against Domestic Violence, Futures Without Violence, Advocates For Youth, National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, National Crime Victim Law Institute, National Network to End Domestic Violence, National Women’s Law Center, Network for Victim Recovery, Sanctuary for Families, and the Women’s Law Project.

The Daily Wire previously reported on the details of Khan’s case. In March 2018, a jury found him not guilty in a court of law. While some could argue that “not guilty” does not mean “innocent,” some jurors said they perceived him as innocent after the trial.

“He’s innocent, and the facts prove it,” said Elise Wiener, an alternate juror who saw the same evidence as the other jurors. “He was acquitted because he deserved to be acquitted and the prosecutor should never have brought the case in the first place.”