I just listened to a confusing interview with an Axios reporter on Noodles.

"The reason why this has been such a shock...inside the White House is because the Joe Biden they saw Thursday night was unrecognizable to them." To the thems "inside the White House". (?)

"But as many of them have said to me, this could not have been the first time that he had acted that way. In the minds of a lot of people in the White House they are sad because of how this could affect the election. They're sad for him because there's great affection for him. But they're also.angry because they feel that this side of Joe Biden must have been known to some of his close aides. And they hid that part of it not just from them but from voters and from Democrats and from donors."

Pause. So the distinction the Axios guy is drawing is between "close aides" and others, but still others "inside the White House". I was initially puzzled by that. I would have thought anybody working "inside the White House" is a "close aide". Okay, I understand now, there's close and then there's CLOSE. Still woulda thought those INSIDE THE WHITE HOUSE would have seen SOMETHING. Call me ignorant. Unpause.

"I think a lot of the aides expected that Joe Biden, after doing a week of debate prep, everyone I've talked to said that he seemed good. He seemed fine."

"Aides". Okay, not "close aides" but are you really parsing aides from close aides. I can see, now that I think of it, distinguishing "close aides" from "people who work in the White House", but all aides and close aides are people who work in the White House.

Now, here's where the Axios guy goes Alice in Wonderland:

"And I think the fact that they let him debate is sort of what's driving this anger."

If he hadn't debated "this side of Joe Biden" would have remained hidden from the grunts inside the White House, from voters, from Democrats, from donors. And what do you mean that "they let him debate"? They should have refused him permission? "No, no Joey, you're too tired, you have to go to bed." 

"If they even knew that this sort of Joe Biden was going to show up, even if it was a possibility, I think there's a lot of anger within Biden World that any of the close aides let him go out on stage just because of the election, because of how this could affect his legacy."

Second time he's mentioned that the grunts are angry "because of the election". It's Orwellian. Shouldn't "this side of Joe Biden" affect the election? Why are you "angry" about that? WE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW!

Second time he's said that the WH grunts are pissed because the "close aides" should have forbade the president permission to debate. Define "close aides". They're NANNIES is what you're saying.

"And I would also say that part of the reason that Joe Biden debated is that Joe Biden wanted to debate."

Right! There's the personal agency that has been missing. Biden challenged Trump to the debate! "Make my day," he actually said that. The buck stops with the president, when it's the president debating, not with his close aides. Strange interview.