After leaving out-of-wedlock grandchild out of White House Christmas display, stockings mysteriously disappear


The following contains editorial content written by a retired Police Chief and current staff writer for Law Enforcement Today. 

WASHINGTON, DC- Ah yes, Joe Biden…family man…man of the people…good old “Grampa Joe.”

Wait, what’s this? Joe…or in this case DOCTOR Jill conveniently left out a Christmas stocking of one of the Bidens’ grandchildren for her highly touted (by the mainstream media) Christmas decorations.

Wait, what? One of the grandchildren was apparently ignored by God’s gift to first ladies? Why is this you may ask?

Ahh…it’s the out of wedlock grandchild fathered by crackhead Hunter Biden to a former stripper, Lunden Alexis Roberts.

Then, to add further mystery to why the stocking for the out-of-wedlock grandchild, Hunter Biden’s three-year-old granddaughter, Navy Jones Roberts, was missing, the stockings were mysteriously removed from the fireplace in the State Dining room while Joe stumbled and mumbled through a speech on the economy Friday, Breitbart News reports.

Earlier in the week, Jill Biden…oops DOCTOR Jill Biden revealed the Christmas decorations in the State Dining room, including Christmas stockings for six of the Biden grandchildren, part of what the Bidens called the “Gift of Family” theme.

As the Today Show breathlessly reported, the display of Christmas stockings for the Bidens’ grandchildren—Naomi, 27; Finnegan, 21; Maisy, 20; Natalie, 17; Robert Hunter Biden II, 15; and Beau, 1—were hanging on the mantle in the dining room.

At least until some began to notice one grandchild’s stocking appeared to be missing, that of Hunter Biden’s love child Navy.

In fact, the Today Show story only addressed the six grandchildren, omitting that of the out-of-wedlock three-year old. “Family has always paid a pivotal role for the Bidens,” the story read.

“Their six grandchildren, who call the 46th president ‘Pop,’ have shared the spotlight since Biden began his campaign.” [emphasis added]

It isn’t clear why the White House decided to remove the grandchildren’s Christmas stockings from the fireplace for Biden’s Friday speech on the horrendous job numbers for November. One cannot discount however them trying to make it “out of sight, out of mind” after the controversy arose over the missing stocking.

The now-three-year-old has been another source of controversy for Hunter Biden, who initially denied being the father of Navy and claimed he had “no recollection” of meeting Lunden Roberts, despite her being on the payroll of his consulting firm during her 2018 pregnancy.

The New York Post reported that text messages they reviewed showed she was removed from the company’s insurance plan after she gave birth to Navy.

A DNA test showed that Hunter Biden was the child’s father, and Roberts filed a suit for paternity and child support.

It was reported earlier this year by the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that neither Hunter nor President “Pop” have not seen the little girl since she was born. Pretty good father and grandfather there.

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity

For more on DOCTOR Jill, we invite you to:


WASHINGTON D.C. – Fox News Channel’s Tucker Carlson has a hot take on the mainstream media’s new first lady. 

Monday, the host of the popular show “Tucker Carlson Tonight” compared Dr. Jill Biden’s title to the soda, Dr. Pepper, and to the fallen-from-grace comedian and now inmate, Dr. Bill Cosby. 

His comments followed the controversial article in the Wall Street Journal about the credential of future first lady Jill Biden and her use of the “doctor” moniker. It read: 

“’Dr. Jill Biden’ sounds and feels fraudulent, not to say a touch comic.

“Your degree is, I believe, an Ed.D., a doctor of education, earned at the University of Delaware through a dissertation with the unpromising title ‘Student Retention at the Community College Level: Meeting Students’ Needs.’

“A wise man once said that no one should call himself ‘Dr.’ unless he has delivered a child. Think about it, Dr. Jill, and forthwith drop the doc.” 

Penned by op-ed writer, Joseph Epstein, both he and the media outlet have received heavy backlash over the column. 

Carlson was reacting to that backlash when he addressed the issue this week. 

According to Breitbart, Carlson began by saying: 

“Well, one of the hallmarks of a third-world autocracy is you absolutely cannot under any circumstances make fun of the fake titles of the people in charge give themselves.

“The Wall Street Journal the other day, broke that rule, and they raised the question, Dr. Jill Biden? What is she a doctor of? We will tell you what happened next.” 

From there, Carlson rolled a video clip showing “The View” host Whoopi Goldberg suggesting Jill Biden be nominated to become the Surgeon General. In the clip, she said: 

“I’m hoping Dr. Jill becomes the Surgeon General. Joe Biden’s wife because she’s, you know, he would never do it, but she thinks, yes, she’s a hell of a doctor.” 

To be clear, there is no mistaking that Dr. Jill Biden is not a medical doctor. Even the first line of her Wikipedia biography calls her an “American educator.” 

That’s exactly the point Carlson launches into next. He said: 

“Yes, Jill Biden is one hell of a doctor says Karen. She should be Surgeon General. Just don’t ask her to commit surgery. Don’t ask for advice in your coronary artery disease because she’s not actually a physician.

“She’s a Doctor of Education, which means basically nothing.” 

That’s quickly followed by Carlson’s mic drop moment. He goes on to say: 

“Jill Biden is not a doctor. No. Maybe in the same sense Dr. Pepper is. In 2007, at the age of 55, she got a Doctorate in Education. So she’s got the same degree as Dr. Bill Cosby.” 

He even went on to describe the history of her chosen moniker, saying: 

“In 2009, back when America was a lot more honest, Joe Biden explained why his wife got that degree quote, ‘She said, I was so sick of the mail coming to Senator and Mrs. Biden, I wanted to get mail address to Dr. and Senator Biden.’ That’s the real reason she got her doctorate.” 

The woman of the hour struck back hours after the column dropped, before the conversation surrounding her title reached its highest volume. 

Jill Biden posted to Twitter on Sunday: 

“Together, we will build a world where the accomplishments of our daughters will be celebrated, rather than diminished.” 

The social media sphere was quick to comment back. 

One Twitter user, who goes by Mr. Tom, replied: 

“Unless they want to play sports in which case your party would prefer to let boys pretending to be girls dominate and destroy their accomplishments.”

Another user named Carrie Wilburn posted in response: 

“My step mother is a doctor. You know, a real MD… someone who can treat sick patients.”

Do you want to join our private family of first responders and supporters?  Get unprecedented access to some of the most powerful stories that the media refuses to show you.  Proceeds get reinvested into having active, retired and wounded officers, their families and supporters tell more of these stories.  Click to check it out.

LET Unity


Former lecturer removed from university website after criticizing Jill Biden’s ‘Dr.’ title

December 14, 2020

EVANSTON, IL Some dissecting of semantics that was featured in a Wall Street Journal editorial has resulted in a former Northwestern University lecturer being removed from the university’s website.

The author of this editorial had offended the proverbial masses – on Twitter at least – for speculating on whether Jill Biden should be presenting herself as “Dr. Jill Biden.”

Joseph Epstein, the man behind the WSJ op-ed, had been listed as an “emeritus lecturer of English” on NU’s website. Except, the university seemed to scrub him from its website and issued a statement regarding the matter:

“The department is aware that a former adjunct lecturer who has not taught here in nearly 20 years has published an opinion piece that casts unmerited aspersion on Dr. Jill Biden’s rightful public claiming of her doctoral credentials and expertise.

“The department rejects this opinion as well as the diminishment of anyone’s duly-earned degrees in any field, from any university.”

The offending op-ed was titled “Is There a Doctor in the White House? Not if You Need an M.D.” which suggested that Jill Biden consider dropping the “Dr.” before her name.

That is because, in Epstein’s opinion, Jill Biden is not what might come to many people’s minds when thinking of a doctor.

For clarity, Jill Biden does have a doctorate in education known as an EdD, which is the sort of degree a school principal or school superintendent might possess.

Epstein’s op-ed completely acknowledges the existence of Jill Biden’s degree, but said that the practice of possessors of such degrees referring to themselves as doctors is somewhat tacky:

“In contemporary universities, in the social sciences and humanities, calling oneself Dr. is thought bush league.”

Epstein also alleged that Jill Biden presenting herself as “Dr. Biden” also “feels fraudulent,” not to mention “a touch comedic.”

The op-ed alluded to the fact that if Jill Biden is not the sort of doctor one might see in a hospital, then maybe presenting the title can be a tad misleading:

“A wise man once said that no one should call himself ‘Dr.’ unless he has delivered a child. Think about it, Dr. Jill, and forthwith drop the doc.”

Apparently, the comments Epstein made in his op-ed did not resonate well with folks. Jill Biden’s spokesperson Michael LaRosa called the article “sexist”:

“[James Taranto], you and the [Wall Street Journal] should be embarrassed to print the disgusting and sexist attack on [Dr. Jill Biden] running on the [Wall Street Journal] opinion page. If you had any respect for women at all you would remove this repugnant display of chauvinism from your paper and apologize to her.”

Whether or not Epstein was legitimately conveying a form of veiled sexism through the op-ed is anyone’s guess, as there were no overt expressions in the article that specifically denigrated women.

Ironically, the WSJ’s own Paul Gigot defended the op-ed written by Epstein in a follow-up article he ran for the outlet and even referred to the “Biden team” as acting in a “very Trumpian” manner.

The reference to Biden’s camp acting in a “Trumpian” way, as Gigot described it, was “the left’s version of Donald Trump’s ‘enemy of the people’ tweets” that aimed at discrediting media scrutiny.

Gigot’s response proclaimed that whenever President Trump characterized the press in not-so endearing terms, the entire who’s-who of the press went to attack President Trump.

But when an outlet is the least bit critical of anything Biden-related, the Biden camp then enlists members of the press to attack the non-conforming news outlet responsible for the bad press. Gigot wrote:

“The difference is that when Mr. Trump rants against the press, the press mobilizes in opposition. In this case, the Biden team was able to mobilize almost all of the press to join in denouncing Mr. Epstein and the Journal.

“This strategy worked to protect Joe and Hunter Biden during the campaign, so it’s no surprise that they’re keeping it up as they head to the White House.”

From what Gigot wrote in the follow-up piece, the Biden camp had better buckle up, proverbially at least. He said the WSJ is not going to water-down criticism of the Bidens just because it offends people:

“These pages aren’t going to stop publishing provocative essays merely because they offend the new administration or the political censors in the media and academe. And since it’s a time to heal, we’ll give the Biden crowd a mulligan for their attacks on us.”

Editor note: In 2020, we saw a nationwide push to “defund the police”.  While we all stood here shaking our heads wondering if these people were serious… they cut billions of dollars in funding for police officers.  And as a result, crime has skyrocketed – all while the same politicians who said “you don’t need guns, the government will protect you” continued their attacks on both our police officers and our Second Amendment rights.

And that’s exactly why we’re launching this national crowdfunding campaign as part of our efforts to help “re-fund the police”.

For those looking for a quick link to get in the fight and support the cause, click here.

Want to make sure you never miss a story from Law Enforcement Today?  With so much “stuff” happening in the world on social media, it’s easy for things to get lost.  

Make sure you click “following” and then click “see first” so you don’t miss a thing!  (See image below.)  Thanks for being a part of the LET family!
Facebook Follow First
Submit a Correction
Related Posts