New York – Just when the media world thought the drama over President Donald Trump’s health and energy was cooling down, Katy Tur threw gasoline on the fire — and ignited a full-blown media earthquake. In a scathing response to The New York Times’ latest report alleging Trump shows “signs of fatigue,” the MS NOW anchor didn’t hold back: according to Tur, Trump is doing much more than his predecessor Joe Biden ever did.Tur Fires Back at NYT: “He Does Much More Than Biden Did”
On a podcast episode this Wednesday, Tur acknowledged that the president appears “different than he was”: his energy seems lower, speech slower, and yes — sometimes he even seems to nod off during Oval Office meetings.
But rather than join the chorus of concern, Tur pushed back hard. “I think, not to get on the bandwagon and to push back a little bit, he is doing much more than certainly Joe Biden did,” she claimed. According to her, critics fixate on decrements relative to Trump’s own past — instead of evaluating his activity based on what almost any past president accomplished.
Tur pointed out that unlike many earlier presidents, Trump “is out there in a way that past presidents haven’t even been out there.” He continues to travel — including overseas trips — makes frequent media appearances, and has remained visible on television. Even if some rallies and domestic travel have decreased, Tur insists the president is “still very much mobile … still engaged.”
To draw a sharp contrast, Tur recalled a moment from the Biden years: she attended a White House Christmas party where Biden gave a speech so mumbled that “you could not understand a word he was saying.” Then she added pointedly: “It’s different.”
When asked “Is Trump the new Biden?”, Tur didn’t hesitate — according to her, such comparisons are overblown. She invoked comedian references mocking “Biden Brain,” implying that criticism of Trump’s vitality reflects bias more than objective assessment.
Media Storm, Outrage, and Fireworks
Unsurprisingly, Tur’s remarks detonated across media and public spheres. Conservatives and pro‑Trump outlets hailed her intervention as a long‑overdue pushback against what they view as a partisan hit from the Times. Some argued the NYT’s “fatigue” narrative was just another attempt to frame the 79‑year‑old president as unfit — and Tur exposed it for what they call a “cheap hit.”
But critics accuse Tur of playing fast and loose with facts. Many echoed The New York Times’ original concerns: shorter workdays, slower speeches, fewer public appearances, and even alleged dozing during meetings might well matter — no matter how many TV appearances or candy‑handouts Trump does. Some say Tur’s defense reduces leadership fitness to mere “visibility,” downplaying mental sharpness, stamina, and judgment.
Meanwhile, more measured commentators voiced unease about the trend toward comparisons: using past leaders as benchmarks — especially when age and health are involved — might distort public expectations and downplay genuine signs of decline.
So What’s The Real Story?
Is Trump truly “more engaged than Biden ever was”? Maybe. Tur’s logic resonates for those who see public presence and constant media access as the core of leadership. In her telling, the president remains active, seen, and involved — more so than many past presidents at his age.
But if you measure leadership by stamina, consistency, clarity, and long‑haul performance, then the concerns flagged by The New York Times — and echoed by many analysts — still stand. Shorter workdays, slower speech, fewer public events, even occasional nodding off: these are hard to ignore.
In other words: depending on your yardstick, you’ll draw very different conclusions. And perhaps that’s precisely why the drama continues.