Skip to main content
BoomMag: Readers and Fans
Advertise With Us Newsletter

WLT Report WLT Report

Advertise With Us Newsletter
We may receive compensation from affiliate partners for some links on this site. Read our full Disclosure here.

BIZARRE: Joe Biden BITES Babies While Jill Parades Around In Panda Costume at WH Halloween Party

On Wednesday night, the White House held a Halloween party.

And, it was extremely bizarre, bordering right on disturbing…

First, Joe Biden bit a baby, who was dressed up as a turkey.

See for yourself:

Later, he appeared to suck on another baby’s toe?

Just watch for yourself:

ADVERTISEMENT

The New York Post commented on this:

That’s not real poultry, Joe.

President Biden playfully bit a stable of adorable, dressed-up tots during a Halloween celebration at the White House on Wednesday night.

In a series of awkward interactions, Biden, 81, pretended to chomp down on infant after infant — including a child dressed up as a chicken.

The baby giggled in response to the commander-in-chief nibbling on their thigh just as the theme song for “Jaws” began to play, according to video of the celebration.

The baby’s mom also didn’t seem to mind — as she and the Democrat made small talk afterward.

Meanwhile, Jill Biden was parading around in a full panda costume…

From Newsweek:

ADVERTISEMENT

Videos of President Joe Biden playfully biting several costumed babies at the White House Halloween party have gone viral on social media.

The Halloween event transformed the White House South Lawn into a lively setting with decorations and activities for families, local students, and children of military families.

While Jill Biden, wearing a full-body panda suit, handed out copies of the children’s book 10 Spooky Pumpkins, President Biden greeted a line of children and parents and distributed candy in signature White House wrappers.

Photographers and videographers captured moments of Biden bending down to interact with the children, including playfully biting the leg of a baby dressed as a turkey.

The president also put the toe of a child in an ice cream cone costume in his mouth and nibbled at a third baby wearing a blue dress.

Now, some might say that Jill Biden’s costume was just an innocent, if rather strange, choice for a Halloween costume.

But, it’s a very odd choice, and one that’s not without a potential hidden meaning — especially when it comes to children and abuse.

MJTruthUltra explained:

ADVERTISEMENT

In case you don’t know, “Panda Eyes” is a term rumored to be used in sick, Satanic, pedophilic circles to refer to some very disgusting, evil acts they perform on children.

I won’t go into too much detail here. The information is online, and you can look it up yourself.

But, Shadow of Ezra recalled:

I really hope that Jill’s choice of attire was just a coincidence.

We can’t say it wasn’t just her idea of a fun, silly costume.

As for Joe biting babies…well, that’s just straight-up weird.

Speaking of pandas, did you know there’s a very good case to be made that they aren’t even real?

Yes, I know it sounds weird but read this:

FAKED: Chinese Zoo Admits Pandas Were Actually “Painted Dogs”

FAKED: Chinese Zoo Admits Pandas Were Actually "Painted Dogs"

You know we love a good "conspiracy theory" around here....

ADVERTISEMENT

Why?

Because in my experience almost every single one I've ever looked into has ended up being true!

For example, the alleged Moon Landings that we allegedly pulled off on the very first try in 1969 with a mere fraction of the computing power we have today, and yet we've just decided to never go back since 1972.  Weird!

Of course one of the biggest and first red-pills for most people is 9/11.

And so many more!

But one that I have steered away from covering (until now) is the "conspiracy theory" saying pandas aren't real.

In case you haven't heard that one before, yes it is a "real" conspiracy theory in the sense that a lot of people believe it is true that they're not real.

As with every single other conspiracy theory, it sounds stupid and insane....until you start looking into it.  And then the more you dig, the more you start to say "wait a minute, maybe this isn't as crazy as it sounds!"

And that's what happened to me with this one....and might happen to you too by the end of this article!

First, let me tell you why I'm even covering this at all right now...it's because a Chinese Zoo was just forced to admit that their pandas were actually "painted dogs" after one started barking.

True story, you can't make this stuff up!

Take a look:

More here from Collin Rugg:

NEW: China zoo forced to admit the truth after one of their “pandas” started panting and barking.

The Shanwei zoo admits they painted dogs white and black to make them look like pandas.

The zoo initially tried claiming that the dogs were a unique breed of pandas called “panda dogs.”

It was later discovered that the “pandas” were Chow Chows who were dyed with white and black paint.

As you can see, Twitter has attached a "Community Note" to that Tweet making the following "Fact Check":

Hmmmm, ok.

But it does beg the question why a Zoo in China would need to fake this in the first place?

There are reportedly over 1,800 pandas living in the wild in China, couldn't the Zoo just grab a few?

But I'm only just scratching the surface, now let's dig in to see why some people are not convinced pandas are real at all....

I'm not saying that's what I think, I'm just saying I'm going to show you the best evidence out there to support the claim that SOME people think pandas aren't real.

Let's start here, with the fact that the "painted dogs" is not the first time this has happened.

It also happened recently back in May:

From the NY Post back in May 2024:

A zoo in China sparked all out panda-monium after they dressed dogs as pandas because they didn’t have the genuine artifact, as seen in viral photos.

The fake pandas, unveiled May 1 at the Taizhou Zoo in Jiangsu Province, were actually Chow Chow dogs — a big-haired breed from Northern China, Jam Press reported.

Zoo officials reportedly trimmed their mane and dyed their faces black to look like China’s iconic bamboo-eating bear.

They then put the so-called “panda dogs” on display in an enclosure every day from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m., attracting throngs of people despite the obvious bamboo-zlement, per the sanctuary’s staffers.

When asked why they had the canines engage in panda cosplay, a rep explained, “There are no panda bears at the zoo and we wanted to do this as a result.”

Many visitors accused the sanctuary of animal cruelty; however, zoo officials insist that the dogfishing scheme isn’t harmful to the animals.

“People also dye their hair,” rationalized the spokesperson. “Natural dye can be used on dogs if they have long fur.”

Many social media users were on board with these canines in panda’s clothing with one fan writing, “They are very small to run that fast! I think they’re lovely.”

“I think they’re cute,” said another.

A third quipped, “Well that’s an extreme way to get your dogs cared for while you’re at work lol.” [sic]

Giving dogs panda makeovers is nothing new.

A decade ago, pups dressed as the bamboo-eating bears became such a haute item that pet stores couldn’t meet the demand.

Ok, so at this point we know that at least two times in the last 6 months, Chinese Zoos (which should have access to plenty of panda bears) have been caught creating fake panda dogs....is that all you got Noah?

Hardly.

Let's go deep into why so many people are convinced Pandas aren't real:

Perhaps the man best associated with the "pandas aren't real" conspiracy theory is my friend, comedian Owen Benjamin.

Owen has been driving this train for a long time now, so I have to go to him first.

Here is a short clip where Owen says the whole thing is just one big joke right out in the open, right in your face....

Hard to argue with him on this point, watch this:

Ok, so if you can't see that clip for some reason, he shows how "scientists" claim pandas have excellent camouflage for their environments, but then when you actually look it's the worst possible camouflage ever....

It's a big fat joke right in your face!

You mean that giant white and black animal is "camouflaged" amongst the brown tree and green grass?

LOL...gee, I can barely see it!  I wish someone would circle it with a big red circle so I can find the camouflaged panda:

Ok, ok....that all you got Noah?

No, I was just slowly getting warmed up.

Now let me really hit you with the stuff that started to blow my mind.

Watch this second clip with Owen Benjamin just laying it all out in rapid fire.

Watch first and then I'll break down (and confirm) each one:

Backup here if needed:

Ok, so now let me take them one at a time and start to blow your mind a bit....

Because I assumed I would just Fact-Check this and it would easily be proven wrong.

Spoiler alert: I've confirmed almost everything he said.

Let's start with this:

They were not "discovered" until the late 1800s

This one kind of blew my mind.  Surely they've been around in China for centuries right?

Well, actually this one is Fact-Checked TRUE.

Here's Grok:

So they allegedly are native to China and have been around for centuries and yet it took a French man to "discover" them in 1869?

What?

They're not in Chinese art

Ok, this is another one that seems pretty damning for the concept of pandas being real.

The Chinese history and culture is EXTENSIVE....

They made art for centuries, and often used nature as inspiration.

Surely there are hundreds of examples of pandas in historic Chinese art at any point prior to 1869, right?

No.

Dozens?

No.

One?

No.

They're not in Chinese literature

If they're not in any art, surely they're in the books, right?

ChatGPT tries to claim that reference to an animal named "mo" could be a panda, but then admits it's actually the tapir:

In fact, the more I "chatted" ChatGPT it became clear that there was no clear reference to a panda in any Chinese literature, so I asked it point blank and it confirmed there are none:

The are claimed to live in the wild alongside tigers and bears, and yet they have no ability to defend themselves, can't navigate small hills, they're constantly falling over, and they somehow survived all these years out in the wild? 

This is just common sense, no ability for me to "Fact Check" this one.

But I have to say, watching them constantly fall down and have no known self-defense mechanisms, it does appear to strain credulity to assume these things survived for centuries in the wild.

A group of pandas is called an "embarrassment"

Fact-Checked true, look it up for yourself.

Again, the joke is hidden in plain sight, right in front of your face!

More here:

Ok folks, as usual I'm not going to try and convince you!

Heck...I'm not even entirely sure what I believe about them at this point.

It appears as though perhaps the most likely outcome is they were "engineered" (via breeding) by the Chinese in the late 1800s?

Or they're just entirely fake altogether, I don't know.

My head is spinning right now, but I'd love to hear what you think!

Can you disprove any of the Facts I listed above?

If those Facts are indeed true, then.....are pandas real?

Drop a comment below, I have no doubt this is going to be a LIVELY comments section!

, , ,

 

Join the conversation!

Please share your thoughts about this article below. We value your opinions, and would love to see you add to the discussion!

log in

Forgot password?

reset password

Back to
log in
Leave a comment
Thanks for sharing!
Thanks for sharing!
We invite you to become a WLT Report insider. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we'll make sure to keep you in the loop.