logo
Former Biden press secretary is ready to tell Americans the truth? Give me a break.

Former Biden press secretary is ready to tell Americans the truth? Give me a break.

USA Today6 hours ago

Former Biden press secretary is ready to tell Americans the truth? Give me a break. | Opinion The knives are now out inside the Democratic Party. And the party is bleeding, not only Americans' support and trust but also its last remaining drops of honesty and truth.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Karine Jean-Pierre talks exit from Democratic party in new book
Former White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre talks about leaving the Democratic party in her upcoming book slated for release in October.
The Democratic Party continues to self-destruct, and I am here for it.
Former White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has teased a tell-all memoir about former President Joe Biden and the administration she served for nearly three years. 'Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines' is stoking claims that Jean-Pierre is a grifter, profiting off her time in the administration by trashing the former president and the political party that gave her prominence.
Knives are out among Democrats for one of their own who has now betrayed them.
Like other books that have recently exposed details about Biden's poor health, Jean-Pierre's book raises questions about the White House cover-up that attempted to hide the president's mental and physical decline from voters.
It also calls into question Jean-Pierre's honesty: Why did she wait until now, when she can profit from it, to tell the truth about the former commander in chief?
Former White House colleagues turn on former Biden press secretary
Democrats are now a minority party in America. The GOP controls the White House, the Senate and the U.S. House along with a majority of governor's offices and state legislatures. The Democratic Party has lost Americans' trust because of its leaders' penchant for gaslighting, not just about Biden's health but also on issues like immigration, border security and the economy.
Jean-Pierre, who now claims to be an independent, certainly isn't helping her former colleagues rebuild that lost trust.
Details from the book are still sketchy, but Jean-Pierre should provide readers with an inside look at what happened after Biden's disastrous debate with Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump a year ago this month.
Jean-Pierre's coworkers have already reacted to the book with contempt.
"Former colleagues expressed confusion at how Jean-Pierre seemingly intends to paint Biden as a victim while pinning her own decision to leave the party on his 'broken' White House," Politico reported, citing multiple former Biden administration officials who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Opinion: Biden's cancer diagnosis raises the question: Was he ever in good enough health?
Caitlin Legacki, a Democratic strategist who worked on the Commerce Department's communications team during Biden's presidency, took umbrage with Jean-Pierre's assertion that the Democratic Party betrayed Biden.
'Kamala Harris and the entire Biden/Harris campaign did hero's work to avoid losing 400 electoral votes and giving Republicans a supermajority in Congress, which is what would have happened if he stayed on the ticket,' Legacki told Politico. 'It's more productive to focus on that, and thank Biden for doing the responsible thing by stepping aside, than it is to pretend this was an unwarranted act of betrayal.'
But party insiders continuing to squabble over whether a now former president was or was not betrayed by fellow Democrats entirely misses the larger point.
Opinion: Guess who Americans want to run the economy? Hint − it's not Democrats.
Far too many Democrats, Jean-Pierre included, worked hard to deceive Americans. Their willful lack of self-awareness about their gaslighting and dishonesty is why the party has shown no signs of recovering from the last disastrous election cycle.
Karine Jean-Pierre's book about Biden isn't the first
Jean-Pierre's book will be far from the first to address the deception at the heart of the Biden White House.
On May 20, journalists Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson released "Original Sin," which describes in detail Biden's cognitive decline and the mind-boggling efforts with which his inner circle and the Democratic Party tried to hide the truth from Americans.
Opinion: Texas woman's death would have been prevented if Biden had secured the border
Conservatives had long been suspicious about Biden's health, but journalists with White House access failed to ask tough questions then.
Now that it's too late to make a real difference, those who were silent when it mattered most are more than ready to profit from belated exposés about the former president's failing health.
The knives are now out inside the Democratic Party.
And the party is bleeding, not only Americans' support and trust but also its last remaining drops of honesty and truth.
Nicole Russell is an opinion columnist with USA TODAY. She lives in Texas with her four kids. Sign up for her newsletter, The Right Track, and get it delivered to your inbox.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Threats to Tesla's revenue are piling up
Threats to Tesla's revenue are piling up

Axios

time21 minutes ago

  • Axios

Threats to Tesla's revenue are piling up

Tesla faces fresh risks to a big income stream: sales of regulatory credits to other automakers under vehicle emissions and efficiency rules. Why it matters: Tesla's credit sales were $595 million last quarter and totaled $3.36 billion in the five quarters through Q1 of 2025. The credits are awarded to companies like Tesla that exceed emissions standards. Producers of gas-powered vehicles buy them to help meet various CO2 and mileage standards. The latest: Republicans on the Senate's commerce committee late last week proposed ending civil penalties under the Transportation Department's fuel economy rules. It's part of the committee's portion of the budget "reconciliation" bill — the top GOP and White House legislative priority. The provision would "modestly" cut auto prices by ending penalties on automakers that now "design cars to conform to the wishes of DC bureaucrats rather than consumers," a GOP summary states. The intrigue:"This Senate action would effectively end the market for CAFE credits," Chris Harto, a senior policy analyst at Consumer Reports, tells Axios via email. Dan Becker, who heads the Safe Climate Transport Campaign at the Center for Biological Diversity, noted: "Why buy credits if Trump gives you a get out of CAFE free card?" Driving the news: Separately, DOT on Friday issued an "interpretive rule" that bars consideration of EVs when it sets these mileage rules. It's a step toward crafting replacement standards, DOT said. This paves the way for less aggressive requirements — and less need for buying credits. State of play: Several buckets of credits benefit Tesla, the dominant U.S. EV seller. EPA emissions standards, Transportation Department fuel economy mandates, and California's ambitious clean cars program all provide opportunities. European emissions rules also generate credits. The big picture: The regulatory credit market was already facing risks before all the news late last week. EPA is planning to rescind Biden-era EPA carbon emissions rules for model years 2027 and onward. The House-passed reconciliation bill and the Senate GOP proposal would also nix them. And the House bill pulls back Biden-era DOT mileage rules. Both chambers have passed measures that end EPA's approval of California's auto emissions rules. Threat level: Potential loss of credit revenues comes at a perilous time for Tesla. Its sales have slumped in recent quarters, and CEO Elon Musk's rightward turn and alliance with Trump are among the reasons why, analysts say. The House plan ends $7,500 consumer purchase subsidies for EVs under the Democrats' 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. By the numbers: Credit revenues exceeded Tesla's overall profit last quarter — in other words, it would have been in the red without them. Yes, Q1 was atypically weak for Tesla, but consider Q4 of 2024, when Tesla reported $2.13 billion in profits that were helped along by $692 million in credit sales. In Q3, those numbers were $2.17B and $739M, respectively. Friction point: More broadly, the meltdown of Tesla CEO Elon Musk's relationship with Trump also creates new and unpredictable risks for the billionaire entrepreneur's business empire.

The Democrats Have an Authenticity Gap
The Democrats Have an Authenticity Gap

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

The Democrats Have an Authenticity Gap

The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Since President Donald Trump's victory last fall, Democrats have been trying to reengage with male voters, find a 'Joe Rogan of the left,' and even fund a whole left-leaning 'manosphere.' Young men—Rogan's core audience—were among the voting blocs that definitively moved toward the GOP in 2024, as a comprehensive postmortem by the data firm Catalist recently illustrated. In response, many powerful liberal figures have obsessively returned to the same idea: If we can't compete with their influential manosphere, why not construct our own? One high-profile progressive group, the Speaking With American Men project, is embarking on a two-year, $20 million mission to build 'year-round engagement in online and offline spaces Democrats have long ignored—investing in creators, trusted messengers, and upstream cultural content,' though its leaders say they're not looking for a liberal Rogan. Another effort, AND Media (AND being an acronym for 'Achieve Narrative Dominance'), has raised $7 million and, according to The New York Times, is looking to amass many times that amount over the next four years to back voices that will break with 'the current didactic, hall monitor style of Democratic politics that turns off younger audiences.' But in recent conversations with people in all corners of Democratic politics—far-left Bernie bros, seasoned centrists of the D.C. establishment, and rising new voices in progressive media—I came away with the sense that Democrats don't have simply a podcast-dude issue, one that could be solved with fresh money, new YouTube channels, and a bunch of studio mics. The party has struggled to capitalize on Trump's second-term missteps. It has yet to settle on a unifying message or vision of the future. Given this absence, such a tactical, top-down fix as deputizing a liberal Rogan looks tempting. The big problem is: That fix is both improbable and illogical. [Read: Democrats have a man problem] The party's 'podcast problem' is a microcosm of a much larger likability issue. 'We are a little bit, you know, too front-of-the-classroom,' Jon Lovett, a former Obama speechwriter and a co-host of Pod Save America, told me. In a sense, the show's production company, Crooked Media, already tested the 'make your own media ecosystem' proposition: Five years after its independent founding in 2017, Crooked announced that it had received funding from an investment firm run by the Democratic megadonor George Soros. Lovett seemed less skeptical of the new initiatives than other Democrats I interviewed, but also acknowledged some limitations. 'We believe how important it is to invest in progressive media,' Lovett told me. 'But in the same way you can't strategize ways to be authentic, you can't buy organic support.' The limits of this approach have already become clear. 'If you're trying to identify and cultivate and create this idea of a 'liberal Joe Rogan,' by definition, you're manufacturing something that's not authentic,' Brendan McPhillips, who served as campaign manager during John Fetterman's successful Pennsylvania Senate bid in 2022, told me. 'This fucking insane goose chase that these elite donors want to pursue to create some liberal oasis of new media is just really harebrained and misguided.' Joe Rogan, Theo Von, and other prominent voices in the existing manosphere are not inherently political and, even when they do touch politics, don't adhere to GOP or conservative orthodoxy. Although Rogan and Von did attend Trump's second inauguration, both have also been enamored with Senator Bernie Sanders, of Vermont; and recently, Von delivered an emotional monologue about the destruction in Gaza, drawing ire from many of his listeners on the right. In short, these guys are guided not by ideology, but by their own curiosity and gut instinct. Fluidity in belief is central to their appeal, and helps explain their cross-party success. Their audiences also blossomed over time, not after the stroke of a donor's pen. Throughout my interviews, I heard constant lamentations over the inescapable 'D.C. speak' in both Democratic politics and the left-leaning press. 'Normal people aren't out here talking about and paying attention to the kind of things that tie senior Democratic strategists up in knots,' McPhillips, who lives in Philadelphia, told me. You can't read white papers and study what goes on in the states from afar, he argued; you have to be there at eye level, living among real people, talking like a real person. What politicians have been advised to do for decades—stick to short cable-news hits, repeat the same few points over and over—are habits that today's voters find, in the words of a senior official who worked both in the Joe Biden White House and on the Kamala Harris campaign, 'repulsive.' Although this person, who asked for anonymity in order to speak freely about party strategy, discounted the premise of finding a 'Rogan of the left' as a fool's errand, they did say that, from now through 2028, Democrats should try to infiltrate sports-focused podcasts, paying particular attention to YouTube. This operative has come to view the current moment less as center-left versus center-right, and more as a larger battle of institutionalists versus anti-institutionalists: 'The psyche of a liberal in this moment is institution defense.' Also: fear. Too many Democrats, they believe, approach every public conversation and media interview with a level of trepidation about what they're saying—not in fear of Trump, but in fear of the wrath of their own potential voters. During her 2024 campaign, Harris reportedly feared the potential blowback within her own team from sitting down with Rogan. 'There was a backlash with some of our progressive staff that didn't want her to be on' his show, Jennifer Palmieri, who advised the second gentleman Doug Emhoff, said a week after the election. (Palmieri later revised her comments.) This year, some progressives have found a way to break through. Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who's proved capable of acing a hostile Fox News interview, has now grown facial scruff and has been popping up on the podcast circuit. Several Democrats I spoke with praised both Buttigieg's recent media tour—his appearance on the brash bro show Flagrant was singled out—and Sanders's ability to win over certain manosphere hosts. 'They're able to do that because they have the confidence and the skill to go on a program like that and just be themselves, and people believe what they say because they're being honest,' McPhillips told me. On the Fighting Oligarchy Tour, and in his frequent podcast appearances, Sanders has positioned himself as an accessible and righteously angry force. Faiz Shakir, Sanders's 2020 campaign manager and now an adviser to the senator, told me that Democrats 'are too far removed from organic and interesting conversations that people want to hear about, and have become too reliant on a one-way push at people about the things we want to tell them,' rather than actually listening to voters. Although he himself is a Harvard alumnus who lives and works in D.C., Shakir criticized the Democratic Party's perpetually buttoned-up ethos, the opposite of an unstructured podcast hang. He spoke about the power of anger—the defining emotion of the past political decade—as something that many Democrats don't know how to wield effectively. 'If you're angry, you're uncouth,' Shakir said. 'Calm down! That's not professional!' Unless Democrats stop worrying about politely conforming to pre-Trump communication mores, he believes the chasm with voters will continue to exist, hypothetical new-media ecosystem be damned. [John Hendrickson: Jake and Logan Paul hit the limits of the manosphere] Two things can be true at the same time: Many centrist Democrats may be too timid or genteel, and lack the moxie to speak with the anger that resonates with voters. But the cause of men's alienation from liberal politics cannot be distilled simply into perceptions of gentility. Nor is voicing rage a plausible way to hack the manosphere. When it comes to podcasts—the medium of the moment—a different emotion reigns: curiosity. Hosts such as Rogan and Von succeed across party lines not because they're indignant, but because they're inquisitive and, crucially, persuadable. Their talent is to seem real and relatable without trying. Throughout my conversations, I asked why liberals have not organically produced a figure of Rogan's magnitude and influence. No one really had an answer. But one thing became abundantly clear: No amount of strategic parsing will let Democrats fake their way through this moment. You can't buy authentic communication. Article originally published at The Atlantic

Letters to the Editor: When it comes to Trump immigration policy, 'the chaos and cruelty are the point'
Letters to the Editor: When it comes to Trump immigration policy, 'the chaos and cruelty are the point'

Yahoo

time22 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Letters to the Editor: When it comes to Trump immigration policy, 'the chaos and cruelty are the point'

To the editor: I couldn't agree more with guest contributor David J. Bier that immigration, like many other things in the country, should be subject to the rule of law ('Voters wanted immigration enforcement, but not like this,' June 5). Prior to the Trump era, the problem was that those responsible for determining immigration policy couldn't reach consensus on what the policy and the law should be. Well, maybe they could have if Donald Trump hadn't intervened to block proposed bipartisan immigration legislation, just to keep the issue alive for the 2024 presidential campaign. Against that backdrop, I'm baffled that Bier doesn't point out that, for President Trump, the chaos and the cruelty are the point. June Ailin Sewell, Marina del Rey .. To the editor: The article raises an important point: Support for border enforcement doesn't justify extreme or harmful policies. Many voters expected a more thoughtful, humane approach, not one that detains families or rushes deportations without considering individual circumstances. These methods don't reflect the values of fairness and dignity most Americans still believe in. People say that tough enforcement is about following the law, but without compassion, the law does more harm than intended. Enforcing immigration policies should involve smart case-by-case judgment and not punishment for everyone. A better approach would balance safety with empathy and recognize that real solutions come from true understanding, not fear. Patricia Geronimo, Redondo Beach This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store