New book exposes how top Biden comms staffer was 'tip of the spear' covering up Biden's cognitive decline
Print Close
By Andrew Miller, Cameron Cawthorne
Published May 22, 2025
A new book sheds light on former White House deputy press secretary Andrew Bates' role in defending President Joe Biden's mental acuity, which the book alleges was done without the White House staff having the full picture of the president's actual condition.
"Some of Bates's colleagues believed that Biden's inner circle took advantage of his loyalty and told him to deny things they knew were true," Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson wrote in their new book "Original Sin," detailing the inner workings of the Biden White House and attempts to downplay concerns about the president's mental and physical fitness.
"He, along with most of the press team, rarely met with the president and didn't have firsthand knowledge of the president's wherewithal," the book continued. "They relied on senior staff for answers. Still, risking his own credibility, Bates willingly became the White House's tip of the spear when it came to fighting off any reporting on Biden's acuity."
Outside of White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre, Bates was perhaps the most prominent face of the public-facing defense of Biden during his administration, often handling requests for comment from reporters and is mentioned about half a dozen times in the book.
'THE VIEW' MELTS DOWN OVER LATEST BIDEN BOOK, SLAMS CNN FOR 'HAWKING' IT
The book goes into detail about an alleged "modus operandi" from the Biden campaign and the White House for "attacking any journalist who covered any questions about the president's age" with the goal to "shame journalists and create a disincentive structure for those curious about the president's condition."
"To answer the question on everyone's minds: No, Joe Biden does not have a doctorate in foreign affairs. He's just that f---ing good," Bates posted on X following a Biden press conference two weeks after the debate performance that many believe was the beginning of the end of his campaign.
The book looked back on that remark and stated that it "reflected the views of the Politburo but among professional Democrats, it became an instant legend for its sycophancy and tone-deafness."
Bates dismissed the book's narrative about him, telling Fox News Digital it "is distorted, stretching select facts while excluding others."
A former Biden White House staffer also came to Bates' defense, telling Fox News Digital, "This gets important facts wrong."
FORMER BIDEN MEDICAL ADVISOR SAYS HE 'PROBABLY' HAD CANCER AT BEGINNING OF PRESIDENCY
"Bates served as a senior spokesperson who met with and traveled with the President, including in the Oval and on Air Force One, staffing him around the country and on Capitol Hill. That's public information. He served as a point person in the press office on major legislative and political issues," the former White House staffer continued. "He was known for being respectful and considerate if a colleague didn't want to do an interview for a challenging story, whether it was about policy or anything else."
The book details one specific instance of the White House successfully killing a story when "weeks" before the explosive Wall Street Journal story detailing concern about Biden's decline came out in June, Steve Ricchetti, former White House deputy chief of staff, strongly denied claims that the president was slipping to another journalist.
"[A] reporter with a different national news outlet had been hearing from White House aides that behind the scenes the president was having serious and disturbing moments, forgetting names and facts, sometimes seeming seriously confused at meetings," the book read.
"The reporter reached out to members of the White House press office, which not only aggressively—and angrily—disputed her reporting but also took the unusual step of having Steve Ricchetti call her," the book said. "He talked to her off the record, so she couldn't use any of what he said or even attribute it to 'a White House source.' But he told her that everything the others were saying was false, and that he was at the meetings as a counselor to the president."
According to Tapper and Thompson, the Biden White House was going all out trying to control the perception of his health.
"The message from the White House was clear, this reporter believed: If she went forward with the story from anonymous aides, the White House would aggressively dispute it, on the record, and portray her as a liar," the book reads. "The tacit threat worked."
The book has sparked intense reactions from both sides of the aisle, leading many to slam the media's coverage of Biden's mental acuity and blame the media and Biden's team for covering up the facts of the situation.
Fox News Digital has written extensively dating back to the 2020 presidential campaign about Biden's cognitive decline and his inner circle's role in covering it up.
Others have pushed back against the framing of the book, including Naomi Biden, Joe Biden's granddaughter, who delivered a scathing rebuke to the new book, calling it "silly" and "political fairy smut."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
CNN, Tapper's network, has also faced pushback for its promotion of the book, including from "The View" and Daily Show host Jon Stewart, who took issue with the network promoting the book under the backdrop of Biden's recent cancer diagnosis.
In a statement to Fox News Digital, a Biden spokesperson said, "There is nothing in this book that shows Joe Biden failed to do his job, as the authors have alleged, nor did they prove their allegation that there was a cover up or conspiracy."
"Nowhere do they show that our national security was threatened or where the President wasn't otherwise engaged in the important matters of the Presidency. In fact, Joe Biden was an effective President who led our country with empathy and skill."
Fox News Digital's Hanna Panreck and Rachel del Guidice contributed to this report Print Close
URL
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/new-book-exposes-how-top-biden-comms-staffer-tip-spear-covering-up-bidens-cognitive-decline
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Immigrant rights groups say ICE officers 'ambush noncitizens' in courthouse arrests, ask judge to intervene
Immigrant rights groups are asking a federal judge in Washington, D.C., to provide "emergency relief" and bar the Trump administration from continuing to ramp up its use of expedited removal. The motion, filed on Tuesday, is part of an ongoing lawsuit that is challenging the administration's expansion of the process which allows the government to quickly expel migrants sometimes without going before a judge. The filing has taken a renewed sense of urgency for the groups. In recent weeks, there's been a dramatic spike of arrests in courthouses after DHS moves to dismiss cases against migrants in removal proceedings. "With no advance notice to the noncitizens, Defendants are moving for [immigration judges] to dismiss people's removal proceedings; arresting and detaining people who have appeared for their court hearings as directed; and placing them in expedited removal proceedings, thereby denying them any meaningful opportunity to be heard before quickly removing them," the groups wrote in the filing. The filing added, "This aggressive new implementation of the Rule and Guidance has sown fear in immigrant communities, as noncitizens who have been complying with their legal obligations now face the risk of arrest and summary deportation at their next court dates." MORE: 'Have mercy': Families plead as migrants arrested at routine DHS check-ins The groups accuse ICE officers of coordinating with Department of Homeland Security attorneys and "stationing themselves in immigration courts" to "ambush noncitizens" after their cases are dismissed. Even those who have pending asylum applications and other petitions for relief are being targeted for expedited removal, the groups say. They claim that those who have been detained include "man whose partner was 8 months pregnant and who had applied for asylum, gay couple who feared persecution, asylum seeker married to a U.S. citizen, and 19-year-old who appears eligible for Special Immigrant Juvenile Status." The groups are asking the judge to halt expedited removals while the court battle continues. A senior DHS spokesperson previously defended the courthouse arrests in a statement to ABC News, saying: "Most aliens who illegally entered the United States within the past two years are subject to expedited removals. Biden ignored this legal fact and chose to release millions of illegal aliens, including violent criminals, into the country with a notice to appear before an immigration judge. ICE is now following the law and placing these illegal aliens in expedited removal, as they always should have been." The statement added on the migrants, "If they have a valid credible fear claim, they will continue in immigration proceedings, but if no valid claim is found, aliens will be subject to a swift deportation." Immigrant rights groups say ICE officers 'ambush noncitizens' in courthouse arrests, ask judge to intervene originally appeared on
Fox News
35 minutes ago
- Fox News
Chicago mayor says Trump's America looks like Confederacy won, suggests ICE are 'terrorists'
All times eastern FOX News Radio Live Channel Coverage WATCH LIVE: Trump attends bill signing ceremony at the White House
Forbes
35 minutes ago
- Forbes
L.A. Immigration Crackdown Sparks Concerns About Possible Martial Law
TOPSHOT - Demonstrators holding signs and flags face California National Guard members standing ... More guard outside the Federal Building as they protest in response to federal immigration operations in Los Angeles, on June 9, 2025. US President Donald Trump on June 9 ordered active-duty Marines into Los Angeles, vowing those protesting immigration arrests would be "hit harder" than ever. Protests in Los Angeles, home to a large Latino population, broke out on June 6, triggered by immigration raids that resulted in dozens of arrests of what authorities say are illegal migrants and gang members. (Photo by Apu GOMES / AFP) (Photo by APU GOMES/AFP via Getty Images) In recent weeks, the Los Angeles immigration crackdown has become the epicentre of a dangerous national experiment—one in which immigration enforcement is serving as the pretext for something far more ominous: a steady descent into possible martial law. The deployment of U.S. military forces into California without the governor's consent, the violent sweep of immigration raids, and the weaponization of emergency powers all signal that the constitutional order is under siege. President Donald Trump's decision to send 4,000 National Guard troops and Marines into California was met with outrage from state leaders and legal experts alike. California Governor Gavin Newsom has called the action 'an illegal, immoral, and unconstitutional act,' and the state has filed suit against the federal government, citing violations of the U.S. Federal Code, which prohibit federalizing state militias except in cases of invasion, rebellion, or when a state cannot enforce its own laws. None of those conditions apply in this case. Yet the justification offered by the administration—that Los Angeles was on the brink of collapse due to immigrant protests—is as false and inflammatory as was demonstrated on a recent episode of Jimmy Kimmel, which showed footage of quiet Los Angeles streets. Following a series of ICE raids that detained over 100 people, protests erupted across the city. While the Los Angeles Police Department stated that the demonstrations were largely peaceful, federal officials framed them as acts of rebellion. In televised comments, President Trump, without evidence, declared that Los Angeles would have been 'completely obliterated' without military intervention. However, some legal scholars point out that such claims are disturbingly reminiscent of how autocrats have historically manufactured crises to seize power. For instance, in comments made recently by Yale historian Timothy Snyder, he warned, 'Be wary of paramilitaries. When the men with guns claim to be against the system, the system is under threat.' These warning signs are increasing. Earlier this year, President Trump re-declared a national emergency at the southern border, significantly intensifying deportation efforts, particularly in sanctuary jurisdictions. His Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem, asserts that these efforts are crucial to national security. However, critics contend that the raids are politically motivated, intended to incite chaos and test the boundaries of presidential authority. This is not mere conjecture. There have been calls to arrest Governor Newsom for defying the troop deployment—an idea that would equate to criminalizing political opposition. The implications are chilling. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, Republicans are racing to pass what Trump has dubbed his 'big, beautiful bill,' a sprawling legislative package that, among other things, includes over $46 billion for the border wall and ICE funding. The administration is leveraging the unrest in Los Angeles to push hesitant GOP senators to fall in line. The proposed bill also imposes a $1,000 asylum application fee—an unprecedented barrier to legal refuge—and earmarks billions more for new Border Patrol and customs agents. These aren't merely policy choices; they are tools of exclusion and intimidation. Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), a leading voice for the legislation, is actively urging his colleagues to use the Los Angeles protests as proof of why ICE and the border crackdown require even more support. Beyond Capitol Hill, the cultural symbolism of this shift is equally revealing. Trump has announced a massive military parade in Washington, D.C., timed to coincide with the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary—and his own birthday. With tanks, howitzers, and cruise missile launchers on display, the spectacle is designed to evoke strength. But it also mirrors the authoritarian aesthetics of regimes like Russia and North Korea. The question is, where is this all heading? During his first term, Trump was dissuaded from invoking the Insurrection Act during the George Floyd protests only after senior military officials objected. This time, with loyalists appointed to key positions, those checks seem to be absent. Historically, there exists a dangerous precedent for all this. In 1933, Adolf Hitler used the Reichstag Fire to suspend civil liberties and consolidate power. Legal analysts are increasingly drawing comparisons between that moment and today's ongoing use of emergency powers in the name of immigration control. 'If you saw all this in any other country — soldiers sent to crush dissent, union leaders arrested, opposition politicians threatened — it would be clear that autocracy had arrived,' said constitutional law professor Laurence Tribe. Even tech magnates are playing a role. Elon Musk, who now owns X (formerly Twitter), has eliminated most content moderation, amplifying polarizing rhetoric and misinformation. His platform has become a megaphone for conspiracy theories that portray immigrants as invaders and critics as traitors. Beneath all these disturbing developments in the crackdown on immigrants lies a core question: Is the United States still a democracy governed by civilian law, or is it becoming a militarized state ruled by executive whim? The courts may still provide a line of defense. California's lawsuit regarding the unauthorized deployment of federal troops will test the judiciary's willingness to uphold the Constitution. However, history teaches us that legal battles alone cannot protect democracy when institutions are co-opted or eroded. What is unfolding is more than a dispute over immigration policy; it is a stress test of America's democratic fabric. The use of immigration raids to justify military actions, the demonization of peaceful protests, and the consolidation of emergency powers—these are not isolated events. They form a pattern. While Americans seem divided on the issue of military use in the Los Angeles immigration crackdown, with half in favour and the other half, particularly Californians, opposed, June 14th, 2025, the 'No Kings National Day of Action,' promises to be a pivotal day for America as immigration protests, which have spread to other cities, will likely reach their peak on that day. While this unfolds, Trump will head to Canada to attend the G-7 meeting while keeping a watchful eye on events back home. Meanwhile, the fate of the Republic may hinge not on whether Trump builds a wall, but on whether Americans permit him to dismantle the walls of constitutional restraint in the name of constructing it.
