Karine Jean-Pierre savaged after announcing she is leaving Democratic party and writing Biden tell-all book
Former Biden administration Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre has been slammed after announcing she's leaving the Democratic party and writing a tell-all book about her time inside the 'broken' White House.
On Wednesday, Jean-Pierre, who served as both press secretary and a senior Biden advisor, announced the October 21 publication of Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines, using the occasion to reveal she had left the party after serving in the two past Democratic administrations.
Publisher's notes said the book would feature 'provocative evidence as an insider' and detail 'the three weeks that led to Biden's abandoning his bid for a second term and the betrayal by the Democratic Party that led to his decision.'
'In an era of misinformation, disinformation, the regressiveness of social policy, what we're seeing currently, what I have decided to do, and I really have thought long and hard about this, is to follow my own compass,' Jean-Pierre said in a video statement on Instagram.
Critics laid into Jean-Pierre, pointing to her former role as a staunch defender of the White House, including against allegations that President Biden was in mental decline, which Jean-Pierre repeatedly dismissed.
In a post on X, conservative activist Charlie Kirk accused Jean-Pierre of trying to 'trick everybody into forgetting the central role she played in perpetuating the Biden cover-up.'
Her former colleagues in the White House and Democratic party also savaged the move, arguing that keeping Biden off the ticket was not a 'betrayal' but rather a key move that kept Democrats from further losses in Congress, cementing their ability to at least partially impede Trump cuts to liberal priorities.
'People will literally die because of Republican Medicaid cuts. Kids will go hungry because of SNAP cuts,' former Biden official Caitlin Legacki told Politico. 'The only reason we stand a chance to reduce the harm inflicted is the Democratic Party did the right thing here. It's completely nuts to be more upset that the Party didn't prioritize Joe Biden's ego and keep him on the ticket than to thank god we averted complete and total disaster.'
A Democratic operative, meanwhile, told the outlet the book and party change was 'the most grift-y thing I've seen in a long time, and that's saying something in Washington.'
The Independent has contacted Jean-Pierre for comment.
Jean-Pierre isn't the only high-profile staffer to distance themselves from the Biden administration in recent days.
On Monday, former State Department spokesman Matt Miller, often the face of the Biden administration's defense of Israel during its ongoing war with Hamas, admitted in an interview with Sky News that he believed the U.S. ally had committed war crimes.
'I don't think it's a genocide, but I think the — I think it is, without a doubt, true that Israel has committed war crimes,' he said, adding, 'When you're at the podium, you're not expressing your personal opinion. You're expressing the conclusions of the United States government.'
The torrent of bad press follows the May release of Original Sin, from CNN anchor Jake Tapper and Axios reporter Alex Thompson, in which former officials, including cabinet members, described what they said was an extensive attempt to conceal the president's mental and physical decline from the public and members of government.
Biden and his family members have pushed back against the claims in the book.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
43 minutes ago
What Trump ordering an investigation into Biden's actions might mean legally and politically
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump has ordered an investigation into pardons and other executive actions issued by his predecessor, Joe Biden — launching an extraordinary effort to show that the Democrat hid his cognitive decline and was otherwise too mentally impaired to do the job. Trump, who turns 79 this month, has long questioned the mental acuity and physical stamina of Biden, and is now directing his administration to use governmental investigative powers to try and back up those assertions. Biden, 82, and now undergoing treatment for prostate cancer, dismissed Trump's actions as 'ridiculous.' Here's a look at what Trump is alleging, what impact it could have, and why the country may never have seen anything like this before. Trump directed his White House counsel and attorney general to begin an investigation into his own allegations that Biden aides hid from the public declining mental acuity in their boss. Trump is also casting doubts on the legitimacy of the Biden White House's use of the autopen to sign pardons and other documents. It marks a significant escalation in Trump's targeting of political adversaries, and could lay the groundwork for arguments by leading Republicans in Congress and around the country that a range of Biden's actions as president were invalid. 'Essentially, whoever used the autopen was the president,' Trump said Thursday. He then went further, suggesting that rogue elements within the Biden administration might have effectively faked the president's signature and governed without his knowledge — especially when it came to pushing policies that appeased the Democratic Party's far-left wing. 'He didn't have much of an idea what was going on,' Trump said, though he also acknowledged that he had no evidence to back up those assertions. A Trump fundraising email released a short time later carried the heading, 'A robot ran the country?' Legal experts are skeptical about that the investigation will do much more than fire up Trump's core supporters. 'I think it's more of a political act than one that will have any legal effect,' said Richard Pildes, a constitutional law scholar at New York University School of Law. He added: 'I think it's designed to continue to fuel a narrative that the administration wants to elevate, but courts are not going to second-guess these sorts of executive actions' undertaken by Biden. Trump has long questioned the legitimacy of pardons his predecessor issued for his family members and other administration officials just before leaving office on Jan. 20, people whom Biden was worried could be targeted by a Trump-led Justice Department. But Trump has more recently suggested Biden was unaware of immigration policies during his own administration, and said Thursday that aides to his predecessor pushed social issues like transgender rights in ways Biden might not have agreed with. It is well-established that a president's executive orders can easily be repealed by a successor issuing new executive actions — something Trump has done repeatedly since retaking the White House. That lets Trump wipe out Biden administration policies without having to prove any were undertaken without Biden's knowledge — though his predecessor's pardons and judicial appointments can't be so easily erased. 'When it comes to completed legal acts like pardons or appointing judges,' Pildes said, a later president 'has no power to overturn those actions.' Autopens are writing tools that allow a person's signature to be affixed automatically to documents. The Justice Department, under Democratic and Republican administrations, has recognized the use of an autopen by presidents to sign legislation and issue pardons for decades — and even Trump himself acknowledges using it. 'Autopens to me are used when thousands of letters come in from young people all over the country and you want to get them back,' Trump said Thursday. Michigan State University law professor Brian Kalt said the 'consensus view is that, as long as the president has directed the use of the autopen in that particular instance, it is valid.' 'The only issue would be if someone else directed the use of the autopen without the President's approval,' Kalt, an expert on pardons, wrote in an email. Yes. Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution bestows the president with the power 'to grant Reprieves and Pardons.' 'A president's pardons cannot be revoked. If they could, no pardon would ever be final,' American University politics professor Jeffrey Crouch, author of a book on presidential pardons, said in an email. 'There is no legal obstacle I am aware of to a president using an autopen on a pardon.' Kent Greenfield, a Boston College law professor, said, 'Once you pardon somebody, you can't go back and un-pardon them.' 'If it's done with a president's authority, I don't think it matters whether it's done with an autopen or not,' Greenfield added. 'The president's authority is the president's authority.' Trump's suggestions that Biden's administration effectively functioned without his knowledge on key policy matters go beyond questions about pardons and the president using the autopen. Even there, though, the Supreme Court ruled in 2024 that former presidents have broad immunity from prosecution. At the time, Trump celebrated the ruling as a 'BIG WIN' because it extended the delay in the Washington criminal case against him on charges he plotted to overturn his 2020 election loss. Such immunity would likely cover Biden as a former president. It might not extend to Biden administration officials allegedly acting without his knowledge — though Trump himself acknowledged he's not seen evidence of that occurring. Biden has dismissed Trump's investigation as 'nothing more than a mere distraction.' 'Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency. I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn't is ridiculous and false,' he said in a statement. In a word, no. There have been allegations of presidents being impaired and having their administrations controlled by intermediaries more than the public knew — including Edith Wilson, who effectively managed access to her husband, Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, after his serious stroke in 1919. Wilson's critics grumbled about a shadow presidency controlled by his wife, but the matter was never formally investigated by Congress, nor was it a major source of criticism for Wilson's Republican successor, Warren G. Harding. More recently, some questioned whether President John F. Kennedy struggled more than was publicly known at the time with Addison's Disease and debilitating back pains while in office. And there were questions about whether dementia might have affected Ronald Reagan during his second term, before he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's in 1994, five years after he left office.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
High court ruling on reverse discrimination a no-brainer: Chuck Rocha
(NewsNation) — The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected legal precedent that people in a majority group have a higher standard for proving discrimination. Democratic strategist Chuck Rocha agrees with the high court decision. 'Discrimination doesn't say, 'Oh, you have to be black,' or, 'You have to be a woman,' or, 'You have to be gay.' … Discrimination means you're treating me different,' he says on 'CUOMO.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Boston Globe
an hour ago
- Boston Globe
Mass. lets criminals go, ICE arrests innocent people. They both need to change.
Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Cases like Lopez's show that sometimes, federal authorities have a legitimate gripe with the state's progressive policies. Because of a 2017 Supreme Judicial Court decision, there are instances when the state releases dangerous criminals instead of handing them over to Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Advertisement But the Trump administration is also overstating how much Massachusetts' policies, as bad as they can be, are to blame for its mounting arrests of noncriminals. Both sides need to give a little bit: Massachusetts should be willing to help in cases where ICE wants to arrest a convicted criminal like Lopez. The federal government has the right to deport people who are in this country illegally, and the state should help when it comes to violent criminals. Advertisement What the federal government doesn't have the right to do is compel local law enforcement to go after law-abiding, peaceable immigrants — whether they're here illegally or not. And it shouldn't be targeting noncriminals, either — or using local sanctuary policies as a pretext for the recent arrests of people with no criminal records. Over the past month, ICE has arrested 'If sanctuary cities would change their policies and turn these violent criminal aliens over to us into our custody instead of releasing them into the public, we would not have to go out to the communities and do this,' Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons said during an ICE The state's policies date to 2017, when the Supreme Judicial Court ruled in Lunn v. Commonwealth that the Legislature would have to specifically authorize court officers to honor requests from immigration authorities to hold deportable immigrants. So far, the Democratic-led Legislature has not done so, and it passed up different bills that would allow law enforcement to cooperate on detainers for immigrants who are here illegally and have committed heinous crimes. Inaction on Lunn has drawn scrutiny from conservatives and even a member of Healey's Cabinet. For Worcester County Sheriff Lew Evangelidis, for example, law enforcement's inability to coordinate with federal immigration authorities means that some criminal migrants can be released back into the community. 'Right now, there's no ability to notify ICE and hold that person for [ICE] to make a determination whether they wish to take them into custody and then provide them the due process that they get in the federal system,' he told me. Advertisement Meanwhile, Healey's secretary of Public Safety and Security, Terrence Reidy, has In a statement, Healey's office said it does cooperate with ICE to some extent, such as by notifying ICE when a criminal in state custody is scheduled to be released. But that leaves loopholes for cases like Lopez's, which result in ICE having to rearrest a criminal. There were no collateral arrests when ICE tracked down Lopez because they were banned under the Biden administration — but there could be if a similar arrest were made now. Still, the Trump administration is exaggerating the connection between sanctuary policies and collateral arrests. Cases where criminals like Lopez were released in spite of detainers may have fueled some collateral arrests in the past month. But the Department of Homeland Security has failed to give a detailed breakdown so it's hard to know just how many. In a Advertisement Meanwhile, some of ICE's higher profile examples of collateral arrest seem to have nothing to do with Lunn. Like the case of the 18-year-old Milford student, Marcelo Gomes da Silva, who was arrested on his way to volleyball practice in an operation meant for his father. He was But so far there It isn't crazy for the Trump administration to criticize Massachusetts policies that can and have allowed convicted criminal migrants to be released into the community. In fact, most Americans would agree — a recent University of Massachusetts Amherst But that poll also found that most people Carine Hajjar is a Globe Opinion writer. She can be reached at
