White House Was ‘Lying' About Joe Biden's Health and Investigating It Post-Cancer Diagnosis Is Fair, ‘Original Sin' Author Says
The revelation of former President Joe Biden's cancer diagnosis has seemed to halt the ongoing debate over his fitness for office. But the co-author of the new book 'Original Sin' tells Variety that conversation is fair, and should continue.
Together, CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios' Alex Thompson are the journalists behind 'Original Sin,' a book that depicts a frail and unwell President Joe Biden shielded from reality, and from the press, by a coterie of advisers. In Tapper and Thompson's telling, Biden's fitness for office was questionable, and his decision to run for re-election in 2024 — a choice he reversed by leaving the race in July of that year, following a disastrous performance at a debate against then-candidate Donald Trump — led directly to Republican victory in November. Two days before the book's May 20 release, Biden's office announced that he has been diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer, news that has led some Democrats to call for a moratorium on litigating issues around Biden's choice to run and his condition while in office on sympathetic grounds.
More from Variety
Jon Stewart Slams CNN for Relentlessly Promoting Book on Joe Biden's Declining Health Amid Prostate Cancer Diagnosis: 'Doing the Story Seems Almost Disrespectful'
Joe Biden Diagnosed With Prostate Cancer
Joe Biden Didn't Recognize Old Friend George Clooney at 2024 Fundraiser: Report
Thompson doesn't agree. Prior to 'Original Sin,' which was reported and written over the course of three blistering months, Thompson reported on Biden's condition throughout his presidency. In April, he won a prize for his reporting on the 46th President's cognitive issues at the White House Correspondents' Dinner, and gave a fiery speech. 'We — myself included — missed a lot of this story. And some people trust us less because of it,' he said. 'We bear some responsibility for faith in the media being at such lows.'
Variety spoke with Thompson on the day of the book's release, discussing Biden's recent news and his re-election campaign, and about Thompson's own plans to continue reporting the story out.
It hasn't changed, in that the story is very much framed as a tragedy. After leaving office and getting a potentially lethal form of advanced cancer — for a guy that has been through a lot and has also given the majority of his life to public service, it seems like a very tragic end. The book is also about how risky it was to run for re-election at his age, and if he had won, he would now be having to deal with this in the Oval Office, and if the risks associated with him being that age were not weighed by him or his family or his advisers, that's also part of the story.
Some Biden White House advisers are a little taken aback about the timing of this announcement and are wondering whether or not there were any signs before. Zeke Emanuel, who worked in the Biden White House on the COVID [Advisory Board], said that it's likely he's had this cancer for a few years. The thing that's changed is: Did we miss something more here? That's something both Jake and I are asking ourselves, and something we'll continue to report out. We see this as the first draft, not the last draft.
Because it's an important story that isn't just about Joe Biden. And it's not just about the people around Joe Biden. It is also about the Democratic Party at this moment. The first question of this book was: How did Donald Trump come back? There's so many reasons, but to us, the conclusion was that the most important decision of the election was Joe Biden deciding to run again. It's an important story to explain why we are in the moment we're in, including all the things Trump is doing every day, support or oppose.
I heard similar arguments from many people when Biden was still President: 'You should cover Trump more.' I think that this is an important and newsworthy story, and there are many, many reporters covering Trump. People can do two things at once. Some people in the Democratic Party are, in good faith, really just concerned about Donald Trump. But I do think that there are members of the Democratic Party that don't want to reckon with what just happened, including the fact that a lot of the leaders of the party covered for a guy that many knew was probably not up to doing the job he was running for.
One, they were behind, and they needed to remind people that it was a choice election, not a referendum on Joe Biden. Two, Joe Biden wanted to debate. And three, the early debate is a bit of a hedge. If the debate doesn't totally go our way, there's time to recover. There was this belief that even as he was in decline and no longer capable of some of the things he was able to do, he rises to the occasion. He's a red-light performer.
Like a lot of old people, he has good hours and bad hours, good days and bad days, good weeks and bad weeks. Bad hours, bad days, bad weeks became more frequent and became worse, and eventually, it caught up to them.
They were creating a strategy around his limitations. It's true that the media landscape has changed — you're not going to reach all the voters you need by doing interviews with the New York Times. But listen: It's not like Vogue covers [for Jill Biden] is really new media. It was safe media. It was clear they did not have confidence in his communication abilities.
First, because people in the White House were lying. And after the [first-term] Trump Administration, when there was a feeling that everyone was lying, there was a lack of skepticism. Some people forgot that every White House lies. It was a combination of not being skeptical enough and D.C. journalism groupthink where they're all reporting on the same thing, and the real story is outside the circle.
This book started on Nov. 4 [one day before election]. I was on set with Jake, and he impulsively said, 'Hey, I think she may lose. If she does, I've been thinking about this book. Would you be interested?' Jake and I knew each other, but we didn't 'we're going to write a book together' know each other. I was like, 'Sure, yeah.' On the night of Nov. 6, he sent me the draft of a book proposal. We finalized it on Nov. 7 with no words written, no interviews done. And then we turned the first draft on Jan. 31 and talked to 200 people in that time. It was crazy.
I don't know how we did it. And it's almost all Democrats that we talked to. It wasn't Republicans saying 'I told you so.' It's a soul-searching story.
A lot of Biden people are very sad about this, because they feel that in the near term his legacy is going to be 'Trump came back.' Biden himself framed his presidency in those terms: 'Will Trump come back or not?' And it makes them sad, because a lot of the people that worked in the White House and still love Joe Biden have been very frustrated with how this last year has gone, and feel that he won't live to see people come around to the good parts of his legacy.
I would not say it's my main beat, but I will continue to cover him — and also the Democratic Party grappling with the Biden legacy. Jake and I think there's more to the story. We have more reporting we want to add, because there weren't tons of people on the record in this book, but elite people speaking up has given some others more courage.
I think there are a lot of Democrats that believe we have to have a reckoning, and then there are some Democrats that believe — mistakes were made, move on. I don't know which faction of the Democratic Party is going to win out or is more strategic. But there's only one side that's more honest.
This interview has been edited and condensed.
Best of Variety
New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week
Emmy Predictions: Talk/Scripted Variety Series - The Variety Categories Are Still a Mess; Netflix, Dropout, and 'Hot Ones' Stir Up Buzz
Oscars Predictions 2026: 'Sinners' Becomes Early Contender Ahead of Cannes Film Festival
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sen. Brian Strickland enters race to succeed Georgia's AG Chris Carr
The Brief State Senators Brian Strickland and Bill Cowsert have entered the race to succeed Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr, who is running for governor in 2026. Strickland, a McDonough attorney, launched his campaign Tuesday, highlighting his record on conservative policies like the heartbeat bill and constitutional carry. Cowsert, a former Senate majority leader, announced his campaign in April, pledging to prioritize public safety and crack down on illegal immigration and crime. ATLANTA - The race to become Georgia's next attorney general is beginning to take shape, with two Republican lawmakers officially in the running to replace Attorney General Chris Carr. What we know Carr, who is not seeking reelection as he pursues a bid for governor in 2026, leaves an open seat that is drawing early interest. On Tuesday, State Sen. Brian Strickland launched his campaign during an event at Liberty Plaza in Atlanta. Strickland, a McDonough attorney who has served in the state Senate since 2018, highlighted his record on conservative policies, including support for the "heartbeat bill," constitutional carry, and mental health reform. Standing alongside his wife, Lindsey, he told reporters he would work to uphold Georgia's conservative values if elected. GEORGIA POLITICAL STORIES Strickland is expected to face Athens State Sen. Bill Cowsert in the Republican primary. Cowsert, a former Senate majority leader, chairs the Senate committee investigating Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and her prosecution of former President Donald Trump. He announced his candidacy in April, vowing to tackle crime and illegal immigration. PREVIOUS STORY: Georgia Attorney General race: Sen. Bill Cowsert announces campaign As of Tuesday afternoon, no Democratic candidates had formally entered the race.


Newsweek
20 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Marjorie Taylor Greene Partially Agrees With Elon Musk on Trump-Backed Bill
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Georgia Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene partially backed Elon Musk Tuesday in his criticism of President Donald Trump's "big, beautiful bill" that recently passed the House of Representatives and is under debate in the Senate. The Context The Trump-backed reconciliation package passed the House last month following weeks of negotiations in which House Speaker Mike Johnson wrangled votes from the ultraconservative and more centrist factions of the GOP. While Trump praised the measure in its current form, Senate Republicans have made it clear that they plan to make significant changes to it before it passes the upper chamber. Musk, meanwhile, has repeatedly criticized the bill, most recently calling it a "disgusting abomination," saying it was filled with "outrageous pork" that would balloon the federal deficit and undo the work by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene is pictured arriving for a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene is pictured arriving for a House Republican meeting at the U.S. Capitol on May 20 in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) What To Know "Congresswoman, what do you make of Elon Musk criticizing the 'One Big Beautiful Bill?'" a reporter asked Greene in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday. "Well, you know, I have to agree with him on one hand," the Republican firebrand responded. "I always love it when Americans are angry at the federal government and express it. I think that should've been happening for years now. I mean, we're $36 trillion in debt for a reason." Greene, one of Trump's staunchest supporters in Congress, went on to criticize the Biden administration's initiatives on renewable energy, its handling of the economy and more. "Unfortunately, in the 'One Big Beautiful Bill,' we had to spend some money to right the ship and pass President Trump's campaign promises" on issues including border security and immigration enforcement, tax cuts and "America First energy." Greene is among three House Republicans who have voiced their agreement with Musk's criticisms. Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie re-shared Musk's post on X, formerly Twitter, ripping into the bill, writing, "He's right." Representative Warren Davidson of Ohio also appeared to agree, sharing another post from Musk that said, "Congress is making America bankrupt." Massie and Davidson voted against the bill in the House. Greene voted in favor of it but said she did not read through a portion of the measure related to artificial intelligence (AI) when it was initially up for vote. Greene said the provision violates states' rights, writing on X on Tuesday: "Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years. I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there." "We have no idea what AI will be capable of in the next 10 years and giving it free rein and tying states hands is potentially dangerous," she added. Greene said that if the Senate doesn't strip the provision from the version of the bill that's sent back to the House for final approval, she won't back it, which could complicate House GOP leadership's effort to pass the Trump-backed package. The White House responded to Musk's X posts during Tuesday's press briefing. "Look, the president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill. It doesn't change the president's opinion," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters. "This is one big, beautiful bill, and he's sticking to it." What People Are Saying Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters: "We obviously respect everything that Elon did with DOGE. On this particular issue, we have a difference of opinion ... he's entitled to that opinion. We're going to proceed full speed ahead." Republican Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina said of Musk's criticisms: "He's entitled to his opinion." Asked by Politico whether Musk's criticism would affect amendments to the bill, Tillis said: "No." Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer waved around a printout of Musk's post and told reporters: "I agree with Elon Musk!" What Happens Next Trump recently gave Senate Republicans a July 4 deadline to pass the bill and get it to his desk.
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Memo: Musk drops bomb on Trump's ‘big, beautiful bill'
Elon Musk dropped a rhetorical bomb on President Trump's plans to pass a massive budget bill on Tuesday. Musk, the world's richest man, excoriated legislation that Trump calls big and beautiful as 'a disgusting abomination.' He also called the legislation 'outrageous' and 'pork-filled.' Referring to members of the House who had passed the bill and sent it along to the Senate, Musk added, 'Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it.' The remarks were all the more striking for coming just days after Musk departed from his role with the quasi-official Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). His departure was marked by a joint appearance with Trump in the Oval Office, at which they paid tribute to one another. Musk had expressed misgivings about the spending legislation in an interview broadcast on 'CBS Sunday Morning' this past weekend, musing that while such a bill could indeed be either big or beautiful, 'I don't know if it can be both.' GOP leaders on Capitol Hill thought they had been able to assuage Musk's concerns. Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told reporters on Tuesday that he had spoken to Musk for 20 minutes the previous day. Johnson, who had to go through arduous efforts to get the bill passed in the House, said that in his Monday conversation, 'I extolled all the virtues of the bill, and he seemed to understand that. We had a very friendly conversation about it.' That left Johnson blindsided by the billionaire's rhetorical barrage on Tuesday. Musk's latest remarks were 'very disappointing' and 'terribly wrong,' Johnson lamented. But Musk's characteristically combative intervention raises two bigger questions. One is whether it will land so hard among Republican senators that it could capsize the bill itself. The other is whether it presages a larger willingness on Musk's behalf to go against the wishes of Trump, the president whom Musk spent more than $250 million getting elected — and who gave him enormous power at the heart of government. The Trump-backed budget bill, which also includes a $4 trillion increase in the debt ceiling, already faced uncertain prospects in the Senate. Republicans hold 53 seats in the 100-member body, but fiscal hawks and more moderate members alike have yet to signal they are willing to back the legislation. Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.), Ron Johnson (Wis.) and Mike Lee (Utah) are all in the first category, expressing concern that the bill fails to curb the long stretch of budget deficits that have created an astronomical national debt. The debt currently stands at around $36 trillion. At the other end of the GOP ideological spectrum, many insiders are watching Sens. Susan Collins (Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) for signs of how hard they will resist proposed changes to Medicaid that are projected to cause millions of Americans to lose their health insurance. Musk is aligned with the first camp. After Musk's initial blast on Tuesday, Paul took to social media to write, 'I agree with Elon. We have both seen the massive waste in government spending and we know another $5 trillion in debt is a huge mistake.' Musk, in turn, amplified Paul's message to his 220 million followers on the social platform X, which he owns. Musk also reposted critiques of the legislation from Lee, who said the Senate 'must' make the bill better, and from Rep. Thomas Massie (Ky.), one of two House Republicans to vote against the legislation in the lower chamber. Musk's alignment with Paul was especially notable on a day when Trump had lambasted the Kentucky senator for his reluctance to back the legislation. Trump had written on social media Tuesday morning that Paul had 'very little understanding' of what was in the spending bill, adding, 'He loves voting 'NO' on everything, he thinks it's good politics, but it's not.' In a second post, Trump complained that Paul 'never has any practical or constructive ideas. His ideas are actually crazy (losers!). The people of Kentucky can't stand him.' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt sought to swat aside Musk's criticisms during Tuesday's media briefing. 'The president already knows where Elon Musk stood on this bill,' Leavitt said. 'It doesn't change the president's opinion. This is one big, beautiful bill, and he's sticking to it.' But GOP senators are not quite so nonchalant. Johnson, the Wisconsin senator and fiscal hawk, told Politico that Musk's social media blasts 'got spread around pretty quickly' within the Republican conference. GOP senators will also not have missed the implicit threat in a later social media post from Musk. 'In November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people,' he wrote. Such a message raises the specter of Musk using some of his enormous wealth to finance primary challenges to incumbents — despite a recent statement that he was likely to curb his political spending. For Trump, the danger is that Musk will grow increasingly willing to voice his discontent. Trump, of course, has no more elections to run. But Musk's enormous X megaphone and his influential position near the apex of the online right makes him a highly dangerous potential critic. Relations between Trump and Musk have not fully degraded yet, of course. But Tuesday's messages from Musk will disconcert the White House as much as GOP leaders on Capitol Hill. The Memo is a reported column by Niall Stanage. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.