Biden aide intimidated reporter investigating former president's mental decline with 'tacit threat:' Book
"Original Sin," by Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson, reported that "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 White House also reportedly asked Democrats interviewed by the Wall Street Journal for the report on Biden's mental acuity to call the outlet back and push back on "false" accounts, with one congressman reportedly defending the president's sharpness, while admitting to a reporter he was told to call back.
Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and other members of the cabinet bashed the Wall Street Journal article, telling Fox News Digital, "The article was BS."
"The president is utterly on his game," she added. "He is the wisest, most knowledgeable person in the room. He asks the toughest questions and has the keenest insights on the complex questions brought to him. He is sharp, thoughtful and wise."
Other outlets felt the wrath of the Biden administration when trying to report the story that was obvious to the rest of the country.
The Biden White House let the New York Times know it was "extremely upset" about its coverage of Biden's age, according to the paper's publisher, A.G. Sulzberger in February 2024.
"I think the Biden team made it really hard to ask questions about his health — they shamed you, said you didn't like him, etc.," former CNN journalist Chris Cillizza admitted to Fox News Digital, noting that many reporters, including himself, "Let that be that."
Thompson told the White House Correspondents' Dinner in April, "President Biden's decline and its cover-up by the people around him is a reminder that every White House, regardless of party, is capable of deception."
Fox News Digital reached out to a spokesperson for Biden for comment, but did not immediately receive a response.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans step up pressure on Democratic lawmakers to return to Texas
By James Oliphant WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Texas Republicans tried on Monday to pressure Democrats to return to the state legislature after their absence again prevented a vote on a redistricting plan favored by President Donald Trump that seeks to add Republican seats in Congress. After House Speaker Dustin Burrows declared there were too few members to conduct business, he said Republicans would move up to Tuesday voting on bills for measures related to floods that killed at least 137 people last month, a bid to persuade Democrats to return. 'The question is simple,' Burrows said. 'Will you be in that chair to vote for these critical disaster-recovery bills, or will you be remembered as the one who did not show up?' Democratic legislators in the Texas House of Representatives fled this month to deny Republicans the quorum necessary to pass the Trump-backed redistricting plan, which is intended to flip five congressional seats in the state from Democrat to Republican. The Democrats have gone to more hospitable states such as California and Illinois, putting them out of reach of Texas' legal maneuvers to force their return. Texas Governor Greg Abbott and other officials have vowed to track down the absent members and step up efforts to remove them from office. Burrows said state Department of Public Safety agents had fanned out to 'every region' of Texas. 'They are set up outside members' homes, conducting surveillance, knocking on doors, calling their phones multiple times of day,' he said. 'So far, no one is home, but the search continues, and it will not stop.' Burrows said he would ask the department to establish a tip line for information about the absent members. California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who has threatened his own redistricting effort to boost his party, wrote Trump on Monday that California would drop that if Texas ended its redistricting initiative. "You are playing with fire, risking the destabilization of our democracy, while knowing that California can neutralize any gains you hope to make," Newsom told Trump in the letter. "This attempt to rig congressional maps to hold onto power before a single vote is cast in the 2026 election is an affront to American democracy." Newsom said on Friday he will ask voters to approve a ballot measure in November redrawing the state's congressional map in a way likely to create five more Democratic seats. Democrats need to flip only three Republican-held seats to retake the majority in the 435-seat U.S. House next year, so even modest gains for either party via redistricting could prove decisive. If Democrats win the House, they could stymie much of Trump's legislative agenda and pursue multiple investigations into his administration. Texas House Democrats did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Last week, several members argued that Abbott has the authority to release surplus disaster-assistance funds without the legislature's involvement.
The Hill
22 minutes ago
- The Hill
Dems rage against Trump's DC takeover
PRESIDENT TRUMP took extraordinary measures Monday to implement a federal crackdown on crime in Washington, D.C., while warning other cities run by Democrats that the government stands ready to expand its enforcement efforts across the nation. At a nearly two-hour press conference from the White House, Trump declared a 'public safety emergency' in the nation's capital and a cited a rarely used law that allows him to temporarily take control of the District's police department. In addition, Trump is deploying the National Guard to assist local and federal law enforcement with patrols. 'I'm announcing historic action to rescue our nation's capital from crime, bloodshed, bedlam, squalor and worse,' Trump said. 'This is liberation day in D.C. and we're going to take our capital back.' Trump has been moving in this direction for several days, citing a recent attack on a former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) employee, who was severely beaten during an attempted carjacking last week. The FBI had been assisting in police patrols since that incident, although Trump's moves on Monday escalate federal involvement and represent a direct challenge to the District's self-governance. 'Our capital city has been overtaken by violent gangs and bloodthirsty, criminal, roving mobs of wild youth, drugged-out maniacs and homeless people,' Trump said. 'We're not going to let it happen anymore.' Democrats are furious and accusing the president of overreach. 'This is dictator-level stuff,' Democrats on the House Oversight Committee posted on X. 'Deploying the military on DC's streets only creates fear and chaos. Donald Trump will be held accountable for this brazen power grab.' House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-K.Y.) plans to hold a hearing with Washington, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser (D), Council Chairman Phil Mendelson (D) and D.C.'s Attorney General Brian Schwalb (D) in September to discuss Monday's actions. In a Monday press conference, Bowser called Trump's actions 'unsettling and unprecedented.' 'I'm going to work every day to make sure it's not a complete disaster. Let me put it that way,' she told reporters. Schwalb called the move 'unprecedented, unnecessary, and unlawful.' 'There is no crime emergency in the District of Columbia,' he posted on X. 'Violent crime in DC reached historic 30-year lows last year, and is down another 26% so far this year. We are considering all of our options and will do what is necessary to protect the rights and safety of District residents.' D.C. City Council Member Charles Allen (D) called it 'an extreme, outrageous, and dangerous move for our city and the safety of all our residents.' 'National Guard soldiers are trained for warfare & natural disasters, not for community policing. Every American should be deeply concerned with what they're witnessing today,' Allen posted on X. The district's police union chairman Gregg Pemberton backed Trump's move. 'We stand with the President in recognizing that Washington, DC, cannot continue on this trajectory,' he said in a statement. 'Crime is out of control, and our officers are stretched beyond their limits. The federal intervention is a critical stopgap, but the MPD needs proper staffing and support to thrive. This can only happen by repealing the disastrous policies that have driven out our best officers and hindered recruitment.' In tomorrow's edition of The Movement, 'President Trump's effort to lessen crime in Washington, D.C. and launch a 'beautification' effort is clashing with a long tradition of Republicans criticizing and outright writing off the nation's cities.' Click here to sign up & get it in your inbox.
Los Angeles Times
22 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump isn't the main villain in Texas' gerrymander scheme
If you want someone to blame for the recent crisis caused by President Trump's rush to force a gerrymander of Texas' congressional districts, and the harried responses from governors in California, Illinois and New York, you can start with the Supreme Court. In 2019, in Rucho vs. Common Cause, the group held, 5 to 4, that challenges to partisan gerrymandering present 'a nonjusticiable 'political question'' and thus cannot be heard in federal court. This was widely considered a terrible ruling at the time, and we're just now starting to see the consequences. Gerrymandering occurs when the party that controls a state legislature redraws its districts to maximize smooth elections and safe seats for its party members. The notorious practice isn't new — it's nearly as old as the U.S., having taken its name from Founding Father Elbridge Gerry, an early governor of Massachusetts. Despite finding the practice 'highly disagreeable,' Gerry signed off on the drawing of his state's districts in 1812 to help his party gain competitive seats in the Legislature. During this process, someone apparently remarked that one bizarrely drawn district looked like the salamander — and the name 'gerrymandering' took hold. In the March 26, 1812, edition of the Boston Gazette, the paper ran a cartoon of the district, caricatured by artist Elkanah Tisdale to introduce 'The Gerry-Mander: A new species of Monster.' For most of American history, those engaging in gerrymandering would choose between a handful of maps based on their predictions of which could yield them the greatest advantage. Today, computers can generate thousands of these clever geographical divisions, with leaders ultimately choosing the map that provides them the best chance of partisan success. Intricate algorithms and detailed data about voters allow these map drawers to engage in gerrymandering with surgical precision. Rucho vs. Common Cause arose in North Carolina, which is basically a purple state these days; presidential elections are always close, and statewide votes for congressional seats are evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans. However, when Republicans gained control of the North Carolina Legislature in 2010, they crafted a plan to redraw the boundaries for the state's then 13 congressional districts in their favor. State Republicans hired longtime political consultant Thomas Hofeller to generate and evaluate roughly 3,000 distinctive maps, and then selected the one they believed gave Republicans the best chance of earning significant control over North Carolina's House. In the 2018 midterm elections, Republican and Democratic candidates statewide each received roughly half of the votes, but Republicans won 10 of the 13 congressional races. This, of course, isn't unique to North Carolina. In Pennsylvania, across several elections, congressional races in districts drawn by a Republican legislature resulted in Democrats receiving between 45% and 51% of the statewide vote, yet winning just five of its 18 House seats. In Rucho vs. Common Cause, a lower federal court found that partisan gerrymandering violated the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment (as well as the 1st Amendment and Article 1 of the Constitution). But the Supreme Court, in a 2019 opinion by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., reversed this decision. The 5-4 majority held that federal courts 'cannot entertain a claim' and suggested that the plaintiffs 'must find their resolution elsewhere.' But this was just wrong. Gerrymandering is nothing more than a method for rigging elections. The central precept of a republican government, as the Supreme Court itself once observed, is 'that the voters should choose their representatives, not the other way around.' However, partisan gerrymandering infamously creates a system for representatives to effectively choose their voters. As a result, each voter does not have the same opportunity to influence the outcome of an election, which is antithetical to equal protection. When the court first ruled on partisan gerrymandering, holding that federal courts could hear challenges to it, Justice Lewis Powell observed that 'the boundaries of the voting districts have been distorted deliberately' to deprive voters of 'an equal opportunity to participate in the State's legislative processes.' Some voters will benefit and will have more influence in choosing representatives. For others this will be more difficult as their votes are diluted. That is inconsistent with democracy. Even though districting is usually done at the beginning of each decade, right after the U.S. census, and even though Texas' congressional districts were drawn just a few years ago, Trump and Texas Gov. Greg Abbott are trying to engage in redistricting for the sole goal of manipulating the composition of Congress. Trump, knowing the Supreme Court's decision means that federal courts can't stop it, has strongly urged the state to redraw its districts now to effectively create five more safe seats for Republican representatives. Not surprisingly, states with Democratic governors and legislatures are now looking for ways to respond, including redrawing districts that create Democratic seats in Congress. But some of these states, notably California and New York, already adopted the desirable and seemingly bipartisan approach of having independent commissions draw their districts to eliminate the plague of gerrymandering. The question is whether they can and should also change this practice now to combat what Texas is trying to do. There are many ways to end partisan gerrymandering. Congress could pass a law requiring that all states use independent commissions to draw the congressional districts. The Supreme Court could reconsider and overrule Rucho vs. Common Cause and go back to holding, as the law used to be, that federal courts can invalidate partisan gerrymandering. State courts can find partisan gerrymandering violates state constitutions. But none of this is going to happen now, and there is nothing to stop Texas from its efforts to carve out five more Republican districts. States controlled by Democrats need to respond; unilateral disarmament never makes sense. The loser is American democracy. And the Supreme Court is to blame. Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the UC Berkeley Law School, is an Opinion Voices contributing writer.
