Warnock dodges question on whether Biden should've dropped out in 2024: ‘It's over'
Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-Ga.) sidestepped a question on whether former President Biden should have dropped out of the 2024 presidential race sooner, saying in a Sunday interview that the election is 'over.'
'Here is what we absolutely know about last year's election: It's over. And I'm going to spend all of my energy focused on the task in front of us,' he told NBC News's Kristen Welker on 'Meet the Press' on Sunday, before railing against the GOP tax and spending bill, which the Senate is poised to take up this week.
'We are headed into a very critical week,' the senator continued. 'The Republicans are trying to push forward this big, ugly bill that's going to literally cut as many as 7 million Americans off of their health care. It is a drag not only on their health care, it is a drag on the American economy.'
'This is an unfunded mandate at a time when Donald Trump's tariff tax is literally raising the cost of groceries. And so I've got my sleeves rolled up and in front of me is the American people, the people of Georgia. I'm doing everything I can to save them from Trump's big, ugly bill,' he added.
Warnock's comments came in response to Welker's question about a quote from David Plouffe, a senior campaign adviser to former Vice President Kamala Harris, reported in the recent book by CNN's Jake Tapper and Axios's Alex Thompson.
'If Biden had decided in 2023 to drop out, we would have had a robust primary. Whitmer, Pritzker, Newsom, Buttigieg, Harris, and Klobuchar would have run. Warnock and Shapiro would have kicked the tires. Maybe Mark Cuban or a businessperson of some sort. Twenty percent of governors and 30 percent of senators would have thought about it. We would have been eminently stronger,' Plouffe said in the quote, which Welker read to Warnock in the interview.
After Warnock gave his response, Welker noted that she 'didn't hear a direct answer to the question there,' but tried to move on.
Warnock interrupted the anchor and again focused on the GOP legislative package that passed the House late last month.
'Well, I take very seriously my job. The people of Georgia hired me to stand up for them. And this really is a critical week,' Warnock said, continuing to talk about the bill.
The interview comes as high-profile Democrats have been asked to reckon with new reporting alleging Biden's mental and physical decline in the final few years of his term was more severe than what had previously been disclosed to the American public.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Washington Post
12 minutes ago
- Washington Post
Trump, DOJ threaten Calif. with legal action, fines after trans athlete's win
Days after a 16-year-old transgender athlete placed first in two events at the California state track-and-field championship, the Trump administration is threatening legal action and 'large scale' fines over the state's policy allowing trans athletes to compete in high school sports. In a letter addressed to the state's public school districts, Harmeet Dhillon, who heads the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, said on Monday that the California Interscholastic Federation violates the Constitution's Equal Protection Clause with its bylaw stating that all students 'should have the opportunity to participate in CIF activities in a manner that is consistent with their gender identity, irrespective of the gender listed on a student's records.' The letter directed school districts to certify in writing by June 9 that they wouldn't follow the bylaw.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump orders investigation into Biden's ‘autopen' pardons
Donald Trump has ordered an investigation into the pardons granted by Joe Biden to family members and death-row inmates which were signed by 'autopen' in the final hours of his presidency. On Monday, a senior official in the justice department told staff that he was investigating pardons granted by the former president, and whether Mr Biden was 'competent' at the time. In an email to staff, obtained by Reuters, Ed Martin, a controversial Trump loyalist, said his investigation would look at whether Mr Biden 'was competent and whether others were taking advantage of him through use of autopen or other means.' An autopen is a device used to add a signature to a document. Unlike the common e-signature, the autopen is a robot-writing instrument that learns how to mimic and repeat the pen strokes of any individual. They are used routinely by the White House, but Mr Trump and his supporters have spread theories that it was being used by his predecessor as he became less able to conduct the duties of president. The president's allies in Congress have also launched an investigation into its use. In the email, Mr Martin indicated that his investigation will be focused on preemptive pardons issued to several members of the Biden family, and clemency that spared 37 federal inmates from the death penalty, allowing them to serve out their sentences in prison. Mr Biden left office on Jan 20. In the run-up he said he wanted to spare his relatives from politically motivated investigations. Most controversially, he pardoned his son Hunter, who last year pleaded guilty to tax fraud and was convicted of a firearms offence. He also pardoned three siblings – James, Frank, and Valerie – as well as their spouses. A justice department spokesman declined to comment on the investigation other than to say that the email was intended for staff only. Mr Martin, who was recently appointed to several top roles in the department, including pardon attorney, previously worked as interim US attorney for Washington, DC. He was originally nominated to take on that role permanently but his nomination was withdrawn after it became clear that senators were unlikely to confirm him to the role. Even some Republicans baulked at his work defending Jan 6 rioters. A source told The Telegraph that Mr Martin has a broad remit to tackle what Mr Trump believes was the 'politicisation' of the justice department under his predecessor, and to look back at claims of electoral fraud in 2020. He said the election results looked 'weird' during a recent interview with Tucker Carlson, the former Fox News host. 'There was the admission that the election was fortified. It was intentionally planned to do that in such a way to get results that looked off,' Martin said. 'Now, does that mean they cheated? We don't have that smoking gun, but we certainly have over and over and over again aspects of things that didn't look right, and we've never had the answers on it. 'So yes, we will get to the bottom of it again.' US presidents have broad power to issue pardons in the case of federal convictions. Mr Trump has also used the power. On his first day in power, he granted clemency to most of his 1,600 supporters facing criminal charges over the attack on Congress in 2021. Mr Martin last month said presidents had power over pardons. 'If you use the autopen for pardon power, I don't think that that's necessarily a problem,' Martin said during a press conference. But he added that Mr Biden's pardons still demanded scrutiny. The email is the latest twist in efforts by Republicans to ask questions about Mr Biden's health in office and to explore whether they can use them to overturn his decisions. Mr Biden, 82, ended his re-election campaign suddenly in July last year after a shambolic debate performance. Last month, he revealed he had been diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer. His former aides have long dismissed allegations that he was ever unable to perform the role of president during his four years in office. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Forbes
15 minutes ago
- Forbes
Cities Consider Using Eminent Domain For Unholy Property Seizures
A person takes a picture of the childhood home of the new Pope Leo XIV in Dolton, Illinois, (Photo ... More by KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI/AFP via Getty Images) Robert Prevost grew up in a modest home in the south Chicago suburb of Dolton, Illinois. Recently, a realty company purchased that old home, fixed it up, and put it up for sale. Then a few weeks ago, Robert Prevost became Pope Leo XIV. Now that modest home is in demand. The house is supposed to be auctioned off, with bidding starting at $250,000. How much of a premium will people pay for the childhood home of a Pope? Ten percent? Twenty? Nobody knows because this hasn't happened before—we can't make a guess based on past sales of 'childhood Pope homes.' And we may never find out. Dolton officials are threatening to use eminent domain to force a sale so the home can become a publicly accessible historic site. But while taking the home for a public use meets the constitution's requirements to take property, the price the city ends up paying could be less than divine. When the government takes property through eminent domain, the constitution says it must pay 'just compensation' for the property, which courts say is whatever price the property would fetch on the open market. But figuring out what that price is can be tricky, and the government often stiffs property owners when it can get away with it. ProPublica had a series of articles several years ago showing how the federal government paid very different prices for property depending on whether owners could afford attorneys. That's where the planned auction would have been helpful. After all, the best evidence of how big a 'Pope premium' the house commands on the open market would be an auction on the open market. And that may well be why the city moved so quickly: In May, city officials darkly warned the current owner to make sure bidders knew 'their 'purchase' may be only temporary since the Village intends to begin the eminent domain process very shortly.' If the city can suppress bids at the auction, it leaves itself the option of arguing that the real value of the property is what the home was on sale for before the Pope's elevation: $199,900. It could even argue it should be lower than that. The Pope himself has been quite busy and hasn't commented specifically on what should happen with his old family home, but Christian Britschgi writing for Reason noted that his first included the line: "[Saint] Peter must shepherd the flock without ever yielding to the temptation to be an autocrat.' The actual 'fair market' price for a Pope's childhood home may be high or it may be low, but Dolton shouldn't be afraid of the truth. And it shouldn't be using public power to try to stop the current owners' efforts to find out exactly what their property is worth in the real world. Meanwhile, a city in New Jersey is considering another unholy use of eminent domain, except here it is directed squarely at a church. In Toms River, the Christ Episcopal Church wants to open a small homeless shelter on its property. But the town has a different plan for the church's property: pickleball courts and a skate park. Christ Episcopal hosts a number of community programs, including an affordable housing nonprofit. That nonprofit recently submitted plans to the zoning board for a 17-bed overnight shelter on the church property. Like many areas across America, rising home prices have contributed to rising homelessness across New Jersey. One group estimates that the number of homeless residents in the region has doubled in recent years. But for the mayor of Toms River, a new park complex along the city's eponymous river is a priority. He said the church's property is, 'a great opportunity for parking, for recreation.' Broader plans for the area include taking nearby waterfront property to build a tiki bar and jet ski rentals. The church found out about the effort to seize its property a mere 24 hours before the city council first considered a measure. It passed by a 4-3 vote in a contentious meeting where council members yelled at each other. A second approval may come this week. That the vote to take the property came just three weeks before the zoning board considered the application for the shelter is far too convenient. The Fifth Amendment allows government to take property for public use and parks usually fit that definition. But the town doesn't want a park so much as it doesn't want a homeless shelter. Whether or not this kind of bad faith use of eminent domain is constitutional is a somewhat open question. For instance, in nearby Connecticut the state supreme court rejected an attempt to stop an affordable housing development with sham playing fields. Massachusetts, Georgia, and Rhode Island similarly prohibit these so-called pre-textual takings. Last fall, the Supreme Court almost took up the case of a Long Island hardware store chain that lost its property to a town for a 'passive park' (the town had no plan to develop the land). Justices Thomas, Gorsuch, and Alito said they would have granted the case but four votes are needed to achieve Supreme Court review. Pretextual takings are an incredible threat to private property. As long as the government is willing to pay the 'fair market' price practically any property can be seized. That market price doesn't include whatever an owner might spend in court trying to keep their property. Challenging even the most outlandish use of eminent domain could mean coming out the other end of the process without a home or business and poorer for it. The Asbury Park Press speculated that the New Jersey episcopal diocese's poor financial situation may be a consideration in whether it negotiates or resists. For now though, the church has indicated it will fight and it has support from other area houses of worship. The mayor has talked about the need to 'balance the hardships' of a community without a park and speculated that the church congregants could simply 'drive to a different location every Sunday.' This is a grim view of governing that is fundamentally at odds with America's traditions of property and religious rights. Christ Episcopal has been in Toms River since 1865 and it wants to use its property to fulfill its religious mission to care for the poor at no expense to the town. The mayor wants to provide convenient recreation at cost to the taxpayers. The U.S. Constitution gave government the power of eminent domain but courts shouldn't merely roll over whenever government presents a plan to take private property. The Fifth Amendment also says that no one should be deprived of their property without due process of law. When the government presents an unholy use of eminent domain, judges should consider all the facts and uphold justice.
