WASHINGTON — Former Vice President Kamala Harris blasted the “recklessness” of then-President Joe Biden’s decision to run for a second term — writing in her forthcoming memoir that the choice should not have been “left to an individual’s ego.”
The ex-veep’s stunning dig at her former boss was laid bare in an excerpt of her book, “107 Days,” which was obtained by The Atlantic on Wednesday — shocking former Biden White House aides who were not expecting a juicy tell-all.
“Was it grace, or was it recklessness? In retrospect, I think it was recklessness,” Harris writes of her decision not to convince Biden to drop out of the 2024 race earlier.
“The stakes were simply too high. This wasn’t a choice that should have been left to an individual’s ego, an individual’s ambition. It should have been more than a personal decision.”
One former White House official claimed to The Post that Harris’ admission “hurts” any chance of a political comeback in 2028.
“No one wants a leader that can’t speak truth to power, but I do not think she is going to run,” the Democratic aide said.
“Is she just going to be like ‘sure’ [to Russian President Vladimir] Putin and then write in a book she should have said ‘don’t bomb Poland’?”
A second Biden White House alum told The Post that “we were all surprised with how candid she was in this book.”
“We honestly thought that it was going to be a nothingburger. This actually made me want to buy it,” this person added, saying it was “smart of her to get it out before Joe [Biden publishes his memoir].”
The second source also said that “I’m sure the [book] tour will sell out. I’m sure she will make a lot of money from this. I’m sure it will raise her profile even more. But it’s not going to give her any political footing.”
Michael LaRosa, who served as first lady Jill Biden’s spokesman, disagreed with his former colleagues, arguing that Harris may benefit politically.
“Her candor in these excerpts is exactly what she needs to convey if she ever wants back into the presidential arena and she’s doing it in an impressively direct fashion,” he said.
“Will the Bidens like it? Absolutely not. But Harris seemingly has zero f—s to give since it was the Bidens who offloaded that compressed campaign in her lap, making a decision that they should have made 2 years earlier.”
‘If she’s shining, he’s dimmed’
Harris defended her decision not to chime in “during all those months of growing panic” about Biden’s cognitive health as a sign of her being a “loyal person.”
That loyalty, however, didn’t stop her from delivering several other painful punches — with her blaming her silence on her “delicate status” within the White House and even suggesting the Biden admin added “fuel” to negative narratives being peddled about her by critics.
When she was “attacked … on everything from my laugh, to my tone of voice, to whom I’d dated in my 20s, or claimed I was a ‘DEI hire,’ the White House rarely pushed back with my actual résumé,” Harris complained.
“They had a huge comms team; they had Karine Jean-Pierre briefing in the pressroom every day. But getting anything positive said about my work or any defense against untrue attacks was almost impossible.
“Worse, I often learned that the president’s staff was adding fuel to negative narratives that sprang up around me,” she continues.
Harris suggested it was in part driven by polls showing her popularity was inching closer to Biden’s.
“Their thinking was zero-sum: If she’s shining, he’s dimmed. None of them grasped that if I did well, he did well. That given the concerns about his age, my visible success as his vice president was vital,” the excerpt says.
“It would serve as a testament to his judgment in choosing me and reassurance that if something happened, the country was in good hands. My success was important for him.
“His team didn’t get it.”
Still, despite the subtle jabs, Harris doubled down on her decision not to convince Biden to drop out, saying that “the American people had chosen him before in the same matchup,” staying quiet about her own concerns because “It was just possible he was right about this, too.”
“And of all the people in the White House, I was in the worst position to make the case that he should drop out. I knew it would come off to him as incredibly self-serving if I advised him not to run. He would see it as naked ambition, perhaps as poisonous disloyalty, even if my only message was: Don’t let the other guy win.”
“’It’s Joe and Jill’s decision.’ We all said that, like a mantra, as if we’d all been hypnotized.”
Harris goes on to claim that she would have stepped in if she feared Biden was incapacitated.
“Many people want to spin up a narrative of some big conspiracy at the White House to hide Joe Biden’s infirmity. Here is the truth as I lived it. Joe Biden was a smart guy with long experience and deep conviction, able to discharge the duties of president. On his worst day, he was more deeply knowledgeable, more capable of exercising judgment, and far more compassionate than Donald Trump on his best,” the excerpt says.
“But at 81, Joe got tired. That’s when his age showed in physical and verbal stumbles. I don’t think it’s any surprise that the debate debacle happened right after two back-to-back trips to Europe and a flight to the West Coast for a Hollywood fundraiser.”
“I don’t believe it was incapacity. If I believed that, I would have said so. As loyal as I am to President Biden, I am more loyal to my country,” she writes.
Leave a Reply