ED MORRISSEY: Boom: Biden ‘Reckless’ to Run Again, Says … Kamala Harris.
And the incoherence only gets worse. Harris refers to “months of growing panic” about Biden’s cognitive “health,” which is a longer timeline than the three weeks between the debate and Biden’s withdrawal. Harris claims she didn’t speak up out of “loyalty,” but Harris wasn’t supposed to be loyal to Biden. She swore fealty to the Constitution, and if Harris had “months of growing panic” about Biden’s unfitness for the job, the Constitution provides the mechanism to deal with it. Harris could have convened Biden’s Cabinet and then gone to Congress with those concerns, and had him removed from office over incapacitation.
However, Harris then argues that there was no reason for “months of growing panic” in the first place:
“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.
So … what was the “months of growing panic” about, then? Why gripe now about having to remain silent out of loyalty? Harris wants to eat her cake and have it at the same time with this argument. It seems likely now that some in the White House will admit to Biden’s incapacity while in office and implicate Harris as being aware of it. In her book, Harris appears to be providing cover stories to cover all bases, even when those stories contradict each other.
