Biden’s decision to drop out crystallized Sunday. His staff knew one minute before the public did

Biden’s decision to drop out crystallized Sunday. His staff knew one minute before the public did
1 / 2
It was at his home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, where US President Joe Biden made a decision on July 21, 2024, to drop out of his reelection battle with Donald Trump, in a historic move that plunges the already turbulent 2024 White House race into uncharted territory. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 22 July 2024
Follow

Biden’s decision to drop out crystallized Sunday. His staff knew one minute before the public did

Biden’s decision to drop out crystallized Sunday. His staff knew one minute before the public did
  • It wasn’t until Saturday evening that Biden began to come to the conclusion that he would not run for reelection
  • By Sunday evening, Biden for President had formally changed to Harris for President.

WASHINGTON: At 1:45 p.m. Sunday, President Joe Biden’s senior staff was notified that he was stepping away from the 2024 race. At 1:46 p.m., that message was made public.
It was never Biden’s intention to leave the race: Up until he decided to step aside Sunday, he was all in.
His campaign was planning fundraisers and events and setting up travel over the next few weeks. But even as Biden was publicly dug in and insisting he was staying in the race, he was quietly reflecting on the disaster of the past few weeks, on the past three years of his presidency and on the scope of his half-century career in politics.
In the end, it was the president’s decision alone, and he made it quietly, from his vacation home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, sick with COVID-19, the first lady with him as he talked it through with a small circle of people who have been with him for decades.
“This has got to be one of the hardest decisions he’s ever made,” said Sen. Chris Coons, D-Delaware, the president’s closest ally in Congress, who spoke with him Sunday. “I know he wanted to fight and keep going and show that he could beat Donald Trump again, but as he heard more and more input, I think he was wrestling with what would be the best for the country,” Coons said in an interview with the Associated Press.
This story is based on interviews with more than a dozen people familiar with the president’s thinking over the past few weeks, days and hours as he made his decision. They spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity to talk about private discussions.
Deciding to leave the race
It wasn’t until Saturday evening that Biden began to come to the conclusion that he would not run for reelection. He started writing a letter to the American people.
Biden had been off the campaign trail for a few days, isolated because of COVID-19, when it all started to deeply sink in — his worsening chances of being able to defeat Donald Trump with so much of his party in open rebellion, seeking to push him out of the race — not to mention the persistent voter concerns about his age that were only exacerbated by the catastrophic debate.
Biden was at his beach home with some of his and Jill Biden’s closest aides: chief strategist Mike Donilon, counselor to the president Steve Ricchetti, White House deputy chief of staff Annie Tomasini, and Anthony Bernal, senior adviser to the first lady.
By Sunday, his decision crystallized. He spoke multiple times with Vice President Kamala Harris, whom he would endorse. He informed White House chief of staff Jeff Zients, and his longtime aide and campaign chairwoman Jen O’Malley Dillon.
A small group of senior advisers from both the campaign and the White House were assembled for the 1:45 p.m. call to relay Biden’s decision, while his campaign staff released the social media announcement one minute later.
“It has been the greatest honor of my life to serve as your President. And while it has been my intention to seek reelection, I believe it is in the best interest of my party and the country for me to stand down and to focus solely on fulfilling my duties as President for the remainder of my term,” Biden wrote.
Just about a half-hour later came his public vote of support for Harris. It was a carefully choreographed strategy meant to give the president’s initial statement full weight, and to put a period on the moment before launching forward into the next step.
“Today I want to offer my full support and endorsement for Kamala to be the nominee of our party this year,” Biden said in another post on X. “Democrats — it’s time to come together and beat Trump.”
Elizabeth Alexander, Jill Biden’s communications director, said, “down to the last hours of the decision only he could make, she was supportive of whatever road he chose.
“She’s his biggest believer, champion, and always on his side, in that trusted way only a spouse of almost 50 years can be,” Alexander said.
About the debate
It’s not like things had been going great before the June 27 debate. In an August 2023 poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, fully 77 percent of US adults said Biden was too old to be effective for four more years. Not only did 89 percent of Republicans say that, but so did 69 percent of Democrats.
And it hadn’t gotten any better by April, when more than half of US adults thought Biden’s presidency hurt the country on issues like the cost of living and immigration.
But Biden had insisted — to himself, to the nation, to his supporters — that he would be able to bring voters around if he got out there, told people about his record, explained it to them. Talked to them. Looked them in the eye.
He had a lifetime of experience that told him that if he stuck to it, he’d overcome. His campaign was so confident, in fact, that they arranged to go around the Commission on Presidential Debates to set up a series of faceoffs with Trump under a new set of rules.
That produced the June 27 debate that set Biden’s downfall in motion. Biden gave nonsensical answers, trailed off mid-sentence and appeared to stare blankly in front of an audience of 51 million people. Perhaps most distressing to other Democrats, Biden didn’t go after Trump’s myriad falsehoods about his involvement in the violence around the insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, abortion rights or immigration.
Biden and his team blamed the night on so many different things. He had a cold. He was jet-lagged. He needed to get more sleep. That night opened the door for his party to push him out.
A slow acceptance
Publicly and privately Biden was fighting to stay in the race. He was working to convince voters that he was up for the task for another four years. He was frustrated by the Democrats coming out publicly against him, but even angrier about the leaks and anonymous sources relaying how even former President Barack Obama and former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi were working to get him to drop out.
It looked like he’d won out a couple times; the chorus of naysayers seemed to die down. He had some well-received speeches mixed with so-so TV interviews and a day featuring an extended news conference in which he displayed a nuanced grasp of policy but also committed a few gasp-inducing gaffes.
But the doubts didn’t go away.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer eventually invited top Biden staff to a meeting on July 11 to talk about their concerns. It didn’t go well. Senators expressed their concerns, and almost none of them said they had confidence in the president. But even afterwards, Schumer was worried it wasn’t getting to Biden.
Following the meeting, Schumer called Democratic House Leader Hakeem Jeffries, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi and former President Obama. Schumer decided that day to request a meeting with Biden.
At a July 13 meeting in Rehoboth, Schumer told Biden he was there out of love and affection. And he delivered a personal appeal focused on Biden’s legacy, the country’s future and the impact the top of the ticket could have on congressional races — and how that could potentially affect the Supreme Court. That same day came the attempted assassination of Donald Trump.
Schumer told the president he didn’t expect him to make an immediate decision, but he hoped Biden would think about what he said, according to a person familiar with the conversation.
Biden responded, “I need another week,” and the two men hugged.
Sunday's decision
It was full steam ahead until Biden pulled the emergency brake.
The president had lost his voice, but he was recovering well and his doctor had sent an update to the public shortly before 1 p.m. on his condition. His small circle decided to post the statement on X on Sunday, rather than let it leak out for days before he was prepared to address the nation, which he is expected to do sometime early this week.
Much of his campaign was blindsided, and it was clear by how little had changed after he dropped out. For hours after the announcement, Biden’s campaign website reflected that he was still running and KamalaHarris.com still redirected to Biden’s page.
Even Harris’ statement announcing her intent to succeed Biden was sent from “Joe Biden for President.”
After the public announcement, Zients held a senior staff call, and sent out an email, and spoke with members of Biden’s Cabinet, emphasizing to them that nothing had changed when it came to the business of governing and that the administration still had a lot of work to do, according to two people with knowledge of the message. And the president was also making personal calls.
“Team — I wanted to make sure you saw the attached letter from the President,” Zients wrote in the staff email. “I could not be more proud to work for President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and the American people — alongside all of you, the best White House team in history. There’s so much more to do — and as President Biden says, ‘there is nothing America can’t do — when we do it together.’”
Vermont Sen. Peter Welch, a Democrat who had called for Biden to bow out, was gardening with his wife when the news broke, and said he was momentarily “stunned.” Senators texted each other questioning if it was really happening.
Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal was at an event in his state, and there was spontaneous applause when it was announced to the crowd that Biden wouldn’t run, he said.
There was a sense of excitement and energy in the crowd “that has been completely lacking,” Blumenthal said.
“It was also, let’s be blunt, a sense of relief,” he said. “And a sense of reverence for Joe Biden.”
By Sunday evening, Biden for President had formally changed to Harris for President.
O’Malley Dillon told campaign staff their jobs were safe, because the operation was shifting to a campaign for Harris.
 


Trump rattles NATO allies as he descends on summit

Trump rattles NATO allies as he descends on summit
Updated 25 June 2025
Follow

Trump rattles NATO allies as he descends on summit

Trump rattles NATO allies as he descends on summit
  • The alliance hopes to keep Trump bound to its mutual defense vow by meeting his demand for a headline figure of five percent of GDP on defense spending

THE HAGUE: US President Donald Trump swept into NATO’s Hague summit Tuesday, with allies hoping a pledge to ramp up defense spending will keep the mercurial leader of the military superpower committed to protecting them.
Trump joined leaders from NATO’s 31 other members to kick off the two-day gathering with a dinner hosted by Dutch King Willem-Alexander in the ornate Orange Hall at his royal residence.
The alliance hopes to keep Trump bound to its mutual defense vow by meeting his demand for a headline figure of five percent of GDP on defense spending.
But Trump refused to say he was committed to NATO’s Article Five clause and protecting Europe in comments that will likely rattle his counterparts on the continent.
“Depends on your definition. There’s numerous definitions of Article Five,” Trump told journalists aboard Air Force One. “I’m committed to being their friend.”
To keep Trump on board, NATO members have thrashed out a compromise deal to dedicate 3.5 percent to core military needs by 2035, and 1.5 percent to broader security-related areas such as cybersecurity and infrastructure.
NATO says the military build-up is crucial to deter Russia, which officials warn is rapidly rebuilding its forces depleted by the war in Ukraine and could be ready to attack the alliance in five years.
But it is just as important for keeping Trump engaged as Washington warns it may shift forces from Europe to face the threat from China.
“They’re going to be lifting it to five percent, that’s good,” Trump said. “It gives them much more power.”
But while the promise of more spending could win Trump over, deep divisions remain over the approach to Europe’s key security issue: Russia’s war in Ukraine.
Trump said he would probably meet Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky while in The Hague, with Kyiv hoping it can avoid a repeat of the pair’s infamous Oval Office bust-up.
European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen told an audience in The Hague that NATO’s “historic” spending pledge showed that “the Europe of defense has finally awakened.”
Alliance leaders meanwhile — many of whom are struggling to find the money that will be required — lined up to argue that the threats facing the continent required bold steps.
“We must navigate this era of radical uncertainty with agility,” British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said in announcing the UK’s commitment to meet the target.
Starmer on Wednesday will formally announce that his country is buying a dozen F-35A fighters, capable of carrying atomic weapons to support NATO’s nuclear mission.
The purchase marks an expansion of Britain’s nuclear deterrence, which is currently limited to submarine-launched missiles.
A statement late Tuesday from Starmer’s office quoted Rutte as saying: “I strongly welcome today’s announcement,” calling it “yet another robust British contribution to NATO.”
Separately, powerhouse Germany announced plans to hit the 3.5-percent figure for core defense needs by 2029 — six years before the timeline.
At the other end of the scale, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez has risked Trump’s ire by insisting his country doesn’t have to meet the five percent target.
For its part, the Kremlin attacked NATO for its “rampant militarization,” with spokesman Dmitry Peskov saying: “This is the reality that surrounds us.”
Since storming back to power, Trump has upended the West’s approach to the three-year conflict by turning his back on Kyiv and opening the door to closer ties with Moscow.
Zelensky was set to play less of a central role than at recent NATO gatherings and will not attend the main working session.
But Ukraine’s president said he would discuss with Trump buying a package of weapons made up mainly of air defenses.
Zelensky would also push Trump on imposing new sanctions on Russia as Moscow has stalled peace efforts being pressed by Washington, Kyiv said.
“There are no signs that Putin wants to stop this war. Russia rejects all peace proposals including those from the US. Putin only thinks about war,” the Ukrainian leader told a defense forum held alongside the summit.
Trump did briefly meet on the sidelines of the summit late Tuesday with Turkiye’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who urged “close dialogue” to end the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
Rutte said allies would send the message that support for Kyiv was “unwavering and will persist.”
But despite his insistence that Ukraine’s bid for membership remains “irreversible,” NATO will avoid any mention of Kyiv’s push to join after Trump ruled it out.


Lawsuit challenges billions of dollars in Trump administration funding cuts

Lawsuit challenges billions of dollars in Trump administration funding cuts
Updated 25 June 2025
Follow

Lawsuit challenges billions of dollars in Trump administration funding cuts

Lawsuit challenges billions of dollars in Trump administration funding cuts
  • The lawsuit argues the Trump administration has used the clause for the basis of a “slash-and-burn campaign” to cut federal grants

BOSTON: Attorneys general from more than 20 states and Washington, D.C. filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday challenging billions of dollars in funding cuts made by the Trump administration that would fund everything from crime prevention to food security to scientific research.
The lawsuit filed in Boston is asking a judge to limit the Trump administration from relying on an obscure clause in the federal regulation to cut grants that don’t align with its priorities. Since January, the lawsuit argues that the administration has used that clause to cancel entire programs and thousands of grants that had been previously awarded to states and grantees.
“Defendants’ decision to invoke the Clause to terminate grants based on changed agency priorities is unlawful several times over,” the plaintiffs argued. “The rulemaking history of the Clause makes plain that the (Office of Management and Budget) intended for the Clause to permit terminations in only limited circumstances and provides no support for a broad power to terminate grants on a whim based on newly identified agency priorities.”
The lawsuit argues the Trump administration has used the clause for the basis of a “slash-and-burn campaign” to cut federal grants.
“Defendants have terminated thousands of grant awards made to Plaintiffs, pulling the rug out from under the States, and taking away critical federal funding on which States and their residents rely for essential programs,” the lawsuit added.
Rhode Island Attorney General Neronha said this lawsuit was just one of several the coalition of mostly Democratic states have filed over funding cuts. For the most part, they have largely succeeded in a string of legal victories to temporarily halt cuts.
This one, though, may be the broadest challenge to those funding cuts.
“It’s no secret that this President has gone to great lengths to intercept federal funding to the states, but what may be lesser known is how the Trump Administration is attempting to justify their unlawful actions,” Neronha said in a statement. “Nearly every lawsuit this coalition of Democratic attorneys general has filed against the Administration is related to its unlawful and flagrant attempts to rob Americans of basic programs and services upon which they rely. Most often, this comes in the form of illegal federal funding cuts, which the Administration attempts to justify via a so-called ‘agency priorities clause.”
Connecticut Attorney General William Tong said the lawsuit aimed to stop funding cuts he described as indiscriminate and illegal.
“There is no ‘because I don’t like you’ or ‘because I don’t feel like it anymore’ defunding clause in federal law that allows the President to bypass Congress on a whim,” Tong said in a statement. “Since his first minutes in office, Trump has unilaterally defunded our police, our schools, our health care, and more. He can’t do that, and that’s why over and over again we have blocked him in court and won back our funding.”
In Massachusetts, Attorney General Andrea Campbell said the US Department of Agriculture terminated a $11 million agreement with the state Department of Agricultural Resources connecting hundreds of farmers to hundreds of food distribution sites while the US Environmental Protection Agency terminated a $1 million grant to the state Department of Public Health to reduce asthma triggers in low-income communities.
“We cannot stand idly by while this President continues to launch unprecedented, unlawful attacks on Massachusetts’ residents, institutions, and economy,” Campbell said in a statement.
The lawsuit argues that the OMB promulgated the use of the clause in question to justify the cuts. The clause in question, according to the lawsuit, refers to five words that say federal agents can terminate grants if the award “no longer effectuates the program goals or agency priorities.”
“The Trump Administration has claimed that five words in this Clause— ‘no longer effectuates . . . agency priorities’— provide federal agencies with virtually unfettered authority to withhold federal funding any time they no longer wish to support the programs for which Congress has appropriated funding,” the lawsuit said.


US intel says strikes did not destroy Iran nuclear program

This picture shows a general view of an Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) in Isfahan on November 20, 2004. (AFP file photo)
This picture shows a general view of an Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) in Isfahan on November 20, 2004. (AFP file photo)
Updated 25 June 2025
Follow

US intel says strikes did not destroy Iran nuclear program

This picture shows a general view of an Uranium Conversion Facility (UCF) in Isfahan on November 20, 2004. (AFP file photo)
  • White House Press Secretary Karline Leavitt confirmed the authenticity of the assessment but said it was “flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked”
  • Israel launched an unprecedented air campaign targeting Iranian nuclear sites, scientists and top military brass on June 13 in a bid to set back Tehran’s nuclear efforts

WASHINGTON: A classified preliminary US intelligence report has concluded that American strikes on Iran set back Tehran’s nuclear program by just a few months — rather than destroying it as claimed by President Donald Trump.
US media on Tuesday cited people familiar with the Defense Intelligence Agency findings as saying the weekend strikes did not fully eliminate Iran’s centrifuges or stockpile of enriched uranium.
The strikes sealed off entrances to some facilities without destroying underground buildings, according to the report.
White House Press Secretary Karline Leavitt confirmed the authenticity of the assessment but said it was “flat-out wrong and was classified as ‘top secret’ but was still leaked.”
“The leaking of this alleged assessment is a clear attempt to demean President Trump, and discredit the brave fighter pilots who conducted a perfectly executed mission to obliterate Iran’s nuclear program,” Leavitt posted on X.
“Everyone knows what happens when you drop fourteen 30,000 pound bombs perfectly on their targets: total obliteration,” she added.
US B-2 bombers hit two Iranian nuclear sites with massive GBU-57 bunker-buster bombs over the weekend, while a guided missile submarine struck a third with Tomahawk cruise missiles.
Trump called the strikes a “spectacular military success” and said they had “obliterated” the nuclear sites, while Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Washington’s forces had “devastated the Iranian nuclear program.”
General Dan Caine, the top US military officer, has struck a more cautious tone, saying the strikes caused “extremely severe damage” to the Iranian facilities.
Iran’s government said Tuesday that it had “taken the necessary measures” to ensure the continuation of its nuclear program.
“Plans for restarting (the facilities) have been prepared in advance, and our strategy is to ensure that production and services are not disrupted,” the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Mohammad Eslami, said in a statement aired on state television.
An adviser to Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, meanwhile said his country still had stocks of enriched uranium and that “the game is not over.”
Israel launched an unprecedented air campaign targeting Iranian nuclear sites, scientists and top military brass on June 13 in a bid to set back Tehran’s nuclear efforts.
Trump had spent weeks pursuing a diplomatic path to replace the nuclear deal with Tehran that he tore up during his first term in 2018, but he ultimately decided to take military action.
The US operation was massive, with Caine saying it involved more than 125 US aircraft including stealth bombers, fighters, aerial refueling tankers, a guided missile submarine and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance aircraft.

 


US puts up reward for American detained in Afghanistan

US puts up reward for American detained in Afghanistan
Updated 25 June 2025
Follow

US puts up reward for American detained in Afghanistan

US puts up reward for American detained in Afghanistan

WASHINGTON: The United States on Tuesday offered a $5 million reward for information to find a US citizen who it said was abducted in Afghanistan in 2022.
Mahmood Shah Habibi, who worked for a telecommunications firm and holds dual nationality, was abducted along with his driver in Kabul and detained by the Taliban government’s intelligence service, the State Department said.
“Since that time, the so-called Taliban government has not yet provided any information about Mr. Habibi’s whereabouts or condition,” State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters.
In January, the Taliban government released two other Americans, Ryan Corbett and William McKenty, for an Afghan detained in the United States in an exchange mediated by Qatar.
Dozens of foreign nationals have been arrested since the Taliban returned to power in August 2021 following the withdrawal of the US military.


Tiny Greek island appeals for help after migrant increase

Tiny Greek island appeals for help after migrant increase
Updated 24 June 2025
Follow

Tiny Greek island appeals for help after migrant increase

Tiny Greek island appeals for help after migrant increase
  • Migrants leaving Libya hope to reach the European Union and follow instructions from people-smugglers, who for the past few months have been directing them to Crete and tiny Gavdos
  • Gavdos lies off the southern coast of neighboring Crete and is about 300 kilometers (186 miles) from the Libyan city of Tobruk across the Mediterranean Sea

ATHENS: Greece’s southernmost island is facing a significant increase in migration from Libya, its mayor said on Tuesday, warning it does not have the means to cope.
Lilian Stefanakis said the rise was “a heavy burden” for Gavdos, which is just 30 square kilometers (11.5 square miles), has 70 residents off-season and only a handful of shops.
Gavdos lies off the southern coast of neighboring Crete and is about 300 kilometers (186 miles) from the Libyan city of Tobruk across the Mediterranean Sea.
“We don’t have the capacity to manage these flows,” Stefanakis told Greek public radio Ert. “Institutional solutions must be found.”
According to the port police, 7,300 migrants have arrived on Crete and Gavdos since the start of this year compared to 4,935 for the whole of 2024.
Since the start of this month, 2,550 arrivals have been recorded.
Migrants leaving Libya hope to reach the European Union and follow instructions from people-smugglers, who for the past few months have been directing them to Crete and tiny Gavdos.
Crete does not have any camps to register asylum seekers and offers only emergency shelters for migrants before they are transferred to mainland Greece.
“The smugglers will not set the rules,” Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis said on Monday, promising to raise the issue about increased migration flows from Libya at the next European summit.
“Navy ships will be sent outside Libya’s territorial waters in order to control illegal migrant flows,” he added.
Government spokesman Pavlos Marinakis later clarified that two military frigates would be sent.
Stefanakis said a vessel from the European Union’s border agency Frontex was deployed and called for further reinforcement on the island.
The northeastern islands in the Aegean Sea opposite Turkiye have traditionally been entry points to Greece and Europe for undocumented migrants and camps have been built.