3 days ago
2
The revelation of former President Joe Biden‘s cancer diagnosis has seemed to halt the ongoing debate over his fitness for office. But the co-author of the new book “Original Sin” tells Variety that conversation is fair, and should continue.
Together, CNN’s Jake Tapper and Axios’ Alex Thompson are the journalists behind “Original Sin,” a book that depicts a frail and unwell President Joe Biden shielded from reality, and from the press, by a coterie of advisers. In Tapper and Thompson’s telling, Biden’s fitness for office was questionable, and his decision to run for re-election in 2024 — a choice he reversed by leaving the race in July of that year, following a disastrous performance at a debate against then-candidate Donald Trump — led directly to Republican victory in November. Two days before the book’s May 20 release, Biden’s office announced that he has been diagnosed with metastatic prostate cancer, news that has led some Democrats to call for a moratorium on litigating issues around Biden’s choice to run and his condition while in office on sympathetic grounds.
Thompson doesn’t agree. Prior to “Original Sin,” which was reported and written over the course of three blistering months, Thompson reported on Biden’s condition throughout his presidency. In April, he won a prize for his reporting on the 46th President’s cognitive issues at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, and gave a fiery speech. “We — myself included — missed a lot of this story. And some people trust us less because of it,” he said. “We bear some responsibility for faith in the media being at such lows.”
Variety spoke with Thompson on the day of the book’s release, discussing Biden’s recent news and his re-election campaign, and about Thompson’s own plans to continue reporting the story out.
How has your thinking about the issues covered in this book been reframed in the last two days or so, since the announcement of President Biden’s diagnosis? Has it changed the way you thought about your reporting or the conclusions you drew?
It hasn’t changed, in that the story is very much framed as a tragedy. After leaving office and getting a potentially lethal form of advanced cancer — for a guy that has been through a lot and has also given the majority of his life to public service, it seems like a very tragic end. The book is also about how risky it was to run for re-election at his age, and if he had won, he would now be having to deal with this in the Oval Office, and if the risks associated with him being that age were not weighed by him or his family or his advisers, that’s also part of the story.
Some Biden White House advisers are a little taken aback about the timing of this announcement and are wondering whether or not there were any signs before. Zeke Emanuel, who worked in the Biden White House on the COVID [Advisory Board], said that it’s likely he’s had this cancer for a few years. The thing that’s changed is: Did we miss something more here? That’s something both Jake and I are asking ourselves, and something we’ll continue to report out. We see this as the first draft, not the last draft.
I think there are people who would be outraged we’re even discussing the topic of Biden’s acuity in office given his medical news. Democratic political strategist David Axelrod, who has been critical of Biden, recently said that the topic should be set aside in light of this announcement. I’m curious why you think it’s important to keep discussing it.
Because it’s an important story that isn’t just about Joe Biden. And it’s not just about the people around Joe Biden. It is also about the Democratic Party at this moment. The first question of this book was: How did Donald Trump come back? There’s so many reasons, but to us, the conclusion was that the most important decision of the election was Joe Biden deciding to run again. It’s an important story to explain why we are in the moment we’re in, including all the things Trump is doing every day, support or oppose.
Even before Biden’s diagnosis was made public, I saw criticism that this book is a distraction given the upheaval President Trump is causing in office — and that’s the story that deserves your attention. How do you respond?
I heard similar arguments from many people when Biden was still President: “You should cover Trump more.” I think that this is an important and newsworthy story, and there are many, many reporters covering Trump. People can do two things at once. Some people in the Democratic Party are, in good faith, really just concerned about Donald Trump. But I do think that there are members of the Democratic Party that don’t want to reckon with what just happened, including the fact that a lot of the leaders of the party covered for a guy that many knew was probably not up to doing the job he was running for.
Why did Biden’s camp agree to have him do that early debate — the one that tanked his campaign?
One, they were behind, and they needed to remind people that it was a choice election, not a referendum on Joe Biden. Two, Joe Biden wanted to debate. And three, the early debate is a bit of a hedge. If the debate doesn’t totally go our way, there’s time to recover. There was this belief that even as he was in decline and no longer capable of some of the things he was able to do, he rises to the occasion. He’s a red-light performer.
Like a lot of old people, he has good hours and bad hours, good days and bad days, good weeks and bad weeks. Bad hours, bad days, bad weeks became more frequent and became worse, and eventually, it caught up to them.
Biden was less available to the press than his predecessors — but observing this during his presidency, I chalked it up, at least somewhat, to the media ecosystem having shifted. A president doesn’t need a traditional news interview in the same way. Do you think Biden’s team took advantage of this shift in expectations?
They were creating a strategy around his limitations. It’s true that the media landscape has changed — you’re not going to reach all the voters you need by doing interviews with the New York Times. But listen: It’s not like Vogue covers [for Jill Biden] is really new media. It was safe media. It was clear they did not have confidence in his communication abilities.
Stipulated that you did report on the age issue throughout Biden’s Presidency: There’s a call-coming-from-inside-the-house quality to critiquing the media for missing the story. Why do you think that the larger story was missed?
First, because people in the White House were lying. And after the [first-term] Trump Administration, when there was a feeling that everyone was lying, there was a lack of skepticism. Some people forgot that every White House lies. It was a combination of not being skeptical enough and D.C. journalism groupthink where they’re all reporting on the same thing, and the real story is outside the circle.
This book came about remarkably quickly. Did you and Jake Tapper pitch it after the election?
This book started on Nov. 4 [one day before election]. I was on set with Jake, and he impulsively said, “Hey, I think she may lose. If she does, I’ve been thinking about this book. Would you be interested?” Jake and I knew each other, but we didn’t “we’re going to write a book together” know each other. I was like, “Sure, yeah.” On the night of Nov. 6, he sent me the draft of a book proposal. We finalized it on Nov. 7 with no words written, no interviews done. And then we turned the first draft on Jan. 31 and talked to 200 people in that time. It was crazy.
I find that pace shocking.
I don’t know how we did it. And it’s almost all Democrats that we talked to. It wasn’t Republicans saying “I told you so.” It’s a soul-searching story.
This question has really been scrambled by recent news, but I’m curious how you think the Biden legacy will continue to play out. He still has have ardent defenders, but I wonder if the conversation around his decision to run again will continue to erode his reputation, even in light of recent news.
A lot of Biden people are very sad about this, because they feel that in the near term his legacy is going to be “Trump came back.” Biden himself framed his presidency in those terms: “Will Trump come back or not?” And it makes them sad, because a lot of the people that worked in the White House and still love Joe Biden have been very frustrated with how this last year has gone, and feel that he won’t live to see people come around to the good parts of his legacy.
Is it your intention to keep covering Biden in the weeks and months ahead?
I would not say it’s my main beat, but I will continue to cover him — and also the Democratic Party grappling with the Biden legacy. Jake and I think there’s more to the story. We have more reporting we want to add, because there weren’t tons of people on the record in this book, but elite people speaking up has given some others more courage.
Do you think there will be a reckoning in the Democratic Party?
I think there are a lot of Democrats that believe we have to have a reckoning, and then there are some Democrats that believe — mistakes were made, move on. I don’t know which faction of the Democratic Party is going to win out or is more strategic. But there’s only one side that’s more honest.
This interview has been edited and condensed.
English (US) ·