The Tenuous Relationship Between Biden and Harris

This week, an unspoken rift between Joe Biden and Kamala Harris seems to have finally surfaced.

In her latest memoir, “What Will Come,” or was it “107 Days”?—it’s a bit unclear—she seems to have distanced herself from her former boss with some vague statements.

“It’s Joe and Jill’s decision,” Harris recalled the alarm that filled the party during the last months of Biden’s reelection attempt last year. It was like a mantra we all repeated, almost hypnotically.

Reflecting on that time, she expressed concerns, saying, “Looking back, I think it was reckless. The stakes were simply too high. This was not a choice that should have been left to someone’s ego or personal ambition.”

There’s something striking about her isolated tone.

Harris was closely aligned with Biden’s controversial decision to push for a second term, despite the complications that surrounded it.

She was convinced that the supposed right-wing conspiracy could be a “cheap” avenue to victory, contrasting with the liberal critics and lower-tier staff who observed the president from a distance.

No, throughout this time, Kamala Harris stood by Biden.

She acted as a fierce defender when special adviser Robert Huar revealed that the president no longer remembers significant personal events, including the death of his son Beau or the timeframe of his vice presidency.

“As a former prosecutor, those comments are free, inaccurate, and inappropriate,” she asserted emphatically.

“The characterization of the president’s attitude in that report couldn’t be further from the facts; it’s clearly politically motivated,” she continued, standing firm.

Yet months later, the audio from Huar’s interview appeared to support his claims.

Now, with a bit of political maneuvering, she seems to want recognition for calling out the ineffectiveness of Biden’s 2024 campaign.

But by doing so, it feels like she’s trying to secure her own political future.

Backing a losing candidate in 2024 might be seen as a misstep, but perhaps, it wasn’t purely a matter of patriotism for her; rather, it could have been about advancing her own career.

While she insists that “many people want to spin a narrative about a big White House conspiracy to cover Joe Biden’s weaknesses,” she also claims, “the truth is that Joe Biden is a smart man with a lot of experience and strong beliefs, capable of fulfilling his presidential duties.”

“I don’t see it as incompetence,” she states during discussions surrounding Biden’s exit from the race.

“If I truly believed that, I would have said so. I’m loyal to President Biden, but I’m even more loyal to my country,” she added, emphasizing her commitment.

But is that really the crux of the conversation?

It seems like more than just talk; there’s a growing record of Biden’s hesitance during his tenure last year.

His close associates kept his condition from other staffers, and he even overlooked occasions, like a fundraiser hosted by George Clooney.

At its core, “107 Days” suggests an electoral defeat that many might view as a desperate attempt to elevate her own standing rather than a genuine recognition of her efforts.

“It felt nearly impossible to achieve anything positive in my role while countering false accusations,” she lamented.

“I’ve come to realize just how much the president’s team fueled negative perceptions about me,” she expressed.

“It certainly appeared as though they had decided to undermine me further.”

There’s another truth that many seem to acknowledge, except perhaps her. Kamala Harris’s rise to the vice presidency followed the 2020 election.

Her time in office, marked by challenges and setbacks, was not unexpected—especially for those familiar with her track record, including the Biden team who may have overestimated her potential.

Harris seeks validation for her loyalty to Biden.

She talks about patriotism, even as she continues to mislead the public.

And it’s as if she remains blissfully unaware of her place in the narrative of her life at this point.

Harris promotes “107 Days” as a narrative about underdogs striving to save the nation.

In reality, though, it plays out as the tale of someone perhaps delusional, seeing the country through a lens of her persistent denial.