The brother of the former secretary to the Department of Education under Trump condemned the Secret Service‘s failure to prevent the shooter from getting within 150 yards of Trump, labeling it as “either malice or massive incompetence.”
Hopefully after the tragedy yesterday in Butler PA we can all recognize that unaccountable bloated bureaucracies continue to fail us as Americans.
Donald J Trump is alive today solely due to a bad wind estimate by an evil would be assasin. As the graphics show the full value… pic.twitter.com/VU6JYDxiVM
Prince, who founded the private security company Blackwater, argued that Trump survived only due to a miscalculation by the shooter, whose bullet grazed Trump’s ear instead of hitting him in the head. He emphasized that the Secret Service’s handling of the situation was inadequate, claiming that a counter-sniper’s hesitation and lack of coordination were evident during the incident.
“Hopefully after the tragedy yesterday in Butler [Pennsylvania] we can all recognize that unaccountable bloated bureaucracies continue to fail us as Americans,” Prince stated. He criticized the security perimeter and the response time, highlighting the chaotic evacuation that left Trump exposed to further danger.
Prince drew on his experience in providing diplomatic security, arguing that the basics of securing a perimeter were not executed properly. He called for accountability and a shift toward merit-based hiring and leadership in security agencies.
In the wake of the shooting, President Joe Biden has directed the Secret Service to review all security measures for this week’s Republican National Convention and launched an independent review of the security at the rally. The FBI is leading the investigation into the attempted assassination, and there are growing calls from Congress for investigations into the security failures.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and other lawmakers have demanded a full investigation, with hearings expected to feature testimony from Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle, the Department of Homeland Security, and the FBI later this month. The incident has raised concerns about the adequacy of security protocols for high-profile political events, especially with the upcoming convention.
Prince’s post comes as the Associated Press reported Sunday an account from sources that described shocking details that allegedly occurred moments before the shooting took place.
A group of rallygoers reportedly saw the suspect climb to the top of a roof of a nearby building and warned local law enforcement, two law enforcement officials told the outlet.
One law enforcement officer climbed a ladder and saw the suspect lying on the roof, who proceeded to point his rifle at the officer. The officer ducked down the ladder, and the shooter quickly took shots toward Trump. At that point, Secret Service counter-snipers began to shoot at him, officials said under the condition of anonymity.
The Secret Service has said there were four counter-sniper teams: two from the agency and two from local law enforcement on the ground. The agency has also said Cheatle was in Milwaukee at the time of the shooting, where this week’s Republican National Convention is being held.
The shooting has been described by sources as coming from the “three o’clock” position of Trump’s podium location, with shots coming from his right side about 150 meters away, according to CNN. After gunfire began, counter-snipers began shooting at the suspect, who was found dead on the roof of an American Glass Research building outside the perimeter of the rally.
Authorities have identified the shooter as 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks, who was killed by Secret Service agents after firing multiple rounds, resulting in injuries to Trump and the death of a bystander. The investigation is ongoing, with a focus on how the shooter obtained rooftop access and evaded security measures.
A trio of Republican-led states called on the Supreme Court on Tuesday to halt the Biden administration’s plan to slash student debt repayments for millions of borrowers.
Republican attorneys general from Alaska, South Carolina, and Texas are challenging the Saving on a Valuable Education, or SAVE, Plan, which is aimed at lower-income borrowers to reduce their monthly payments and provide a faster route to debt forgiveness. The plan was formulated on the heels of the Supreme Court decision last year to strike down President Joe Biden’s broader student loan forgiveness program.
President Joe Biden delivers remarks on student loan debt at Madison College, Monday, April 8, 2024, in Madison, Wisconsin. (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)
The petition comes just days after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit lifted a temporary halt on the Biden administration’s plan, and it once again thrusts the president’s longstanding campaign promise into the legal limelight just months before the 2024 presidential election.
“As Congress has done nothing in the intervening 12 months to authorize the Administration to write off nearly half a trillion dollars of loans, if the Tenth Circuit were to vacate the district court’s preliminary injunction, it will ‘ha[ve] decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with [a] relevant decision[] of this Court,’” the states argued in their petition.
Around 8 million people are enrolled in the SAVE Plan, and nearly 3 million enrollees were expected to begin lower payments as of July 1, when the plan was activated.
Once the plan was initially stalled by district courts in Kansas and Missouri, the Department of Education said the 3 million borrowers would be put into forbearance while the dispute is litigated. But after the 10th Circuit sided with the Biden administration on Sunday, the Education Department is now able to move ahead with its reductions, which prompted the three states to tap the Supreme Court to intervene.
The SAVE Plan takes into account monthly student loan payments based on income and family size. Nearly 4 million borrowers enrolled in the plan have a $0 monthly payment.
Most borrowers who qualify for the SAVE Plan never fully repay their loans, leaving the balance to fall on taxpayers. The Penn Wharton Budget Model estimated that Biden’s SAVE program could cost taxpayers $475 billion, an amount that will be far lower if the rulings stand.
Portions of the SAVE Plan aren’t affected by the lawsuits, such as its relief for those whose debt balances are rising due to unpaid interest.
In the last student loan ruling that came in a 6-3 decision that quashed Biden’s broad student debt relief effort, the majority of justices held that the secretary of education lacks the authority to waive student debt.
The three states on Tuesday called on the justices to grant the case for consideration as soon as possible, saying they should either “summarily affirm the district court” or “expedite briefing and argument so this case can be heard in this upcoming Term,” which begins in the fall.
It takes four or more justices to agree to consider a petition, and the Supreme Court could respond to this request in a matter of weeks.
Four months out from Election Day, activists are still fighting over the rules that will dictate how voters cast their ballots, including in swing states. The parties are preparing for legal battles if the results are close, as they were four years ago. In this series, the Washington Examiner will look at the battles over election rules. Part one will look at absentee voting.
The 2024 presidential election will likely be decided by a handful of swing states, where judicial activists on both sides of the political aisle have been busy in court trying to alter the rules for a key method of casting ballots: mail-in voting.
In 2020, states across the partisan spectrum altered their voting policies to provide more options at the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Many states relaxed the rules for voting by mail, and some sent absentee ballot or ballot applications to all registered voters. Ballot drop boxes were installed in nearly 40 states. Others established curbside voting options, and some counted ballots received after Election Day so long as they were postmarked by the date.
Former President Donald Trump, who is heading into a rematch against President Joe Biden, blamed much of his failure to win a second term on the sweeping changes to voting procedures across the country. He accused mail-in voting of contributing to election fraud, which conditioned his supporters to distrust those methods.
This combination of photos shows Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, left, and President Joe Biden during a presidential debate hosted by CNN on Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Atlanta. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
Yet Trump and other ranking Republican officials this cycle have encouraged his supporters more than ever to take full advantage of any and all alternatives to voting in-person, including early voting and casting ballots by mail.
“If we swamp them with votes they can’t cheat,” the campaign said in a press release in early June. “You need to make a plan, register, and vote any way possible. We have got to get your vote.”
With nearly every possible voting method now endorsed by the Trump campaign, lawsuits backed by conservative voter integrity groups are still underway in swing states. But rather than filing lawsuits to block alternative voting methods, these suits take aim at what these groups consider dubious rules, such as relaxed instructions for verifying ballot signatures and outdoor ballot drop boxes.
Chester County, Pennsylvania, election workers process mail-in and absentee ballots at West Chester University in West Chester on Nov. 4, 2020. (AP Photo/Matt Slocum)
Here’s a look at where absentee ballot legal challenges stand in seven key swing states:
Arizona
11 Electoral Votes
In late April, a state court judge upheld Arizona’s signature matching and drop box procedures for mail-in voting, rejecting two lawsuits from the Arizona Free Enterprise Club, a conservative legal group founded by Bill Barr, the former attorney general under Trump.
One lawsuit contested signature verification methods, which the judge found compliant with state law following a recent clarification from the secretary of state. Signature verification is the process of matching the signature on a voter’s ballot with his or signature on voter registration records. The other lawsuit challenged the use of unmonitored drop boxes, which the judge also ruled as lawful.
Despite the setback for Republican-backed efforts to make the Grand Canyon state’s elections more secure, Trump recently had a 5-point lead above Biden, according to a June 30 poll from 538.
Georgia
16 Electoral Votes
In late February, the U.S. Department of Justice intervened in a lawsuit challenging the Georgia State Election Board’s deadline for absentee ballot applications under the Voting Rights Act.
The lawsuit, filed by the International Alliance of Theater Stage Employees union, argued that Georgia’s deadline violates the VRA’s mandate for absentee ballots in presidential elections if applied seven days before the election.
The Peach State’s law requires applications 11 days before, which the union says is unlawful under Section 202(d) of the VRA.
Georgia Attorney General Christopher Carr (R) contended that Section 202’s provisions are not privately enforceable and that only the U.S. attorney general can sue under the VRA. The DOJ asserts that the VRA’s provisions are privately enforceable.
On June 13, a federal judge found that the union should not have sued the state election board and dismissed them from the case, though the case has been permitted to continue against Fulton County defendants. The county is also where Trump is facing criminal charges over an alleged election subversion plot, and it is the state’s most populous county.
As of June 30, Trump held 6.4-point lead over Biden in Georgia, according to 538.
Michigan
15 Electoral Votes
A Michigan judge on June 12 partially sided with a Republican National Committee bid to tighten signature verification rules for absentee ballots. The judge ruled that election officials can continue using most current signature matching guidelines but cannot apply a “presumption of validity” standard.
The ruling was applauded by RNC Chairman Michael Whatley, who said it confirms that safeguards are required for absentee ballots.
“The Secretary of State’s covert attempts to sidestep these rules were rightfully rejected by the court, exposing that her attacks on election integrity have no substance. This win is just the latest development in our ongoing fight to promote fair and transparent elections in the Great Lakes State,” Whatley wrote in a press release.
But the ruling does still allow most of Michigan’s current mail-in voting procedures to remain largely intact for the 2024 election. The judge acknowledged that a voter’s signature can change one time due to age or disability, or if it was made in haste, or was written on an uneven surface.
Trump held a narrow 1.8-point lead above Biden in Michigan as of June 30, according to 538.
Nevada
6 Electoral Votes
The Trump campaign, with the RNC and Nevada GOP, filed a lawsuit in early May to challenge Nevada’s mail-in ballot receipt deadline, arguing it violates federal law.
The lawsuit seeks to invalidate ballots received after Election Day, claiming this dilutes votes and harms Republican candidates. In the 2022 midterm elections, Clark County officials say about 40,000 ballots came in after Election Day.
Trump lost the state against Biden by about 33,500 votes in 2020.
While no ruling has been made in the Silver State case, the Biden campaign has filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit and is also seeking to become a party to the case. The motion argues that the receipt deadline law would disenfranchise Nevadans.
Trump sported a close 3.7-point polling advantage above Biden in Nevada as of June 30, according to the 538 average.
North Carolina
16 Electoral Votes
A federal judge in January blocked part of North Carolina’s new election law concerning same-day voter registration at early voting sites.
The ruling affects the procedure of verifying voter addresses, which critics argue could disenfranchise voters due to potential errors in address verification.
The decision comes amid litigation filed by progressive groups and the Democratic Party against the law, which overall remains largely in effect. Republican backers of the suit plan to appeal the ruling, asserting their commitment to election integrity.
Trump held a 7.2-point advantage over Biden in North Carolina according to a June 30 poll.
Pennsylvania
19 Electoral Votes
A coalition of grassroots organizations sued Pennsylvania officials in late May to end the disqualification of mail-in ballots lacking a handwritten date on the envelope.
The 3rd Circuit Court ruled that such ballots should not be counted, conflicting with previous rulings favoring ballot inclusion.
The lawsuit argues the date requirement is arbitrary and disenfranchises voters. This case follows another federal suit by the NAACP challenging the date requirement as a violation of the Civil Rights Act.
Trump held a narrow 1.9-point average lead over Biden in Pennsylvania as of June 30.
Wisconsin
10 Electoral Votes
The liberal-controlled Wisconsin Supreme Court in early May signaled a willingness to overturn a 2022 ruling that restricted absentee ballot drop boxes to election clerk offices.
The court’s potential reversal could reinstate the broader use of drop boxes, which Democrats argue are essential for secure absentee voting, while Republicans say they make elections less secure.
The case, brought by Priorities USA and the Wisconsin Alliance for Retired Voters, challenges the interpretation of state law by the previous conservative majority. A reversal may significantly affect the 2024 election in this key swing state.
Trump held less than 1-point average advantage over Biden in Wisconsin as of June 30.
The Supreme Court is expected to rule Monday on Donald Trump‘s claim that he is immune from criminal prosecution surrounding his four-count indictment on an alleged attempt to overturn the 2020 election.
The strongest possibility that legal experts have suggested is that the case will be returned to a lower court, where a judge will wrestle over the facts of the case to determine which actions may be considered “public” conduct that is shielded by presidential immunity, and which acts constituted “private” conduct that may not be covered by immunity.
Protesters demonstrate outside the Supreme Court as the justices hear arguments over whether Donald Trump is immune from prosecution in a case charging him with plotting to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, April 25, 2024. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
The case centers on whether Trump can challenge special counsel Jack Smith’s indictment for allegedly trying to subvert the 2020 election. Trump argues that former presidents should have full immunity for actions taken while in office and that a conviction should first require an impeachment, though the justices did not sound poised to grant full immunity based on their oral arguments in late April.
Lower Court Decisions and Supreme Court Deliberations
Two lower courts have ruled against Trump’s claim of broad immunity, which began with a ruling against Trump by U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan, an appointee of former President Barack Obama who is assigned to his cause.
However, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh, two conservative justices who often vote together in consequential cases, suggested during April oral arguments that the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia Circuit may have erred in its approach.
At one point in the hearing, Kavanaugh pushed back on the special counsel’s position that there is no mention in the Constitution of immunity for former presidents.
“It’s not explicit in the Constitution, but also executive privilege is not explicit in the Constitution,” Kavanaugh said, referencing an established idea that presidents may withhold documents and information from the other branches of government.
Justice Elena Kagan pushed Trump’s attorney on just how far presidential immunity could extend, raising a hypothetical scenario of a military coup by a former president.
“How about if a president orders the military to stage a coup?” Kagan asked.
Former President Richard Nixon was a key historical figure that was leaned upon in the hearing. Trump in part rests his arguments on a 1982 Supreme Court decision that found former presidents are entitled to immunity from civil litigation for actions taken in office. Trump contends the same protection should apply to a former president for criminal charges as well, because the same concerns cited in the Nixon decision pertaining to “functioning of government” should apply.
Potential Outcomes
• Partial Immunity/ Sending the Case Back To Trial Judge
The Supreme Court might instruct lower courts to determine whether Trump’s actions on January 6 were official or private before deciding on immunity. This could delay the trial, which Trump has aimed to push beyond the 2024 election.
• No Immunity
The justices could conversely rule that Trump does not have any immunity from prosecution, allowing the trial to proceed as planned. This would align with lower court rulings that former presidents can face criminal charges for actions taken in office.
Timing and Implications
The Supreme Court’s decision to delay the ruling until July 1 has provided Trump with a temporary reprieve from seeing the case get to trial ahead of the 2024 presidential election. If the court sends the case back, it could delay the trial past the November 2024 election, aligning with Trump’s strategy. However, if the court rules against him, the trial could proceed swiftly, impacting the election.
Depending on the complexity of a potential public vs. private conduct test set by the court, Chutkan could get the case back on schedule ahead of the Nov. 5 election. However, legal experts have warned that the possible ambiguities of this test could result in another appeal by Trump or the prosecution if they contest the judge’s interpretations.
Broader Context
Trump pleaded not guilty in August to a four-count indictment related to election subversion.
Meanwhile, a high court decision in Fischer v. United Statescould affect whether Trump can still legally face two of the four charges pertaining to obstruction allegations.
Roberts wrote in the majority opinion that the law should not be interpreted broadly but instead dependent on language in the overarching statute, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which passed in 2002 after the Enron scandal. The act specified that obstruction meant destroying or manipulating documents that were part of an official proceeding.
Legal analysts at Just Security conceded that Friday’s decision dealt a “soft blow” to the government. They said, however, that “very few [Jan. 6] cases are likely to be materially affected” and that Trump’s case would be “materially unaffected.”
“The upshot is that the decision means little in terms of the pending charges against former President Donald Trump,” the analysts wrote, adding that the allegation Trump created “false evidence” in the election could be enough to satisfy the Supreme Court’s scope of the obstruction charge.
Special counsel Jack Smith has said as much in court papers, a sign that Smith would argue he correctly applied the obstruction charges if Trump were to challenge them.
Steve Bannon, a former adviser to former President Donald Trump, previewed his expectations for a second Trump term, listing former officials he says need to be investigated.
Bannon’s comments come ahead of July 1, when the host of the right-wing War Room podcast is due to report to prison to serve a four-month sentence for defying Congress’s inquiry into him, and after the Supreme Court rejected his bid to delay his sentence on Friday.
In a pre-taped interview that was released Sunday, Bannon told ABC’s Jonathan Karl he had “no regrets” for defying subpoenas lobbed against him by the now-defunct House Jan. 6 committee, saying it feels “great” to be a “political prisoner.”
Former White House adviser Steve Bannon speaks during the Conservative Political Action Conference at the National Harbor, Wednesday, Feb. 21, 2024. in Oxon Hill, Md. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)
Bannon, who vowed to continue appealing his conviction while he resides in a low-security prison in Danbury, Connecticut, predicted that Trump will win the November election by a “landslide.”
“We have a 100% certainty we could beat [President Joe] Biden and beat him big and take the Senate and pick up seats in the House,” Bannon said.
And if Trump wins, Bannon gave Karl a list of former senior intelligence agency and Justice Department officials he thinks should be investigated in the name of “justice,” such as former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who previously told CNN he and other ranking officials in the law enforcement and intelligence community about whether they should consider leaving the country if Trump is elected.
“He ought to be very worried,” Bannon said, adding, “He’s definitely going to be investigated” along with Former FBI Director James Comey, former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, and former Attorney General Bill Barr.
Karl said what Bannon was suggesting sounded like “retribution,” to which Bannon pushed back. Trump has told his supporters “I am your retribution” during campaign rallies, but Bannon claimed what the former president meant is to have a “very successful, more successful second term.”
“What we’re saying is we want justice. We want to have full investigations, and then if criminal charges come up, then criminal charges come up,” Bannon said.
Bannon also outlined “three verticals” he predicted that a second Trump term would address.
“First vertical is seal the border and the mass deportations,” Bannon said. “The second vertical is about the finances. So Trump’s going to have to deal with a budget of $2 trillion of deficits. He’s going to have to look at the — getting the tax cuts back. And the third is to stop these endless forever wars.”
Despite the political strategist’s prison sentence at the height of the 2024 election, Bannon has said his show, which he runs from the basement of his Washington, D.C., home, will continue to run with the help of his employees and guest appearances.
“I’m serving my country right now as a political prisoner,” Bannon said, adding that the sentence will not “suppress my voice.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), a stalwart supporter of President Joe Biden, admitted Sunday that there are talks among Democrats on “whether he’s the candidate or whether he isn’t the candidate” after a poor performance against former President Donald Trump in the first presidential debate.
Raskin’s comments are a major departure from what most ranking Democratic lawmakers have said publicly in defense of the president, as most have at least acknowledged Biden had a “bad” debate, while stopping short of calling him to drop out of the presidential race.
NEW ON MSNBC: Rep. Raskin tells @AliVelshi that Democrats are “having a serious conversation about what to do” following Biden’s debate performance. pic.twitter.com/XJXZx1X8Sw
“We’re having a serious conversation about what to do,” Raskin said in an interview with MSNBC’s Ali Velsh.
“One thing I can tell you is that regardless of what President Biden decides, our party is going to be unified, and our party also needs him at the very center of our deliberations in our campaign, and so whether he’s the candidate or someone else is the candidate,” Raskin added.
Earlier this year, the Maryland representative talked down against Biden’s naysayers who raised questions about his mental acuity when special counsel Robert Hur’s nearly 400-page report regarding his decision not to prosecute Biden criminally described him as an “elderly man with a poor memory.”
“All these age-based cheap shots at President Biden show you how desperate they are, while Donald Trump is fumbling around every day,” Raskin said back in February.
Rep. Raskin: I just spent an hour with President Biden where he regaled the entire Democratic caucus. All these age-based cheap shots at President Biden show you how desperate they are, while Donald Trump is fumbling around every day pic.twitter.com/F6uVrlirYe
Meanwhile, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) told MSNBC on Sunday that he believed in Biden’s commitment to have a “comeback” after the poor debate performance.
“I’ve been very clear that it was an underwhelming performance on Thursday, during the debate, as President Biden and his campaign have acknowledged. It certainly was a setback. But of course, I believe a setback is nothing more than a setup for a comeback,” Jeffries said.
North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum on Sunday dodged questions about Donald Trump’s vice presidential short list, saying any conversations on that matter are between him and the former president.
“That would be between the president and I,” Burgum said on NBC News’s Meet the Press when asked “yes or no” whether he’s had any conversations with Trump about being his pick for vice president. Host Kristen Welker was quick to pounce on his response, saying, “That’s not a no” from the North Dakota governor.
WATCH: Gov. @DougBurgum (R-N.D.) is on the shortlist to be Trump’s running mate. @kwelkernbc: Have you had any conversations about it with Trump?
Burgum pointed out that Trump has a short list of numerous quality candidates that could also make the eventual cut, and emphasized everything about the selection process is “between the campaign and those that might be being considered.”
“He can probably win the election without a vice president … but I think he’ll make a decision,” Burgum said, noting Trump’s recent “strong debate performance” with President Joe Biden on Thursday and the positive polling position Trump has found himself in even before the Thursday night debate.
The North Dakota governor also defended Trump against the most common criticism the former president has received since the debate, which involved the veracity of his statements. Trump “made more than 30 false claims,” according to CNN, though Biden’s gaffes and concerns about his mental acuity largely turned Trump’s statements into an afterthought for commentators and their post-debate conversations.
“The whole manufactured thing this morning that Donald Trump has said something that he hasn’t said before, I mean everything that he said on Thursday night he’s been saying before it so this is not news,” Burgum said.
Trump’s vice presidential short list also includes notable Sens. Marco Rubio (R-FL), Tim Scott (R-SC), and J.D. Vance (R-OH), as well as prominent allies such as Reps. Elise Stefanik (R-NY) and Byron Donalds (R-FL), among others.
The former president has suggested he will announce his vice presidential pick at the Republican National Convention, which begins July 15.
The 2024 campaign for President Joe Biden blasted the Democratic “bedwetters” calling on him to should drop out after his poor debate performance last week, saying the ensuing chaos would become the “best possible way” for former President Donald Trump to win.
“First of all: Joe Biden is going to be the Democratic nominee, period. End of story. Voters voted. He won overwhelmingly,” Biden deputy campaign manager Rob Flaherty said in an email to supporters. “And if he were to drop out, it would lead to weeks of chaos, internal foodfighting, and a bunch of candidates who limp into a brutal floor fight at the convention, all while Donald Trump has time to speak to American voters uncontested.”
President Joe Biden speaks at a campaign rally in Raleigh, N.C., Friday, June. 28, 2024. (AP Photo/Matt Kelley)
Flaherty’s email was targeted against the Democratic panic that ensued during and after Biden’s first debate of the 2024 election season with Trump on Thursday, which prompted near-unanimous opinions from media pundits that the president failed to clear a low bar of expectations due in large part his hoarse voice and incoherent remarks.
“The bedwetting brigade is calling for Joe Biden to ‘drop out.’ That is the best possible way for Donald Trump to win and us to lose,” Flaherty added, according to ABC News.
Only one in five respondents in an Ipsos poll of more than 2,500 likely voters taken after the debate called Biden’s mental fitness “good” or “excellent.”
Just one day after the debate, the Biden campaign responded to the panic forcefully, hosting fundraisers on both Friday and Saturday in which the president aimed to reassure his supporters that he could take on the former president in November.
“Folks, I don’t walk as easy as I used to. I don’t speak as smoothly as I used to. I don’t debate as well as I used to, but … I know how to tell the truth. I know right from wrong, and I know how to do this job,” Biden said to a crowd of supporters in Raleigh, North Carolina on Friday. “I know, like millions of Americans know, when you get knocked down, you get back up.”
Another major factor that makes dropping out an improbability at this point is the fact that the president’s millions of dollars in campaign cash cannot simply be transferred to a different candidate, unless that candidate is Vice President Kamala Harris, according to the Wall Street Journal.
Flaherty’s email comes as the New York Times editorial board even called on the president to step down for the sake of the nation this weekend, saying his debate performance was a “shadow of a great public servant.”
Meanwhile, Biden has sought to own up to the shoddy curb appeal on display Thursday night despite his initial denial, saying, “It wasn’t my best debate ever as Barack [Obama] pointed out,” referencing the former president’s comment in defense of Biden after the debate.
The media commentariat largely professed that Trump’s worst mistakes of the night were the unchecked claims he told onstage, but many suggested his remarks became an afterthought in light of Biden’s unimpressive performance during the debate.
The Washington Examiner contacted the Biden campaign for comment.
