Secrets from the War Room: Kamala Breaks Her Silence
Kamala Harris’s Memoir Reveals Tense Call with Biden Ahead of Trump Debate
In her upcoming memoir 107 Days, former Vice President Kamala Harris recounts a fraught exchange with President Joe Biden just before her high‑stakes debate against Donald Trump—a moment she says distracted her at a critical time.
Harris describes being in her Philadelphia hotel room on September 10, 2024, preparing for what she saw as one of the most important moments of her campaign. She was getting ready to face Trump on stage when Biden called. Initially, she thought it was a show of support. But according to her account, the conversation shifted quickly into something more confrontational.
What Harris Says Happened
Biden reportedly told Harris that he had heard from his brother James that influential Democratic donors and power brokers in Philadelphia were upset with her, claiming she had been making negative remarks about him. Harris was asked whether she knew those individuals. She says she did not.
“He said those guys were going to withhold support because they’d heard I was criticizing him,” Harris writes. She tried to request that the group be connected to her directly, but the call shifted again—this time into Biden defending his own debate history. He talked about earlier debates with Trump, insisting previous performances weren’t as damaging as they appeared. Harris says she was barely listening.
At this moment Harris felt angry, disappointed, and bewildered. She writes, “I just couldn’t understand why he would call me, right now, and make it all about himself—distracting me with worry about hostile power‑brokers in the biggest city of the most important swing state.” Her husband, Doug Emhoff, reportedly tried to refocus her: “Don’t worry about him … you’re dealing with Trump. Let it go.”
Wider Criticisms Harris Levels
The memoir doesn’t stop at that phone call. Harris expresses bigger frustrations with how the 2024 campaign was handled. She calls Biden’s decision to run for another term “reckless,” especially given concerns about his age and stamina. Yet she also acknowledges she believed he remained capable of serving.
Harris describes feeling under‑supported by Biden’s communications team. She complains that when things went wrong—or when she was attacked in public for her laugh, her speaking voice, or her past relationships—her side rarely defended her with anything more than boilerplate or silence. She contrasts this lack of pushback with how she saw others, including Republican critics, treated differently.
Her View of the Relationship
Despite the friction, Harris does not portray her relationship with Biden as entirely adversarial. She writes of loyalty, warmth, and shared moments. But she also communicates that there were growing misalignments: moments when she believed he was tired, when the campaign seemed to run on inertia rather than sharp political strategy, and when internal messaging failed to shield her or to properly highlight her record.
The phone call just before the debate becomes, in her telling, emblematic: she was expected to carry forward, to defend his record, to maintain unity—sometimes at the cost of her own mental focus or campaign needs.
Political Fallout & Reactions
Excerpts from 107 Days have stirred considerable discussion among Democrats and political observers. Allies of Biden have pushed back, arguing that now may not be the time to air internal grievances. Some say it looks like Harris is seeking to position herself for 2028, or to forge a narrative that distinguishes her from her former running mate.
Critics say the revelations are self‑serving, arguing that such critiques might have been more useful during the campaign itself rather than afterward. Others suggest they expose the messiness and emotional stress behind running a presidential campaign, especially one marked by high expectations and intense personal scrutiny.
What It All Means
Harris’s memoir highlights a recurring tension in politics: how leaders must balance unity and loyalty with independent voice and self‑preservation. Her telling suggests that part of her campaign struggle was not just external—against opponents—but internal, dealing with expectations, relationships, perception, and communication.
The book raises questions about whether more transparency during the run might have changed the dynamic, whether stronger public responses from her side could have shifted narrative, and how political alliances become complicated when ambition, loyalty, and strategy collide.
Ultimately, 107 Days gives readers a front‑row look at what many already suspected: that the campaign was not just about messaging, debates, and policies, but of moments behind the cameras—phone calls, staff dynamics, personal doubts—that shaped outcomes just as much as public actions.