In the months leading up to former President Joe Biden’s stunning exit from the 2024 presidential race, a swirl of confusion, personal emotion, and family involvement dominated the final chapter of his political career.
According to an explosive new book titled “2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America” by Jason Dawsey, Tyler Pager, and Isaac Arnsdorf, one of the most influential voices behind the scenes during Biden’s unraveling campaign was not a seasoned political adviser, senior strategist, or Cabinet official—but his son, Hunter Biden.
The book, set for release on July 8, paints an intimate and at times startling portrait of the internal disarray that gripped the Biden campaign following the president’s disastrous debate performance in June 2024. It also reveals a level of involvement from Hunter that has stunned even seasoned political observers, including his participation in high-level White House calls and unsolicited advice on matters of presidential decorum.
One of the most poignant excerpts from the book recounts a private moment between father and son, shortly after Biden’s debate meltdown—an event widely regarded as the turning point that sealed his fate.
Watching from Los Angeles, Hunter reportedly exclaimed in disbelief as he witnessed his father falter on live television: “What the f---?” It wasn’t merely a critique of performance, but the anguished reaction of a son seeing his aging father publicly struggle with clarity and stamina.
A few days later, Hunter flew to Camp David to be with his father. The book describes a touching exchange—“I love you,” Hunter told him. “Get some sleep.”
But beneath that tenderness was a deeper truth: Hunter, more than anyone, wanted his father to walk away from the campaign. “He often told people that he had more of an interest in his father abandoning his campaign than anyone,” the book reveals.
It was not just a political calculation—it was personal. Hunter missed his father. The presidency had consumed Joe Biden’s time, attention, and energy, and Hunter reportedly yearned for a return to normalcy, to family, to the man he once knew away from the relentless demands of the Oval Office.
But the book also documents moments where Hunter’s involvement crossed into political territory in ways that alarmed White House staff and raised questions about boundaries.
One such moment came on July 1, 2024, following the Supreme Court’s historic ruling that granted presidents substantial immunity for official acts but not for unofficial ones.
As aides scrambled to draft a formal response to the ruling—one with potential consequences for Trump’s legal battles and Biden’s legacy—a high-level White House call was convened by then-chief of staff Jeff Zients.
According to the excerpt published by The Wall Street Journal, as the team of advisers debated how the former president should address the nation, an unidentified voice suddenly cut through the screen.
At first, no one recognized it. Then came the realization—it was Hunter Biden. The president’s son had been quietly present on the call without the knowledge of most of the staff. His suggestion? An Oval Office address, utilizing the symbolic power of the room to project strength and resolve.
White House Counsel Ed Siskel was reportedly taken aback. He expressed concerns that speaking from the Oval Office might blur the lines between official duties and campaign activity, particularly in the sensitive context of the Supreme Court ruling.
Hunter, however, pushed back. According to the book, he argued that his father had “every right to use the room’s powerful imagery.” Siskel, according to colleagues, later voiced that Hunter’s very presence on the call was “inappropriate.”
While the book does not suggest Hunter held any official position or formal authority within the Biden administration during that period, it raises significant questions about the influence he wielded behind closed doors. For critics of the Biden administration, the revelation only adds fuel to longstanding accusations of nepotism, boundary-blurring, and a lack of transparency.
Republican lawmakers have already seized upon the revelation as proof of what they call the Biden family’s improper entanglement of personal and public interests.
“Hunter Biden should have never been on a policy call involving a former president’s response to a Supreme Court decision,” one GOP aide told reporters. “This isn’t a family business meeting. This is national governance.”
Indeed, the optics alone are politically radioactive. The image of Hunter—already a lightning rod for controversy due to past legal troubles and business dealings—silently sitting in on presidential strategy calls is sure to become campaign fodder for Republicans heading into the 2026 midterms.
More than that, it underscores the degree to which Biden’s inner circle had closed in on itself in the final months. Trusted longtime aides were reportedly sidelined. Decisions were made in private, sometimes guided more by familial instinct than political expertise.
Hunter’s deep involvement may also reflect the emotional toll the campaign was taking on the entire Biden family. After a long and storied career in public service, Joe Biden was facing mounting concerns over his cognitive abilities and physical stamina.
Following the June debate, where he stumbled through answers and appeared disoriented at times, the chorus of concern grew louder—not just from Republicans but from within his own party.
Donors panicked. Allies wavered. Editorial boards turned. And through it all, Hunter stood by his father, but apparently not as a passive bystander.
In many ways, the story of Hunter Biden’s role during this period is emblematic of the larger problem Democrats faced in 2024—a party defined more by insularity and emotional loyalty than by clear messaging or decisive leadership.
While Trump stormed back into the national spotlight with a message focused on inflation, energy independence, and national strength, the Biden campaign became a defensive shell operation, overwhelmed by internal drama and plagued by a growing disconnect from everyday Americans.
The contrast could not have been sharper. Trump had a disciplined campaign machine, a booming presence at rallies, and a focused economic message.
Biden had Hunter on speakerphone, telling him to “use the Oval Office’s imagery” while the president’s staff scrambled to maintain composure amid internal chaos. The symbolism writes itself.
Critics of the Biden White House argue that these revelations should serve as a wake-up call for how personal loyalty and emotional decision-making can corrode effective governance.
The presidency, they say, is not a family heirloom to be preserved through sentimentality. It is a demanding office requiring clarity, discipline, and professional boundaries. Hunter’s insertion into strategic conversations—no matter how well-intentioned—violated that unspoken rule and left the administration exposed.
Even sympathetic observers note that the line between public servant and private family member must be respected. “It’s one thing to be emotionally supportive,” said a former Obama White House staffer.
“It’s another to be a voice on a national security call.” The mere fact that most staff didn’t even know Hunter was on the line until he spoke is a reminder of how ad hoc the operation had become in Biden’s final months as president.
While the book stops short of alleging wrongdoing, its detailed reporting suggests that Hunter’s presence was not just symbolic—it was influential. That alone may reignite a national conversation about the standards of propriety in presidential families, especially after four years of relentless media scrutiny on Trump’s children and their roles in his administration.
In the days following Biden’s formal withdrawal from the race, Hunter was reportedly one of the few individuals who remained closely at his side, even as political allies quietly pivoted to future hopefuls like Gavin Newsom or Gretchen Whitmer. For Hunter, it was never about politics—it was about his father. And in that sense, his involvement may have been inevitable.
But in the court of public opinion, the optics matter. And as “2024: How Trump Retook the White House” reveals, those optics were troubling. A president appearing diminished on a national stage.
A son reacting in horror from afar. A family taking the reins in the absence of a strong political hand. And in the end, a campaign that unraveled not because of one debate, but because of a broader inability to keep personal and political realms separate.
As the country turns its attention to 2026 and beyond, the Biden era may be remembered less for its legislative achievements and more for the scenes detailed in this book—scenes of confusion, desperation, and a family trying to hold on as the presidency slipped through their fingers. For Donald Trump and his supporters, the contrast couldn’t be clearer.
While the Bidens faded into retreat, Trump stood ready to reclaim the stage—sharper, bolder, and more disciplined than ever. And this time, there was no Hunter on the line to interrupt.
