Politico

The Biden Administration on Wednesday announced a new parole program for qualifying Venezuelans and said it would return to Mexico those who crossed the border unlawfully, in an attempt to alleviate strain at the southern border as an increasing number of Venezuelans flee political instability and poverty.

The Department of Homeland Security said U.S. and Mexico officials agreed to a plan that would allow qualifying Venezuelans to travel to the U.S. by air to an interior point of entry. These individuals will be eligible to apply for work authorization in the United States. Venezuelans who enter the United States unlawfully between ports of entry will be sent back to Mexico under Title 42, the Trump-era pandemic emergency rule.

“These actions make clear that there is a lawful and orderly way for Venezuelans to enter the United States, and lawful entry is the only way,” Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said in a statement. “Those who attempt to cross the southern border of the United States illegally will be returned to Mexico and will be ineligible for this process in the future. Those who follow the lawful process will have the opportunity to travel safely to the United States and become eligible to work here.”

The announcement comes just weeks before the midterms as Republicans push immigration as a key issue leading up to Election Day. The Biden administration has faced growing pressure in recent months to respond to the surge of migrants at the border, particularly as Republican Govs. Greg Abbott of Texas and Ron DeSantis of Florida have sent thousands of migrants to cities with Democratic mayors, like New York, Chicago and Washington.

Nearly four times the number of Venezuelans tried to cross the southern border this year compared with last year, DHS said in explaining Wednesday’s announcement. In August, 55,333 migrants encountered at the border were from Venezuela, Cuba or Nicaragua,a 175 percent increase from the year before.

The stated goal of the program, which will allow up to 24,000 Venezuelans to come into the U.S. through these authorized ports of entry, is to create a more “orderly and safe” process. Qualifying migrants must have a preexisting tie in the United States, and someone who can provide financial and other support. The person must also pass national security and public-safety vetting, and complete vaccinations and public health requirements.

The program is similar to the one imposed by the administration earlier this year when Ukrainians were fleeing in large numbers amid Russia’s invasion. Ukrainians were allowed to enter the United States and work in the country temporarily, an orderly process set up to avoid Ukrainians flooding the U.S.-Mexico border.

President Joe Biden will not meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Group of 20 summit next month — even to discuss the release of American basketball star Brittney Griner — White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said during a briefing on Wednesday.

Biden “has no intention of meeting with President Putin,” Jean-Pierre said in response to a reporter’s question about whether the White House has been in communication with Moscow about such a meeting.

The president strongly believes “that the Russians need to take the serious offer that we put forward on the table, or make a serious counter-offer to negotiate, but in good faith,” Jean-Pierre said, reiterating, “he has no intention of meeting with Vladimir Putin.”

In an interview that aired on Tuesday, Biden told CNN’s Jake Tapper he had no plan to meet with the Russian leader, but would make an exception if Putin was open to discussing Griner’s release.

“Look, I have no intention of meeting with him,” Biden said. “But for example, if he came to me at the G-20 and said, ‘I want to talk about the release of Griner,’ I’d meet with him. I mean, it would depend.”

Griner, who was arrested in February after Russian authorities found vape canisters containing cannabis oil in her luggage at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo Airport, was sentenced to nine years in Russian prison in August. She appealed the verdict shortly after, and a Russian court set her appeal date for Oct. 25.

NEW YORK — Days after winning his mayoral primary last year, Eric Adams declared ambitions to play a national role in the Democratic Party. Now, 10 months into his first year as mayor, he’s been thrust into the position he coveted — but not for the reason he’d hoped.

Adams’ city is buckling under pressure to accommodate tens of thousands of Latin American asylum-seekers — many bused here by Republican Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, who is making a public show of sending border-crossers to New York, Washington and Chicago.

It’s also isolated the moderate Democrat mayor, whose political allies are piling on while he’s at war with the GOP and liberal critics protesting his every move.

The situation, which Adams has repeatedly labeled a “humanitarian crisis,” is the most sustained problem he has faced to date and shows no signs of abating — the result of national and international policies that he cannot control but must contend with.

“This is a crisis that’s unfolding and it could undermine our cities in a real way,” Adams said in a phone interview Thursday.

And he’s seized on the challenge to shame the partisan margins of American politics while facing an operational emergency that is testing how he executes his “get stuff done” ethos. Adams complained this week, “The far right is doing the wrong thing. The far left is doing nothing.”

In the follow-up interview, he extended his criticism to those lobbing attacks without offering space in their own districts.

He also blamed the White House, from whom he has requested aid and, so far, received none.

“I think they have been not understanding the full depth of this crisis,” Adams said, in a more pointed critique than he often delivers on the Biden administration’s handling of the situation. “This is a national problem that should not fall on [the city of] Washington, New York and Chicago. This is a national problem and it must have a national solution. And right now I don’t feel we received the level of immediate response that we need.”

The White House did not immediately comment. Last month, President Joe Biden condemned Republicans sending migrants across the country as “reckless” and “un-American.”

The relationship between the mayor and president has thus far been positive, with Adams even referring to himself as the “Biden of Brooklyn” early in his term. The two met about the migrant crisis when Biden visited the city to discuss hurricane aid for Puerto Rico last month, and their staffs are in constant contact, according to City Hall officials.

But the mayor and those close to him are growing frustrated as he takes heat from all sides and contends daily with the challenge of housing so many new arrivals to New York.

“Basically, the mayor has been dealing with this so that the president and the governor don’t have to, but that has now become untenable,” said one person who is close to Adams and declined to speak on the record. “Things have changed in that at first, this was a political stunt and now it’s become a policy of two large, hostile southern states to punish ‘liberals’ in New York for Washington’s policies.”

Meanwhile Adams has publicly called for unity among politicians as his team scrambles behind the scenes to demand more money and help from Gov. Kathy Hochul and Biden, while figuring out how to manage the logistical demands of the city’s new entrants.

Late last month, he announced an emergency shelter in the Orchard Beach section of the Bronx that helped him buy more time to comply with unique local laws requiring the city provide shelter to the homeless, which the city has reportedly twice violated. But he was forced to hastily relocate the planned campus after intensifying concern about flooding there proved true. Days earlier, NBC reported babies in the shelter system were being underfed. One migrant died by suicide in a city shelter — an incident some state lawmakers laid squarely at Adams’ feet.

The latest major setback came Monday night. As Adams finished addressing constituents at a town hall focused on his signature issue of public safety, his administration was preparing a 9:30 p.m. press release announcing plans to move the Bronx campus to another location on Randall’s Island, an island near Manhattan that’s largely home to parkland and municipal buildings that’s believed to be less flood prone.

While the city searches for space and solutions, the impact of the crisis increasingly bears down.

As of Thursday morning, 17,400 migrants had entered the city since the influx began this spring, according to City Hall estimates. Municipal homeless shelters are at their breaking point, and city schools are scrambling to incorporate thousands of new arrivals in what Adams has dubbed a $1 billion crisis for the city. The situation has also afforded the mayor less bandwidth to deal with issues like rising crime, a housing shortage and gaping vacancies in the municipal workforce.

On Friday, he declared a state of emergency, suspending some local land use rules, so he could expedite the creation of more emergency shelter facilities. With the crisis “burning through our city’s budget,” Adams made a public plea to the president and governor for help.

Abbott has been sending migrants to New York, as the GOP seeks to make the stunt a winning election strategy in the upcoming midterms. And they are not alone: Democratic El Paso Mayor Oscar Lesser has also sent people crossing the southern border to Adams’ backyard.

The crisis has isolated a mayor who believes his centrist politics represent the majority of New Yorkers.

Until now, Adams has enjoyed a marriage of convenience with the city’s small Republican contingent. He sided with them in a contentious redistricting process, found common ground in debates over rolling back bail reform measures in Albany and shared their disdain for the far-left flank of the Democratic Party.

But some of those same conservative allies turned on him upon learning Adams was considering housing the migrants on a cruise ship in a decommissioned naval pier on Staten Island, the city’s Republican bastion.

“Staten Islanders by and large don’t support sanctuary city policies. We don’t want our neighborhoods and our schools and our infrastructures being burdened by the Love Boat,” Republican City Council Minority Leader Joe Borelli said in an interview this week, referring to the ship proposal. “The political problem sorts itself out once the mayor realizes the left will never be happy with anything he does.”

The asylum issue is now front and center in New York’s congressional races, as both parties brace for the high-stakes midterms.

GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis of Staten Island and her Democratic challenger Max Rose both oppose the cruise ship plan and say national immigration policy is to blame for much of the city’s woes. Before that, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democrat, and her Republican challenger each questioned Adams’ plan to build the Bronx intake center in the district they’re vying to represent.

Even Adams’ moderate and establishment Democratic allies are shifting from him.

“There are serious concerns that the necessary planning steps to ensure adequate housing and resources for those that need it are lacking, leaving major gaps,” City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams (no relation to the mayor) said in opening remarks at a hearing on the subject last week. The speaker and other five Council members came out against the Randall’s Island plan Wednesday. Through a spokesperson, she declined to comment further.

And the progressive wing of the party — which has yet to figure out how to effectively oppose Adams — is letting loose its criticisms, bolstered by nonpartisan pushback from New Yorkers who don’t want the situation impacting their neighborhoods.

This political crisis is playing out as Adams bids on hosting the 2024 Democratic National Convention in Manhattan, a contest that has granted him exposure to national party figures who value his role as a Black Democrat and former police captain who calls out the left on their criticisms of policing.

In short, the mayor now finds himself all alone.

“There is no constituency for this,” said Joshua Goldfein, a staff attorney at Legal Aid, a group that advocates and provides legal services for migrants.

Goldfein was measured in his criticism, careful to avoid lobbing political bombs over such a sensitive matter. But he was quick to point out how he believes the administration has thus far failed to get a handle on the problem.

“Politics is outside of my wheelhouse,” Goldfein said. “I think that there is a missed opportunity here to solve some problems for New Yorkers by … moving people out of shelter and into permanent housing. That would be good policy, good politics.”

He suggested the administration temporarily lodge migrants in vacant public housing apartments and push private landlords to shelter them in unused units. The city must also expedite subsidies and vouchers for current homeless shelter occupants to make way for asylum-seekers.

“It’s not like they have a drawer full of keys for everybody. But they do have keys for NYCHA and HPD apartments,” Goldfein said, referring to two city housing agencies. “They do have housing subsidies that they could make faster and easier to use. They could prevent some evictions.”

The city’s elected public advocate, Jumaane Williams, hosted a press conference over Zoom Tuesday to raise concerns about the mayor’s handling of the matter.

Williams, a far-left Democrat, was planning a walkthrough of the Orchard Beach site before the mayor abruptly shifted course this week. He lamented the “wasted” resources in setting up camp at what ended up being an unusable site. (The mayor has so far refused to identify the cost associated with that move, but his administration claimed to POLITICO that the move would ultimately save money on flood-mitigation.)

Williams too said the Adams administration should clear space for migrants by speeding up rental vouchers to move New Yorkers from homeless shelters into permanent housing. He acknowledged the problem does not belong solely to Adams, but bristled at the mayor’s condemnation of the left and the right.

“I gotta tell you, if we were a big real estate developer looking for space, we’d find it or we’d make it, so we have to provide a similar amount of urgency here to do this,” he added.

State Sen. Jessica Ramos, another progressive Democrat, rejected the mayor’s critique of the left. She has suggested repurposing underutilized office buildings and stadiums as temporary shelter — some of which she acknowledged could not be done immediately.

“I hear many of us making suggestions,” Ramos said in an interview. “Perhaps they’re just not being heard or considered.”

Joe Anuta and Erin Durkin contributed to this report.

Congressional Republicans are talking more openly about their desire to investigate every aspect of the Biden administration — and family — should they regain control of one or both houses of Congress.

Inside Biden world, aides and allies aren’t entirely displeased with the chatter.

There is a growing confidence in the White House that the House Republicans clamoring for a hodgepodge of investigations will overreach — and that their attempts will backfire politically, with key voters recoiling at blatant partisan rancor. Officials believe they can use GOP efforts to their political advantage heading into the 2024 cycle, betting a pro-Trump Republican conference fixated on Biden will elevate “ultra-MAGA Republicans” and provide a useful foil for Biden, allowing him to draw sharp contrasts between his governing and their obfuscating.

“Their sense for what will resonate with middle-of-the-road folks [is wrong]. It’s not going to be the kind of extremist performance that these hearings will likely end up being,” one White House ally said. “It might make the base feel good, and it’s going to give [Republican Reps.] Matt Gaetz and Marjorie Taylor Greene something awesome to say on their live stream, but it’s not going to be what convinces suburban women in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.”

The GOP’s investigative wish list is long, and it runs the gamut. But members have made it clear they believe digging into the business dealings of the president’s son, Hunter Biden, is at the top of the agenda — hoping it may yield a smoking gun on President Joe Biden. Also ranking high, a coronavirus “origins” probe that would put Anthony Fauci in the hot seat and a multi-committee dive into the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan last year that sparked bipartisan criticism.

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) is also expected to lead a sweeping dig that threatens to touch on every corner of the Justice Department and the FBI, reviving a long-running feud from the Trump era when federal law enforcement agencies were frequently viewed as villains by the former president and his allies.

“We’ve got a lot of opportunities. We’ve got a lot of work to do. Obviously, we’re going to have some high-profile committee hearings on the investigations dealing with Hunter Biden, dealing with [Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro] Mayorkas, dealing with the origination of Covid,” said Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.), who is expected to lead the Oversight Committee and beef up its staff if Republicans win back the majority.

Publicly, the White House has projected optimism about Democrats hanging onto the House this fall. But privately, aides have been preparing for the investigative onslaught that will come with a GOP takeover.

That work actively began in the aftermath of the 2020 election, when Georgia’s unsettled Senate races left open the possibility of a GOP majority in that chamber. But the efforts have accelerated since this past spring, when the White House brought on a small team to begin laying out legal and messaging strategies for possible Republican investigations next year — which has taken on an aura of near-certainty in Washington.

That team is likely to grow once a clearer picture of the political landscape emerges after the midterms. The White House has been thinking through key aides in federal agencies it could bring in or shift to other supporting roles.

Seeking to paint House Republicans as controversy-magnet conservatives won’t be easy. And two factors that could prove decisive for the Biden team remain unresolved: which Democratic congressional allies will do the blocking and tackling for them, and whether the GOP pursues the quixotic goal of a presidential impeachment.

“If we were forced to be in the minority, then we would be the spokespeople for the truth and for the rule of law against those who would trample both,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who cut his teeth as a Trump impeachment manager and wants to lead his party on the Oversight panel next year.

Raskin is widely viewed in Democratic circles as a critical ally for the White House in a potential GOP-controlled House, owing to his experience on various Trump-investigative committees. But other Democrats are also likely to be on the frontlines: Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-Va.), who is running against Raskin for the party’s top Oversight spot, is viewed as a bulldog with a history of tangling with Jordan.

Progressive firebrands like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) also have perches that would allow them to play defense. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), widely seen as the frontrunner to be the next Democratic leader if Speaker Nancy Pelosi leaves, is considered one of the caucus’s most potent messengers against Republicans.

Republicans have been plotting out their targets for months, with key chairs-in-waiting already speaking with party leadership — including Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy — about how to coordinate investigations that could stretch across the conference’s jurisdictional lines.

House Republicans view investigations as the heart of their agenda next year, particularly since, unlike legislation, they can do it without buy-in from Democrats, Biden included. Committee control would give them a spotlight to tangle with administration officials they’ve spent two years lambasting and the subpoena power to cause headaches, obtain records and drown agencies in document and interview requests.

Looming over the GOP’s pledge to conduct rigorous oversight of the Biden administration is the possibility that the party’s base will demand a quick impeachment. It would almost certainly be a fruitless endeavor since two-thirds of the Senate would need to support it in order to actually boot Biden from office. But some party members are talking about it nonetheless. Several Republicans from the conference’s pro-Trump flank, including Greene (R-Ga.) and Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.), have already filed impeachment articles against Biden, Mayorkas and Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Democrats, meanwhile, point to the House Republican investigations of former President Bill Clinton as proof of how overzealous and partisan probes can backfire. Clinton, they argue, emerged stronger from the investigations, and the resulting impeachment from which he was acquitted. Democrats actually gained House seats in the 1998 midterms, the first time in decades that either party had done so while also controlling the White House.

While no one in Biden world wants any sort of congressional investigation in a GOP-led House, an increasing number see the potential for Republicans to alienate swing voters in the run-up to the 2024 general election.

And then there’s the Trump factor. Democrats are already poised to bring up the former president’s decisions to place his family members in prominent White House spots as a defense for attacks on Hunter Biden.

But investigations into Biden’s son could also play a role in the next presidential election, people close to the president believe.

If a GOP-led House turns up the heat on Hunter Biden, it could weigh heavily in the president’s decision to run for a second term. White House officials said Biden is preparing to seek reelection, but a final decision likely won’t be made for several months, with the first lady having an outsized influence. Some aides believe that Biden could forgo another campaign if it would shield his family from hostile congressional investigations.

Vice President Kamala Harris plans to travel to the demilitarized zone between North Korea and South Korea on Thursday, the White House confirmed Monday.

Harris will “tour sites at the DMZ, meet with service members and receive an operational briefing from U.S. commanders,” according to a White House statement. The visit aims to reaffirm the United States’ alliance with South Korea, the White House said.

“Your visit to the DMZ and Seoul will be very symbolic demonstrations of your strong commitments to the security and peace to Korean Peninsula, and we are working with you and U.S. in dealing with North Korea,” South Korean Prime Minister Han Duck-soo said Monday in a meeting with Harris.

The White House confirmed the planned trip after the prime minister mentioned it in remarks Monday. The DMZ has existed since an armistice halted the Korean War in July 1953; the two Koreas technically remain at war.

Harris met with the prime minister in Japan, where she traveled for Tuesday’s funeral of slain Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.

North Korea, long antagonistic toward the United States and South Korea, criticized the two countries and Japan this summer, after they held a trilateral meeting about the dictatorship’s military provocations.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s move to mobilize as many as 300,000 military reservists, an escalation in the Kremlin’s faltering Ukraine invasion, is “definitely a sign that Putin is “struggling,” the White House said Wednesday.

National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby said the calling up of more troops was expected but acknowledged the large number — and what it indicates in this stage of the war.

“I mean, that is almost twice as much as he committed to the war back in February of this year,” Kirby said on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “It’s definitely a sign that he’s struggling.”

Kirby’s remarks came after Putin announced the partial mobilization of reservists in a prerecorded address on state television earlier in the day. It was a significant escalation from Putin, following Ukraine’s successful reclaiming of territory in the north — adding pressure on the Kremlin to lay out its next steps in response to Kyiv’s advances on the battlefield.

In the national address, Putin also backed plans to annex occupied areas in Ukraine’s eastern Donbas region and the country’s southern Kherson region, and he threatened the use of nuclear weapons if Kyiv continues its fight to reclaim the territory.

“When the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will certainly use all the means at our disposal to protect Russia and our people,” Putin said. “This is not a bluff.”

The Russian leader went on to make false claims about the West’s nuclear threats against Russia, accusing the U.S. and its allies of attempting to “destroy” his country. He bragged about Moscow’s nuclear capabilities.

“Those who are trying to blackmail us with nuclear weapons should know that the wind patterns can also turn in their direction,” Putin said.

Kirby on Wednesday said there will be “severe consequences” if Russia uses nuclear weapons against Ukraine and said the U.S. always takes “this kind of rhetoric seriously.”

“It’s irresponsible rhetoric for a nuclear power to talk that way, but it’s not atypical for how he’s been talking the last seven months, and we take it seriously. We are monitoring as best we can their strategic posture so that if we have to, we can alter ours,” Kirby said. “We’ve seen no indication that that’s required right now.”

British singer Elton John will perform on the South Lawn of the White House Friday in an event celebrating “the healing and unifying power of music,” the White House announced on Tuesday.

The concert, dubbed “A Night When Hope and History Rhyme,” will be hosted by A+E Networks and The History Channel.

President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden are also slated to speak at the event, which will honor John and the “everyday history-makers in the audience, including teachers, nurses, frontline workers, mental health advocates, students, LGBTQ+ advocates,” the release said. Approximately 2,000 people are invited to attend, CNN reported.

It isn’t the first time in recent memory John has been asked to perform at the White House. Former President Donald Trump invited the singer to perform at his inauguration — an invitation he declined — and John’s music was often the soundtrack to Trump’s rallies.

When Barack and Michelle Obama returned to the White House on Wednesday to unveil their official portraits, it was a chance to commemorate the historic presidency they’d ushered in.

It also served as a stark reminder of the differences with the current era.

The event, held in the East Room, had all the feelings of a family reunion. Former Obama aides mingled with colleagues who now staff the current president. Former members of the cabinet exchanged knowing glances, handshakes and hugs. Obama himself seemed giddy by the scene in front of him. He spouted dad jokes about his ears and tan suit “controversy” and noted how surreal it was to see his once young staff become power players.

But behind the celebratory feel — the funny, favorite family members coming back home — was an inescapable contrast. Those Obama years ended just six years ago. And yet, politically, it’s been an eternity.

The youthful vibe Obama brought has been replaced by something older, less hip, more traditional in Joe Biden. A quip from Obama on Wednesday about his wife being “fine” almost certainly would have created a thousand viral clips and cable news segments if it had come from Biden. Obama got laughs, and a smattering of “did he just say that?” giggles. His wife even thanked him for “such spicy remarks.”

Beyond that, however, was a more serious undercurrent to Wednesday’s affair. The weighty issues that the Obamas confronted have been exacerbated and overtaken by even weightier matters, as the former first lady herself alluded to.

“Traditions like this matter not just for those of us who hold these positions, but for everyone participating in and watching our democracy,” she said. “[The people] make their voices heard with their vote. We hold an inauguration to ensure a peaceful transition of power. Those of us lucky enough to serve work, as Barack said, as hard as we can for as long as we can, as long as the people choose to keep us here. And once our time is up, we move on.”

The crowd was gathered to see two pieces of historic art unveiled. But, implicitly, they were recognizing that the era from which that art was derived was now a thing of the past, much like the portraits of George Washington over the left shoulder of each speaker.

There is, as those involved in the process note, something solemn about the unveiling of the presidential portrait. It is a celebration of a former White House occupant. But the work belongs to a building, not a person — a testament to the notion that the presidency is about an office, not an individual.

For the Obama portraits, however, the unveiling was fundamentally different than any prior ones. They were the first Black couple to occupy their posts.

It was Michelle Obama who most directly addressed that history on Wednesday. There were subtle ways in which she hammered home the point and overt ones, too. Her hair was done up in braids, prompting a few attendees to call out “ooh braids!” before catching themselves.

But she also spoke of the surrealness, even after more than a decade in the public eye, of seeing herself speaking at the White House, of finding her likeness adorning the walls alongside the white women whose portraits hang there now. She talked about her biography and how it could inspire others who never would have previously imagined the possibility of the path she took.

“Because a girl like me, she was never supposed to be up there next to Jacqueline Kennedy and Dolley Madison,” she said. “She was never supposed to live in this house, and she definitely wasn’t supposed to serve as first lady.”

In the room, she felt like the blunt truth teller — a reprisal of the role she played during the 2016 election by honing in on campaign themes that her husband and the Bidens touched on. While the crowd seemed to see Barack Obama as the swaggy cousin, she was the cousin that sets you straight. At one point, someone in the crowd yelled out, “We love you Michelle!”

The former president’s portrait was painted by Robert McCurdy. It featured him standing at the center of the white canvas wearing a black suit with a gray tie. McCurdy is known for his photorealist portraits and stark white backgrounds, having painted notable subjects such as Toni Morrison and Muhammad Ali. And even Obama noted that the work was designed to portray him with flaws — the wrinkle in his shirt, the gray in his hair — as means of dispelling the notion that presidencies are anything other than flawed enterprises, measured often by the delta between what they promise and what they achieve.

“Presidents so often get airbrushed. They even take on a mythical status, especially after you’ve gone and people forget all the stuff they didn’t like about you,” Obama said. “But what you realize when you’re sitting behind that desk, is that presidents and first ladies are human beings like everyone else. We have our gifts. We have our flaws. We have good days and bad days. We feel the same joy and sadness, frustration and hope.”

Michelle Obama’s portrait was something else entirely. Painted by Sharon Sprung, it featured the former first lady seated on a sofa in the Red Room of the White House, wearing a formal blue dress. Whereas her husband’s portrait was a contrast of blacks and whites and grays, hers offered a bounty of colors — another subtle nod to how different she was from her predecessors. The choice of Sprung was historic in its own right: she’s the first woman artist to do an official portrait in decades.

The event itself was a reminder of how divisive the current state of politics is at the moment. The Obama unveiling event would have traditionally been held during the Trump presidency but Donald Trump refused to hold the event.

Biden, by contrast, appeared overjoyed in having the Obamas back, though he conceded that he was also happy to have in person events again after the hiatus caused by Covid. He opened his speech at Wednesday’s ceremony with praise for the Obamas and their legacy, calling Barack Obama “one of the consequential presidents in our history” and Michelle Obama “one of the most consequential first ladies.”

“Barack and Michelle,” he said, “welcome home.”