How can we simultaneously believe in the resurrection of Joe Biden and in the legitimacy of depriving him of the nomination he won in the primaries?

I open the NYT this morning — it's 3 a.m. — and see this:

 

Biden isn't sleeping in the middle of the day on a beach in Delaware, he's working — if not around the clock, against the clock.

The last couple weeks I'd been fretting about whether we even had a President at the moment and fantasizing about asking Kamala Harris how she could justify refraining from using the 25th Amendment to fill the vacuum. If it was proper to engage in the bold strategy to displace him as her party's candidate, why is it acceptable to stand by and do nothing when you are the one with the power to oust him from the presidency? 

Maybe it's because of questions like mine that the NYT concocted the headline "Biden Works Against the Clock as Violence Escalates in the Middle East" and installed it at the top of the front page alongside that somber photo of the elderly man's serious, determined face. I read the subheadline and wonder if any newsworthy story even occurred: "President Biden is beginning to acknowledge that he is simply running out of time to help forge a cease-fire and hostage deal with Hamas, his aides say. And the risk of a wider war has never looked greater." That's a well-known, persistent condition. 

For a year now, Mr. Biden has warned publicly and privately about the need to avoid a regional war, one that could easily escalate into direct conflict between Israel and Iran.... Mr. Biden even held on to hope for the transformative peace deal... Now, Mr. Biden’s aides say, the president is beginning to acknowledge that he is simply running out of time. With only four months left in office, the chances of a cease-fire and hostage deal with Hamas look dimmer than at any time since Mr. Biden laid out a plan at the beginning of the summer....

Oh, he's running out of time because his term is almost over. But wouldn't he be handing off the task to Kamala Harris, if she wins? Are they not promising continuation of the effort? Harris's campaign theme is that she represents change, so we don't get a don't-change-horses-in-midstream message. We get: Biden is running out of time. 

The name Kamala Harris never even appears in the article!

In private... many members of Mr. Biden’s national security team make little effort these days to hide their exasperation with the prime minister. They talk more openly now about the president’s shouting matches in phone calls with Mr. Netanyahu....

Shouting matches! The old man is shouting at Netanyahu. And the other day we saw him unable to recognize that he was in the middle of a public appearance with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Why didn't the NYT put the news of the "shouting matches" in the headline instead of the "news" that Joe Biden is working and the clock is ticking.

[Members of Mr. Biden’s national security team] say it was telling that the White House announced no phone calls between the president and the prime minister as beepers exploded in the pockets of Hezbollah members and missiles flew. It seemed a sign of how little they had to say to each other....

Is President Biden capable of speaking on the phone effectively or is he given to shouting? Does he even understand the problems he'd need to purport to be lecturing Netanyahu about? I can see why Netanyahu might have "little... to say to" Biden. What's the point?

The article doesn't mention Kamala Harris, but it does mention Donald Trump:

[I]t is hard to imagine that Mr. Netanyahu will be able to eliminate Hezbollah, just as he has been unable to eliminate Hamas. And it is harder still to imagine that Mr. Netanyahu will spend much time worrying about crossing Mr. Biden. He knows that if former President Donald J. Trump is elected, he will have a far freer hand to prosecute the war against Hamas and Hezbollah the way he sees fit.

Will Mr. Netanyahu spend any time worrying about crossing Ms. Harris? She doesn't even seem to exist as far as this article is concerned.