Special Counsel Robert Hur has cleared President Biden of willfully keeping classified documents in his home after he left the vice presidency. As usual with these things, however, he also wrote a "damning" doorstop report to go along with it. Don't they all?
The whole case turns primarily on the word "willfully." Hur seems to personally believe Biden deliberately kept some classified documents after leaving office even though he admits there are several reasons this is unlikely:
The place where the Afghanistan documents were eventually found in Mr. Biden's Delaware garage—in a badly damaged box surrounded by household detritus—suggests the documents might have been forgotten.
....Most significantly, Mr. Biden self-reported to the government that the Afghanistan documents were in his Delaware garage and consented to searches of his house to retrieve them and other classified materials. He also consented to searches of other locations, and later in the investigation, he participated in an interview with our office that lasted more than five hours and provided written answers to most of our additional written questions.
....Jurors will conclude that Mr. Biden—a powerful, sophisticated person with access to the best advice in the world—would not have handed the government classified documents from his own home on a silver platter if he had willfully retained those documents for years. Just as a person who destroys evidence and lies often proves his guilt, a person who produces evidence and cooperates will be seen by many to be innocent.
The events in question happened at the end of Biden's vice presidency, and even Hur admits they were small enough and routine enough that it would be natural not to remember them clearly ("finding classified documents at home less than a month after leaving office could have been an unremarkable and forgettable event"). Nevertheless, Hur inexplicably chose to suggest that Biden could be viewed as a "sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory"—based on a grand total of four times over two days of interviews that Biden was momentarily confused about some things.
This editorializing seems both gratuitous and wholly unrelated to the case itself. I have no idea what was running through Hur's mind when he decided to include it. I guess he figured he needed to sound tough, especially since he wasn't recommending charges and Republicans were likely to jump all over him for that. Gotta throw them some red meat.
For what it's worth, though, Hur did take the time to explain why Biden's case is nothing like Donald Trump's:
Several material distinctions between Mr. Trump's case and Mr. Biden's are clear.... Most notably, after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution, Mr. Trump allegedly did the opposite. According to the indictment, he not only refused to return the documents for many months, but he also obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence and then to lie about it. In contrast, Mr. Biden turned in classified documents to the National Archives and the Department of Justice, consented to the search of multiple locations including his homes, sat for a voluntary interview. and in other ways cooperated with the investigation.
Biden acted all along like an innocent man. Trump made it clear all along that he was guilty and was willing to commit additional crimes to hide his guilt. It's night and day and it always has been.
"Will be seen." I wonder why a jury might arrive at such a conclusion. Truly it is a mystery.
Aside from the possibility that Hur has Republican leanings, or is simply trying to mollify Republican reaction to the exoneration, some of his gratuitous sniping at Biden might come down to a prosecutor's displeasure at not getting the goods on someone. In particular, any time a person under investigation says they can't remember some fact that the investigator asks about, it's frustrating. The investigator might think the person is just being deceptive, but what can they do about it? Well, how about writing up your report and commenting to the effect of, "Gee, this old guy has a terrible memory, maybe his mind is going."
Don't forget special counsel mustache (Durham) with the famous fact free talking indictments...
Yes because everyone remembers exactly where they put everything 8 years ago, especially the stuff they leave in a garage. This is why the phrase “I can’t find my (keys, wallet, purse, phone, shoes, etc)” has never been uttered by a single mentally competent human being ever, because memories are crystal clear among the sane and nobody with all their mental faculties ever forgets where they put anything, even pieces of paper they’ve not set eyes on for almost a decade.
I've come to the conclusion that parts of my garage belong to a space which only occasionally coincides with the one I live in, which explains why things can go missing for a decade or two and suddenly appear in plain sight.
Clerked for Rehnquist, nominated for US Attorney by Donald Trump.
Bingo. His comments certainly seem gratuitous.
"I have no idea what was running through Hur's mind when he decided to include it."
I find this implausible.
Because the Party is the Vanguard of the Revolution, it will from time to time demand that we do things we would just as soon not do.
All power to the soviets of car dealers and realtors! Sailing the seas depends on the orange Helmsman!
"I have no idea what was running through Hur's mind when he decided to include it."
Really?
He is a Trump nominee that understands there is no crime to prosecute, which is why he is not pursuing charges, but still wants to do whatever he can to help the man who essentially gave him his job, hence the unnecessary and completely speculative dig at Biden.
You can't be this naive.
There seems to be an unwritten rule that in the interest of fairness, if an special counsel is appointed to investigate a Democrat, the counsel must be a partisan Republican. On the other hand, if special counsel is appointed to investigate a Republican, they must be a partisan Republican.
Seriously.
Concur. One can conclude that an undeniable violation nevertheless does not rise to the level of prosecution for all sorts of reasons, some of which are mentioned, without throwing in speculation that specifically includes one of the two main political attacks being used by Republicans in the Presidential election.
Ima guess that "what was running through Hur's mind" included something about maintaining and enhancing his party bona fides, toward the goal of a future ... Federal judicial appointment? AG position? Who knows -- he's still young.
I hope Garland appoints him US Attorney for the Northern District of North Dakota.
Or the Southern District of North Dakota (at Hoople).
"Nevertheless, Hur inexplicably chose to suggest that Biden could be viewed as a "sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory"—based on a grand total of three times over two days of interviews that Biden was momentarily confused about some things."
there is nothing inexplicable about this at all in particular in an election year when Republicans have spent a year talking about Biden's cognition.
"I have no idea what was running through Hur's mind when he decided to include it."
We all know what was going through his mind.
Moreover, those two interview periods were when the Oct 7 Hamas attack was taking place and the President was trying to handle that, too. Good move! Waiting for a time when Old Joe would be really, seriously preoccupied, right?
I think a phrase you're looking for, Kevin, is "Fox fodder." Another might be something like "oblique hit job."
I respect your inherent fairness and your reflexive assumption of good faith, but this *is* DC and the post-Gingrich Republican party we're talking about. At least a soupcon of Emptywheel is needed for balance on this one.
It's the flippin' headline on the WaPo web site this morning, not Biden Cleared. It's awful. The comments rip the whole column for this gratuitous shot.
Friday Wapo headline: "Special counsel report paints scathing picture of Biden's memory." Leads the phone app's list of top stories.
*That's* the point, and yes, Kevin, it's what Hur was thinking.
Here's another quote from Hur's findings:
“At trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory,” the prosecutors wrote in their report released Thursday.
This is entirely out of bounds. This is pure speculation. Hur has no way to know how Biden would present himself to a jury--and no jury has been or will be called.
And do prosecutors choose which defendants to charge based on how sympathetic they'd be in front of a jury? "Well, this guy murdered his entire family, but he's so mild mannered that no jury would convict him."
We will never hear the end of this (from the report):
"He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died."
Do you really think Biden doesn't know when his son died? Seriously? I don't.
Bingo again. "...Robert Hur totally slimed Biden with these gratuitous comments about his mental acuity and memory, referring to him as a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” Even if you assume they are the product of a good faith evaluation they are still wildly inappropriate."
Check out Josh Marshall:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/thoughts-on-the-hur-report
This has the aroma of the Comey situation. The lack of professionalism is something to behold.
Extremely similar.
And it isnt just Comey and Hur, we have a very long line of Republican operatives using the DOJ as a purely political tool. This is standard practice now.
The law is applied very differently depending on which party you belong to. Not quite Russia, but trending down that path with the full support of the US nedia system.
Hur's personal medical opinions had no place in this report and characterizing the retention of documents as 'willful' - but not "knowingly and willfully" is deliberate. It's what I would do in front of a jury.
The problem here is that the damage is done - and I blame Garland, not Hur. The msm will jump on both the mental capacity and the "willfully" parts because that will sell.
I'd have to think the AG and his high-level staff have the authority to insist that special counsel reports follow the department's guidelines in order to be accepted. Or do the SCs have carte blanche to say anything they want, in any way they want?
I don't know what the rules and procedures are for SC reports but this is now water under the bridge. But Garland needs to hear about it. This type of own goal is for amateurs. Hur also needs this to follow him back to his firm - and not as a good thing.
Pingback: Robert Hur’s final report is worse than I thought – Kevin Drum