Biden asserts Exec Privilege to prevent release of Hur interview tape

[jerryskids 6,656]

Quote

The Justice Department on Thursday informed House Republicans that President Joe Biden has formally asserted executive privilege over the audio of his interview with special counsel Robert Hur, who investigated Biden's handling of classified documents.

It's a move that the department said effectively shields Attorney General Merrick Garland from any criminal exposure, though Republican lawmakers moved ahead anyway toward trying to hold him in contempt of Congress.

The GOP-led House Oversight Committee voted 24-20 late Thursday to approve a report recommending a contempt of Congress resolution against Garland for his failure to turn over audio recordings of Special Counsel Robert Hur's interview with Biden.

The Garland contempt resolutions now head to the full House for a vote. It’s not clear when that vote will occur, but Speaker Johnson’s office tells ABC News it won’t be tomorrow/Friday.

Republicans sought access to the audio recording of Hur's interview of Biden as part of their stalled impeachment probe into the president.

The DOJ previously provided a transcript of Biden's interview to House Republicans. The White House, in its reasoning for asserting executive privilege, expressed concern the tapes would be unfairly manipulated by GOP lawmakers.

The special counsel's yearlong probe into Biden's handling of classified documents ended with no criminal charges being recommended because the evidence wasn't sufficient to support a conviction.

However, the 388-page report Hur released created a political firestorm as the special counsel described Biden as someone who could appeal to a jury as an "elderly man with a poor memory" and detailed instances where Hur said Biden couldn't remember when his son died or what years he was vice president. Republicans jumped on the assertions made in the report related to Biden's mental acuity, which the White House forcefully pushed back on.

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, as his committee met Thursday to markup the contempt report, argued the audio recordings are "necessary” and the transcripts “alone are not sufficient evidence of the state of the president's memory."

"Clearly President Biden and his advisors fear releasing the audio recordings of his interview because it will again reaffirm to the American people that President Biden’s mental state is in decline," House Oversight Chairman James Comer said in a statement obtained by ABC News.

Hur's yearlong probe into Biden's handling of classified documents ended with no criminal charges being recommended because the evidence wasn't sufficient to support a conviction. However, the 388-page report Hur released created a political firestorm as the special counsel described Biden as someone who could appeal to a jury as an "elderly man with a poor memory."

House Republicans were first informed of the privilege decision in a letter from Assistant Attorney General Carlos Uriarte, who cited what the department called its "extraordinary" cooperation and "good faith" efforts to provide Republicans with all relevant materials from Hur's probe.

Uriarte further detailed in his letter how the department previously made available the transcript of Biden's interview with Hur, and argued Republicans have failed to provide any reason that the audio would add further value to their efforts to investigate Biden.

In explaining the move to have Biden formally assert executive privilege over the remaining materials sought by Republicans -- which includes the audio of the interview with Biden's ghostwriter Mark Zwonitzer -- Uriarte pointed to longstanding DOJ policy "held by administrations of both parties that an official who asserts the President's claim of executive privilege cannot be prosecuted for criminal contempt of Congress."

"With the information you now have, the Committees ought not to proceed with contempt and should instead avoid unnecessary and unwarranted conflict," Uriarte said.

White House Counsel Ed Siskel also wrote a letter to Jordan and Comer explaining the decision to assert executive privilege over the recordings.

In it, Siskel argued Biden has a responsibility to protect the executive branch's law enforcement agencies from "undue partisan interference."

"The absence of a legitimate need for the audio recordings lays bare your likely goal -- to chop them up, distort them, and use them for partisan political purposes," Siskel wrote.

ABC News' Mary Bruce, Lauren Peller and Will Steakin contributed to this report.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-asserts-executive-privilege-audio-interview-special-counsel/story?id=110298904#:~:text=The Justice Department on Thursday,Biden's handling of classified documents.

I've highlighted a few key IMO parts.  Regarding  the comment "Hur's yearlong probe into Biden's handling of classified documents ended with no criminal charges being recommended because the evidence wasn't sufficient to support a conviction." I'll provide the following:

Quote

Hur and his team concluded that “no criminal charges are warranted in this matter” against President Biden, though he did uncover evidence that Biden “willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen.”

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/special-counsel-hur-declines-to-seek-criminal-charges-against-biden

So let's cut to the chase on this. 

- Executive Privilege is intended to protect confidential, security information available only to the POTUS.

- The entire transcript of the interview is public, so there is nothing in the video which qualifies as the above.

- Biden doesn't want the video released because he'll look bad.  Does anyone disagree with this?

- Republicans will do as stated in the article -- use it to make Biden look bad.  Does anyone disagree with this?

Given the above, what are your thoughts on the ability to assert Executive Privilege on this tape?

 

As a bonus, IMO since Hur cited Biden as "an elderly man with poor memory", that opens up to the committee the ability to assess Biden's state itself.  Thoughts?

[Voltaire 5,276]

It's an insult and lie to claim that Biden has a barely functional brain, but we're withholding the evidence that shows why Hur's assessment was wrong. Also, stop believing your eyes at every press conference.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,134]

Today while speaking to some Jewish people at the White House he said that one of the hostages being held by Hamas was joining them. He’s still being held hostage. 

[weepaws 3,159]

And just think people voted for him, and will do so once again

[cyclone24 1,913]

Imagine if 45 did that. 

[IGotWorms 4,057]

Bullsh1t.

Release all that stuff, I say.

Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

[Cdub100 3,870]

Nothing will come from this. Oh well...

[weepaws 3,159]

51 minutes ago, Cdub100 said:

Nothing will come from this. Oh well...

Agreed.  

[RLLD 4,180]

Meh.....I do not need tapes to understand the man is not completely there.....

[Dizkneelande 1,093]

2 hours ago, RLLD said:

Meh.....I do not need tapes to understand the man is not completely there.....

There’s only 2 reasons for not releasing them and I’m leaning in one direction because KJP admitted the DOJ colluded with the administration to enact executive privilege when we already have the transcript. Either the tapes show Biden is even worse than anyone thought except us or, the transcript has been doctored which implicates the DOJ. 

[DonS 3,292]

I'm still waiting for when this administration becomes "transparent" on ANYTHING. 

[jerryskids 6,656]

12 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

There’s only 2 reasons for not releasing them and I’m leaning in one direction because KJP admitted the DOJ colluded with the administration to enact executive privilege when we already have the transcript. Either the tapes show Biden is even worse than anyone thought except us or, the transcript has been doctored which implicates the DOJ. 

My money is on him looking even worse than many people thought.

But you bring up a good point about Garland's role in this.  Seems to me it's worth corroborating the transcript.

Regardless, it is an attempted abuse of Executive Privilege.

[RLLD 4,180]

1 hour ago, Dizkneelande said:

There’s only 2 reasons for not releasing them and I’m leaning in one direction because KJP admitted the DOJ colluded with the administration to enact executive privilege when we already have the transcript. Either the tapes show Biden is even worse than anyone thought except us or, the transcript has been doctored which implicates the DOJ. 

Well, yeah, any President might be disinclined to release this stuff though....

[Mike Honcho 5,230]

1 hour ago, jerryskids said:

My money is on him looking even worse than many people thought.

But you bring up a good point about Garland's role in this.  Seems to me it's worth corroborating the transcript.

Regardless, it is an attempted abuse of Executive Privilege.

Don't you think Hur might have something during the congressional hearing to the effect, "hey these transcripts look like they have been altered"? 

[jerryskids 6,656]

15 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

Don't you think Hur might have something during the congressional hearing to the effect, "hey these transcripts look like they have been altered"? 

I just looked it up and it looks like he and his team did review the report and corrected a few small errors, so I agree that is highly unlikely.

I'll keep my money on Biden coming off really poorly.

[BudBro 175]

Actively re-seeking the office of POTUS after being found mentally incompetent to stand trial for what amounts to be treason.  If he were to magically get re-elected, like he did the first time, we deserve what we get.  Regardless of one's disdain for Pres Trump, nobody of sound mind can actively support Biden.

Scotus ruled against Nixon's assertion of executive privilege.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,134]

13 minutes ago, BudBro said:

Actively re-seeking the office of POTUS after being found mentally incompetent to stand trial for what amounts to be treason.  If he were to magically get re-elected, like he did the first time, we deserve what we get.  Regardless of one's disdain for Pres Trump, nobody of sound mind can actively support Biden.

Scotus ruled against Nixon's assertion of executive privilege.

We will get Kamala if he wins. And these effeminate cucks here are good with that.  

[BeachGuy23 642]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

We will get Kamala if he wins. And these effeminate cucks here are good with that.  

You'd lap the sweat off the orange moron's ballsack while neglecting your kids and you have the gall to call others effeminate?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Cuck

[BeachGuy23 642]

This is yet another dumb move by this administration and makes Biden look weaker, if that's possible.

They're doing everything they can to hand to the election to orange hitler. 

[Engorgeous George 2,236]

21 hours ago, jerryskids said:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-asserts-executive-privilege-audio-interview-special-counsel/story?id=110298904#:~:text=The Justice Department on Thursday,Biden's handling of classified documents.

I've highlighted a few key IMO parts.  Regarding  the comment "Hur's yearlong probe into Biden's handling of classified documents ended with no criminal charges being recommended because the evidence wasn't sufficient to support a conviction." I'll provide the following:

https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/special-counsel-hur-declines-to-seek-criminal-charges-against-biden

So let's cut to the chase on this. 

- Executive Privilege is intended to protect confidential, security information available only to the POTUS.

- The entire transcript of the interview is public, so there is nothing in the video which qualifies as the above.

- Biden doesn't want the video released because he'll look bad.  Does anyone disagree with this?

- Republicans will do as stated in the article -- use it to make Biden look bad.  Does anyone disagree with this?

Given the above, what are your thoughts on the ability to assert Executive Privilege on this tape?

 

As a bonus, IMO since Hur cited Biden as "an elderly man with poor memory", that opens up to the committee the ability to assess Biden's state itself.  Thoughts?

Imagine, a Presidential candidate doing everything in his power to color how the voters will percieve him in an upcoming election.

[jerryskids 6,656]

28 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Imagine, a Presidential candidate doing everything in his power to color how the voters will percieve him in an upcoming election.

Are you thinking of a hypothetical candidate who, say, allegedly pays of a porn star to keep her yap shut?

[BeachGuy23 642]

27 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Are you thinking of a hypothetical candidate who, say, allegedly pays of a porn star to keep her yap shut?

Allegedly?

LOL

[Fnord 2,135]

Seems like abuse of executive privilege. They should be released. I will say though that I completely believe the stated rationale for NOT releasing them. The Gang of Puzzies will have a field day making memes and propaganda out of it, and it will absolutely be sliced and diced in misleading ways. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,134]

40 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Seems like abuse of executive privilege. They should be released. I will say though that I completely believe the stated rationale for NOT releasing them. The Gang of Puzzies will have a field day making memes and propaganda out of it, and it will absolutely be sliced and diced in misleading ways. 

Afraid of memes. Lol.

[jerryskids 6,656]

1 hour ago, Fnord said:

Seems like abuse of executive privilege. They should be released. I will say though that I completely believe the stated rationale for NOT releasing them. The Gang of Puzzies will have a field day making memes and propaganda out of it, and it will absolutely be sliced and diced in misleading ways. 

I agree with your belief of the stated rationale.  But like you said, it is an abuse of executive privilege.

I don't know what the "Gang of Puzzies" is.  

Also, what do you think will be sliced and diced in misleading ways?  Like, Biden is really coherent, but they'll splice and dice it to make him seem like he isn't?

Do you not think the entire video, un-spliced and diced, will make it to the internet?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,962]

17 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I agree with your belief of the stated rationale.  But like you said, it is an abuse of executive privilege.

I don't know what the "Gang of Puzzies" is.  

Also, what do you think will be sliced and diced in misleading ways?  Like, Biden is really coherent, but they'll splice and dice it to make him seem like he isn't?

Do you not think the entire video, un-spliced and diced, will make it to the internet?

Which, is weird, because those very same people believed every cherry-picked, out of context Trump allegation on TikTok, Twitter and anywhere else they could get it with ZERO questions asked.

But they now think THIS tape will be taken out of context?   

[Fnord 2,135]

22 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Afraid of memes. Lol.

Nope. I'm afraid of the dipshits like @Maximum Overkill that believe them and substitute them for honest thought and discourse. Which is the vast majority of MAGAMOOKS. 

[Fnord 2,135]

21 hours ago, jerryskids said:

I agree with your belief of the stated rationale.  But like you said, it is an abuse of executive privilege.

I don't know what the "Gang of Puzzies" is.  

Also, what do you think will be sliced and diced in misleading ways?  Like, Biden is really coherent, but they'll splice and dice it to make him seem like he isn't?

Do you not think the entire video, un-spliced and diced, will make it to the internet?

GOP

Gang of Puzzies.

I'm sure the entire video would be online. I'm also sure nobody's going to watch it, other than those with a vested interest in chopping it up and using it negatively against Biden. Like our boy @EternalShinyAndChrome mistakenly infers about me, because he assumes his own flawed approach to information dissemination applies to others, people will believe the resulting edits automatically and without thought. This is why I mostly refuse to watch news on TV or online. It's much more difficult to identify inherent bias in a carefully procured and edited video segment than it is with the written word, IMO.

[listen2me 23 1,840]

23 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Nope. I'm afraid of the dipshits like @Maximum Overkill that believe them and substitute them for honest thought and discourse. Which is the vast majority of MAGAMOOKS. 

I love how people need little names when talking politics.  Lol.   Children.  

Happens from the right as well.  But people like you and rusty cant write a post without weird little names.   I assume to emphasize your poor points?  

You guys are grown men.  

All caps!   Lookout!   

[jerryskids 6,656]

39 minutes ago, Fnord said:

GOP

Gang of Puzzies.

I'm sure the entire video would be online. I'm also sure nobody's going to watch it, other than those with a vested interest in chopping it up and using it negatively against Biden. Like our boy @EternalShinyAndChrome mistakenly infers about me, because he assumes his own flawed approach to information dissemination applies to others, people will believe the resulting edits automatically and without thought. This is why I mostly refuse to watch news on TV or online. It's much more difficult to identify inherent bias in a carefully procured and edited video segment than it is with the written word, IMO.

To summarize:  you believe that nobody will watch the unedited video, and instead that conservatives with bad intent will edit it to make coherent Joe Biden look incoherent.  Then a bunch of Magamooks will eat up the fake, misleading edits to incorrectly conclude that Biden is in severe cognitive decline.

In other words, basically what I said that you replied to above.

Like I said earlier, I have no doubts that people on the right will edit the juiciest (or unjuiciest, brain-dead?) parts to emphasize this fact.  But it doesn't change the reality.  Camp Biden can certainly respond with a counter, context, etc.  

And it is still not a reason to abuse Executive Privilege.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,134]

Fnord thinks that it’s the MAGA folks that will be swayed by the audio. Lol. 

[Maximum Overkill 1,846]

2 hours ago, Fnord said:

Nope. I'm afraid of the dipshits like @Maximum Overkill that believe them and substitute them for honest thought and discourse. Which is the vast majority of MAGAMOOKS. 

Sorry Ford, you must be sad today. No more grooming for you in SC.  

South Carolina governor signs into law ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors

[Fnord 2,135]

16 hours ago, Maximum Overkill said:

Sorry Ford, you must be sad today. No more grooming for you in SC.  

South Carolina governor signs into law ban on gender-affirming care for transgender minors

You forgot to include the braindead Twitter post. You feeling alright?

[Fnord 2,135]

17 hours ago, jerryskids said:

To summarize:  you believe that nobody will watch the unedited video, and instead that conservatives with bad intent will edit it to make coherent Joe Biden look incoherent.  Then a bunch of Magamooks will eat up the fake, misleading edits to incorrectly conclude that Biden is in severe cognitive decline.

In other words, basically what I said that you replied to above.

Like I said earlier, I have no doubts that people on the right will edit the juiciest (or unjuiciest, brain-dead?) parts to emphasize this fact.  But it doesn't change the reality.  Camp Biden can certainly respond with a counter, context, etc.  

And it is still not a reason to abuse Executive Privilege.

I'm not particularly concerned about what you mention, it's more about deceptive editing practices that would take quotes grossly out of context. MAGAMOOKS don't care, they would believe Joe Biden eats aborted fetuses for breakfast. Their opinions aren't changing. It's more about the tiny fraction of undecided voters who might be swayed by such propaganda. But whatever, I've already said it's an abuse of executive privilege and should be released. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,134]

1 minute ago, Fnord said:

I'm not particularly concerned about what you mention, it's more about deceptive editing practices that would take quotes grossly out of context. MAGAMOOKS don't care, they would believe Joe Biden eats aborted fetuses for breakfast. Their opinions aren't changing. It's more about the tiny fraction of undecided voters who might be swayed by such propaganda. But whatever, I've already said it's an abuse of executive privilege and should be released. 

I don’t think Biden eats aborted Fetuses. I do think he might to get re-elected. 

[Fnord 2,135]

18 hours ago, listen2me 23 said:

I love how people need little names when talking politics.  Lol.   Children.  

Happens from the right as well.  But people like you and rusty cant write a post without weird little names.   I assume to emphasize your poor points?  

You guys are grown men.  

All caps!   Lookout!   

The all caps is just an auto-fill on my phone. Sorry it got you so bent.

Using the term MAGAMOOKS is an important delineation between your average conservatives and Republicans, who are normal decent people and want the best for our nation, and the fevered Trump supporters that will contort themselves into any ridiculous opinion or position to defend their deity. These are the ones that continue to give Trump money, think he's sent from god, believe all liberals are evil, etc. 

Basically it's the difference between you and jonmx. I don't want to slander you while I'm telling the truth about him. You're welcome.

[Fnord 2,135]

6 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I don’t think Biden eats aborted Fetuses.

No? Tucker must not have gone there yet. Once he does, I'm sure you'll come around. 

[jerryskids 6,656]

1 hour ago, Fnord said:

No? Tucker must not have gone there yet. Once he does, I'm sure you'll come around. 

You do realize that a good portion of your party thinks Trump has weekly status meetings with Satan, right?  Also believes stuff like "I want to be a dictator."  I just had that pathetic discussion on this board this  morning.

[Fnord 2,135]

38 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

You do realize that a good portion of your party thinks Trump has weekly status meetings with Satan, right?  Also believes stuff like "I want to be a dictator."  I just had that pathetic discussion on this board this  morning.

I know you're in the habit of attempting to defend the indefensible, but HT? C'mon man!

Also, not a Democrat. I hold both of the parties in extremely low esteem since neither serves anything other than its own ends and cares little for their constituents. 

 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,134]

1 minute ago, Fnord said:

I know you're in the habit of attempting to defend the indefensible, but HT? C'mon man!

Also, not a Democrat. I hold both of the parties in extremely low esteem since neither serves anything other than its own ends and cares little for their constituents. 

 

No you don’t. Laughable.