News /

Fwd: WSJ: Robert Hur and the Hacks The transcript of the special counsel’s interview with President Biden confirms the prosecutor’s account.

  |   By Polling+ Staff

(Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

Robert Hur and the Hacks

The transcript of the special counsel’s interview with President Biden confirms the prosecutor’s account.

The Wall Street Journal comes to the defense of Special Counsel Robert Hur.  The story reports:

“Robert Hur was roundly denounced by the White House and its media allies for an election-year hit job when he released his 345-page report on President Biden’s handling of classified material in February. But the special counsel’s testimony Tuesday before the House Judiciary Committee suggests his critics now realize those attacks brought more unwanted attention to the President’s mental fitness. 

Normally the Hur report would have been embraced by a White House because of its conclusion that no criminal charges were warranted. Mr. Hur included another sweetener for Democrats by distinguishing between Mr. Biden’s classified documents case and Donald Trump’s. But instead of accentuating the positive, Mr. Biden slammed Mr. Hur for describing him as a “well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory” and had “diminished faculties in advancing age.” 

Donald Trump – WSJ Spotlight Coverage, Recent News

Donald Trump was the 45th president of the U.S. and is running again in 2024 for the Republican presidential nom…

Mr. Biden denounced the idea that he had trouble recollecting past events. In a press conference the night the report was made public, the President waxed indignant that Mr. Hur said that he couldn’t name within several years when his son Beau had died. “How in the hell dare he raise that?” Mr. Biden said.

But the transcript of Mr. Hur’s interview with Mr. Biden, which was released Tuesday, reveals several memory lapses by the President. It also confirms that Mr. Biden—not Mr. Hur—brought up Beau. This and the other presidential confusions the report highlights confirm Mr. Hur’s conclusion.

Once Mr. Hur concluded that Mr. Biden had “willfully” retained classified documents prohibited by law, the special counsel had to explain why he decided not to prosecute. That had to include why he thought a jury would make judgments about the President’s memory.

“What I wrote is what I believe the evidence shows, and what I expect jurors would perceive and believe,” Mr. Hur said. “I did not sanitize my explanation. Nor did I disparage the President unfairly. I explained to the Attorney General my decision and the reasons for it. That’s what I was required to do.”

The President and his allies focused on mental acuity because it speaks to Mr. Biden’s greatest weakness as he runs for re-election and trails in the polls. Before Mr. Hur released his report, the White House sent a letter asking that he revisit this language. Mr. Hur refused, as did higher ups at Justice, including Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Mr. Hur’s observations didn’t invent the concerns about Mr. Biden’s mental ability. The reason Team Biden reacted so furiously is that Mr. Hur confirmed what ordinary Americans have seen for three years.

Democrats on the Judiciary Committee played the role of defense counsel for Mr. Biden, claiming Mr. Hur is politically motivated. The cheapest shot came from Georgia Rep. Hank Johnson, who said Mr. Hur wrote what he did in hopes that Mr. Trump would nominate him for a judgeship if elected in November.

But mostly they focused on the report’s language about Mr. Trump’s documents case and tried to turn the hearing into a trial of the 45th president. On the other side, some Republicans tried to make the case that Mr. Hur was applying a double standard by letting Mr. Biden off while Mr. Trump faces a trial on 40 felony counts for his handling of classified info. But the facts are clearly different.

Throughout it all, the special counsel hewed closely to his report. But the contrast between Mr. Hur and his critics showed who the politically motivated hacks really are.”

Watching the hearing one can see why the WSJ Editorial Board has reached this conclusion.