Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Biden invokes executive privilege on special counsel recording demanded by GOP


OverSword

Recommended Posts

Quote

 

President Biden has invoked executive privilege to block House Republicans from obtaining audio recordings of his interviews with special counsel Robert Hur over his handling of classified documents.

The move comes just hours before House Republicans are set to meet to consider resolutions to hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for failing to turn over the files which had been subpoenaed by the House Judiciary and Oversight committees.

“Because of the President’s longstanding commitment to protecting the integrity, effectiveness, and independence of the Department of Justice and its law enforcement investigations, he has decided to assert executive privilege over the recordings,” White House counsel Ed Siskel wrote in a letter obtained by The Hill.

 

Link

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At first,I didn't really care...I have seen and heard enough from him, even with his handlers,pocket guides,ect it's easy enough to know Joe is no longer all there.

Now I want to hear the tape just to see how much "all there" is actually left when having to do something on his own.

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

 

“The White House is asserting executive privilege over the recordings, but it has already waived privilege by releasing the transcript of the interview,” Comer said in a statement.

“Today’s Hail Mary from the White House changes nothing for our committee. The House Oversight Committee will move forward with its markup of a resolution and report recommending to the House of Representatives that Attorney General Garland be held in contempt of Congress for defying a lawful subpoena.”

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We really need the Supreme Court to get off their butts and make a ruling on "immunity".  Depending on what they determine, this and half of Trump's stuff might all be irrelevant wastes of time.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meh. They have the transcripts. I think they want the videos so they can make lots of sound bites of Biden being old, forgetful, and stumbling in his answers.

I don't see any other reason they'd want it, OR any reason that Biden wouldn't want it to be released. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/16/2024 at 2:15 PM, Gromdor said:

We really need the Supreme Court to get off their butts and make a ruling on "immunity".  Depending on what they determine, this and half of Trump's stuff might all be irrelevant wastes of time.

The frightening thing while Trump devided the country and has hurt democracy the worse atrocity would be someway he steals 2024 then three seconds after signed in he would prove he is above the law by pardoning any crime he ever did or will do he would extend that to his special worshippers and family.

His subject would hail him as an even bigger God than they already do, just think he could have free reign nothing could stop him.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, the13bats said:

nothing could stop him.

Putin, Xi, Orban, and Un could pay him a visit, slap him around and tell him he is an idiot that is making all authoritarians look like dummies.  They might even threaten to throw him out of the club if he doesn't stop acting squirrely..

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good thing he’s not a corrupt New York shady landlord with weird hair and terriblely fitting suits. 
 It’d be a great crime against America and against the very soul of America if it was.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Good thing he’s not a corrupt New York shady landlord with weird hair and terriblely fitting suits. 
 It’d be a great crime against America and against the very soul of America if it was.

You got it all wrong.  They want the special counsel recording because is he a doddering old man unfit to remember where his pants are, let alone manage a country.  

The special counsel already determined there was no punishable crime.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

You got it all wrong.  They want the special counsel recording because is he a doddering old man unfit to remember where his pants are, let alone manage a country.  

The special counsel already determined there was no punishable crime.

In addition, the 25th Amendment is not available to Congress, just the President's Cabinet.   Its simple enough though, if Congress wants to check on Biden's mental state, they could just go visit him.  How long has it been since they checked in on grandpa?  And the White House  is just down the  street.  We know they are terribly busy, but its not like they would have to miss a day of work to fly to New York and make speeches to humor him or anything like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

The special counsel already determined there was no punishable crime.

There most certainly was. Hur's words...

Special counsel Robert Hur’s bombshell report on President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents concluded that he presented himself as an “elderly man with a poor memory” who was unable to remember key dates, including when he served as vice president or the year his son died.

Transcript of Biden's interview with special counsel Robert Hur shows memory lapses — but also detailed exchanges (nbcnews.com)

They decided, at this time, that Biden wasn't fit to testify. If he isn't fit enough to have charges brought against him for having classified documents from his time as a vice-president he isn't fit enough to be president IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Michelle said:

There most certainly was. Hur's words...

Special counsel Robert Hur’s bombshell report on President Joe Biden’s handling of classified documents concluded that he presented himself as an “elderly man with a poor memory” who was unable to remember key dates, including when he served as vice president or the year his son died.

Transcript of Biden's interview with special counsel Robert Hur shows memory lapses — but also detailed exchanges (nbcnews.com)

They decided, at this time, that Biden wasn't fit to testify. If he isn't fit enough to have charges brought against him for having classified documents from his time as a vice-president he isn't fit enough to be president IMO.

Think you quoted the wrong sentence there Michelle.  Your article and quote both support this statement of mine:

1 hour ago, Gromdor said:

You got it all wrong.  They want the special counsel recording because is he a doddering old man unfit to remember where his pants are, let alone manage a country.  

and didn't support this one at all:

1 hour ago, Gromdor said:

  The special counsel already determined there was no punishable crime.

But you can tell it is all just an election year game, because as Tate said, they can invoke the 25th amendment whenever they want without opening up an investigation into an investigation.  They can also talk to Hur and have a copy of the err.. "bombshell report" that ended up just clearing him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gromdor said:

You got it all wrong.  They want the special counsel recording because is he a doddering old man unfit to remember where his pants are, let alone manage a country.  

The special counsel already determined there was no punishable crime.

No, the SC determined that any crime couldn’t be punished because he comes across as a senile, doddering old man and therefore wouldn’t be prosecuted. Not that there isn’t an crime to punish.

  • Like 3
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

In addition, the 25th Amendment is not available to Congress, just the President's Cabinet.   Its simple enough though, if Congress wants to check on Biden's mental state, they could just go visit him.  How long has it been since they checked in on grandpa?  And the White House  is just down the  street.  We know they are terribly busy, but its not like they would have to miss a day of work to fly to New York and make speeches to humor him or anything like that.

True enough. As long as it isnt one of the 40% of work days where hes been on vacation.

https://cbsaustin.com/news/nation-world/fact-check-team-examining-president-joe-bidens-vacation-time-in-comparison-to-predecessors-donald-Trump-mar-a-lago-george-w-bush-barack-obama-delaware-rehoboth-beach-personal-business-rnc-pool-reports

Quote

According to the Republican National Committee as of August 18, 2023, Biden has spent 382 days or 40% of his presidency out of office – days spent on vacation, personal business, or just regular days at one of his Delaware homes.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

No, the SC determined that any crime couldn’t be punished because he comes across as a senile, doddering old man and therefore wouldn’t be prosecuted. Not that there isn’t an crime to punish.

Hmm.  This report here seems to indicate that you are a teller of falsehoods: report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf (justice.gov)

Let me quote the first page for you: "

We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.1 We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president.2 Our investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen. These materials included (1) marked classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan, and (2) notebooks containing Mr. Biden's handwritten entries about issues of national security and foreign policy implicating sensitive intelligence sources and methods. FBI agents recovered these materials from the garage, offices, and basement den in Mr. Biden's Wilmington, Delaware home. However, for the reasons summarized below, we conclude that the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Prosecution of Mr. Biden is also unwarranted based on our consideration of the aggravating and mitigating factors set forth in the Department of Justice's Principles of Federal Prosecution. For these reasons, we decline prosecution of Mr. Biden."

Here is the part that you seem to think condemns him:

"We have also considered that, 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. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

To me that just is the SC admitting that a jury wouldn't convict him because of his demeanor.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Hmm.  This report here seems to indicate that you are a teller of falsehoods: report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf (justice.gov)

Let me quote the first page for you: "

We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter.1 We would reach the same conclusion even if Department of Justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president.2 Our investigation uncovered evidence that President Biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen. These materials included (1) marked classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan, and (2) notebooks containing Mr. Biden's handwritten entries about issues of national security and foreign policy implicating sensitive intelligence sources and methods. FBI agents recovered these materials from the garage, offices, and basement den in Mr. Biden's Wilmington, Delaware home. However, for the reasons summarized below, we conclude that the evidence does not establish Mr. Biden's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Prosecution of Mr. Biden is also unwarranted based on our consideration of the aggravating and mitigating factors set forth in the Department of Justice's Principles of Federal Prosecution. For these reasons, we decline prosecution of Mr. Biden."

Here is the part that you seem to think condemns him:

"We have also considered that, 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. Based on our direct interactions with and observations of him, he is someone for whom many jurors will want to identify reasonable doubt. It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him-by then a former president well into his eighties-of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness."

To me that just is the SC admitting that a jury wouldn't convict him because of his demeanor.

How is saying that a jury wouldn’t convict due to his demeanour different to saying “they won’t prosecute due to the fact he comes across as a doddering old man”? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

How is saying that a jury wouldn’t convict due to his demeanour different to saying “they won’t prosecute due to the fact he comes across as a doddering old man”? 

Oh, that's not the falsehood.  The falsehood is there is a crime to be punished.  Hur plainly states that there is no criminal charges warranted in his first sentence and then later on says that what evidence that they did have did not establish Biden's guilt without a reasonable doubt.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Oh, that's not the falsehood.  The falsehood is there is a crime to be punished.  Hur plainly states that there is no criminal charges warranted in his first sentence and then later on says that what evidence that they did have did not establish Biden's guilt without a reasonable doubt.

Would Hur have arrived at that conclusion if Biden didn't come across as a "sympathetic, well meaning, elderly man with a poor memory". What if he instead came across as a president who should know what documents he has and where he got them from? 

Edited by Link of Hyrule
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the Trumpets get Biden kicked out due to mental issues so that VP what's her name steps up and Trump who is sharp as a tack mentality beats her 2024 and three seconds in pardons himself friends and family of anything they did or ever will do he drops gas to ten cents a gal and is haled as a god with bad hair and dull tailor made suits that fit his terrible body.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Link of Hyrule said:

Would Hur have arrived at that conclusion if Biden didn't come across as a "sympathetic, well meaning, elderly man with a poor memory". What if he instead came across as a president who should know what documents he has and where he got them from? 

Ironically enough, he did compare Biden to Trump in his report: 

"It is not our role to assess the criminal charges pending against Mr. Trump, but several material distinctions between Mr. Trump's case and Mr. Biden's are clear. Unlike the evidence involving Mr. Biden, the allegations set forth in the indictment of Mr. Trump, if proven, would present serious aggravating facts. 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."- page 11 of the Hur report.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

Ironically enough, he did compare Biden to Trump in his report: 

"It is not our role to assess the criminal charges pending against Mr. Trump, but several material distinctions between Mr. Trump's case and Mr. Biden's are clear. Unlike the evidence involving Mr. Biden, the allegations set forth in the indictment of Mr. Trump, if proven, would present serious aggravating facts. 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."- page 11 of the Hur report.

I didn't mention Trump's actions. I've actually said elsewhere on the forums that Trump is in a lot of poop for the classified documents he stole and chose not to give back. I was keeping an eye on the polls and the bookmakers during all of the four indictments Trump has gone through. After 3 of those indictments, Trump's popularity spiked. This is because everyone who is not a democrat shill could see that those three indictments were politically motivated nothing burgers (edit: Michael Cohen certainly proved the politically motivated nature of the current indictment in court right now, what with all the lies he got caught spewing on the witness stand). The only indictment that didn't see a spike in Trump support is the classified documents case, and it's also (not surprisingly) the only one of the four indictments that has any merit. 

So with that said, I acknowledge the wrong Trump did - now why did you bring Donald Trump into a discussion about Joe Biden? 

Edited by Link of Hyrule
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Link of Hyrule said:

I didn't mention Trump's actions. I've actually said elsewhere on the forums that Trump is in a lot of poop for the classified documents he stole and chose not to give back. I was keeping an eye on the polls and the bookmakers during all of the four indictments Trump has gone through. After 3 of those indictments, Trump's popularity spiked. This is because everyone who is not a democrat shill could see that those three indictments were politically motivated nothing burgers (edit: Michael Cohen certainly proved the politically motivated nature of the current indictment in court right now, what with all the lies he got caught spewing on the witness stand). The only indictment that didn't see a spike in Trump support is the classified documents case, and it's also (not surprisingly) the only one of the four indictments that has any merit. 

So with that said, I acknowledge the wrong Trump did - now why did you bring Donald Trump into a discussion about Joe Biden? 

Two reasons- you asked about comparison with another president and Trump is the only one that can compare.  And for the second reason, Hur himself brought up Trump in the very report we are using as evidence in our discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gromdor said:

Two reasons- you asked about comparison with another president and Trump is the only one that can compare.

I asked for comparison of "a president who should know what documents he has and where he got them from". That fits Trump accurately, so I suppose there is that. Biden, unfortunately, has lost his faculties and cannot claim to know what documents he has or where he got them from :lol: 

 

3 hours ago, Gromdor said:

  And for the second reason, Hur himself brought up Trump in the very report we are using as evidence in our discussion.

But we aren't discussing Trump's situation, we're discussing Biden's situation! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Link of Hyrule said:

Would Hur have arrived at that conclusion if Biden didn't come across as a "sympathetic, well meaning, elderly man with a poor memory". What if he instead came across as a president who should know what documents he has and where he got them from? 

Yes. It's right there in Gromdor's post (#15).

He establishes the evidence does not establish Biden is guilty of a criminal offence. He then, separately, makes the comment about his memory.

Kind of makes it seem like he just had to find something to harm Biden's chances after the evidence fell through...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Setton said:

Yes. It's right there in Gromdor's post (#15).

He establishes the evidence does not establish Biden is guilty of a criminal offence. He then, separately, makes the comment about his memory.

Kind of makes it seem like he just had to find something to harm Biden's chances after the evidence fell through...

He was very clear when questioned by congress that he didn't recommend charges as he didn't think a jury would convict him because he would come off as a well meaning old man with a poor memory at trial, not because he didn't break the law.  He definitely broke the law.

Edited by OverSword
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.