Robert Hur testimony hard to discount

Whether a Biden defender or not, there can be no mistake that President Joe Biden retained classified materials at the end of his Vice-Presidency. Pictured: Special Counsel Robert Hur. Photo Credit: U.S. Department of Justice. 


The Maryland Board of Regents introduces member Robert Kyoung Hur on its website with the following final paragraph to his impressive credentials: “Mr. Hur received his J.D. from Stanford Law School, where he served as Executive Editor of the Stanford Law Review, was elected to the Order of the Coif, and won the Kirkwood Moot Court Competition. He served as a law clerk for William H. Rehnquist, United States Chief Justice, and Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Mr. Hur received his A.B. degree, magna cum laude with highest honors, from Harvard College and studied philosophy at King’s College, Cambridge.” 

The Biden Administration and the legacy media may feel justified portraying Hur as a Trump-favouring prosecutor with questionable ethics, intent on performing a partisan hack job against the sitting president, but that narrative looks theatrical. Hur has an unimpeachable record as a chief law enforcement officer. 

Attorney General Merrick Garland asked Hur to oversee the investigation into “the possible unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents discovered at the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement and the Wilmington, Delaware private residence of President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.” When Hur released his findings that found Biden to be “an elderly man with a poor memory,” there was a manifest level of protestation from the president, his administration, his defenders and acolytes in the media. Biden even decided to hold an ill-advised press conference where he inflated the concerns after muddling through a prepared statement. 

On March 12, Hur appeared before a Congressional Committee to testify. The Democratic members saw this as an opportunity to point out that Hur had not charged Biden, instead exonerating him. The wind can’t blow two ways simultaneously. Biden’s memory has deteriorated significantly, or Hur would have charged him. There were precisely two options available once Hur completed his findings. Either Biden was responsible for his violations of the law and should be prosecuted or Biden was responsible for his violations but should not be prosecuted because of his senility. Hur chose the latter and this made the Democrats fighting mad even though the first would have put Biden in the dock. 

Three Congressional members stand out as particularly strong examples of how angry Biden’s fellow Democrats were about Hur’s report. 

Adam Schiff of California’s 30th congressional district, famous for his Russian collusion allegations against Donald Trump, berated Hur for suggesting Biden was feeble. He called Hur prejudicial, his report subjective, and that he deliberately tried to create a narrative that would allow Biden’s opponent to influence the fall campaign for president. 

Hank Johnson of Georgia’s 4th Congressional District tried to pin Hur as coveting a future position in a Trump Administration, asking Hur first if he was a member of the Federalist Society (Hur denied), then asking if he was a Republican. When Hur confirmed he was, Johnson smeared Hur with being interested in becoming a Federal Judge or earning an appointment to an ensuing Republican Justice Department. 

Finally, Steve Cohen of Tennessee’s 9th Congressional District decided that a good plan included ignoring Biden’s memory issues instead focusing on Biden having the right values, policies, and understanding of the problems facing America. He even called Biden’s apparent senility a memory disability as if that would diminish the fact that America’s president, heading into a re-election campaign for four more years in office, demonstrates palpable trouble staying focused, recalling facts, or answering questions. 

Even reporters on CBS and ABC tried to come to Biden’s defence admitting Biden had some memory glitches but having reviewed the transcripts the president remembered detailed conversations, staunchly defended his actions and seemed very engaged. One reporter even claimed that Hur had it wrong about Biden’s inability to recall when his son Beau died. What do the transcripts verify?  A quick brief of the 388-page report reveals Hur’s dilemma and the contradiction Democrats espouse when they attempt to claim Biden’s exoneration.  

Andrew Kerr and Joseph Simonson of The Washington Free Beacon reported on March 12, 2024, the day of Hur’s testimony before Congress that “Transcripts of Hur’s interviews with Biden released Tuesday and reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon support Hur’s assessment that there are ‘significant limitations’ surrounding Biden’s memory. Throughout the five hours of interviews on Oct. 8 and 9, Biden struggled to recall relevant details about his handling of classified records or when he served as vice president.” 

The authors indicate that Biden could not recall when his son died and contrary to initial reports, raised the issue himself. The report also revealed a number of bizarre tangents the president raised about sounds a car makes, a risqué bathing suit his 72 year old wife wears, and an industrial accident that left a young man with burned genitals. I suggest to readers to review the full article in the Beacon.

Whether a Biden defender or not, there can be no mistake that Biden retained classified materials at the end of his Vice-Presidency and there are audio recordings with a ghost-writer that stated he (Biden) had just found all the classified materials downstairs (in his home). When asked where he had found classified materials, Hur recounted locating them at seven locations – Penn-Biden Center, Biden’s garage, basement den, main floor office, third floor den, the University of Delaware, and at the Biden Institute. 

While reluctant to call the president a liar, Hur did deem one response, “not credible.” He also confirmed that a reasonable juror could have voted to convict. When referring back to the ghost-writer Hur also established that Mark Zwonitzer tried to destroy evidence, unsuccessfully trying to delete the conversations he had with Mr. Biden. While Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal may think Hur exonerated Biden, despite Hur clearly contradicting her efforts to lie about his report, the real bombshell may be that the White House asked Hur to water down his findings. Hur refused to and what follows will leave Americans having to decide not only if Mr. Biden remains capable of his office, but is he worthy? 


Your donations help us continue to deliver the news and commentary you want to read. Please consider donating today.

Donate Today


  • Politics

  • Sports

  • Business