'That Wasn't My Question': Harriet Hageman Grills Robert Hur About Biden's Memory

is recognized as special counsel when she determined that no criminal charges should be brought against President Biden in this matter, she focused on the specific facts surrounding the classified documents where President Biden stored them and in her

memory

and age wrote that the quote from President Biden's

memory

was significantly limited during his taped interviews with the ghost riter in 2017 and during his interview with the special counsel's office in 2023, he also expressed concern that the respective jurors would be persuaded by the presentation of President Biden as a Sympathetic and well-meaning old man with a bad memory. However, the assessment focused on how President Biden would presently present himself to a jury if he were to stand trial.

It's that correct. That was one element of my explanation to the attorney general about my decision. It was not the only element. Okay, that

wasn

't my

question

, but one of the things we were considering was his current mental state, his current correct memory, one of the things I considered would be how, if in theory a trial were to take place, as long as conduct a trial, how President Biden would present himself to the jury if he chose to testify, okay, you did not compare President Biden's current memory or condition with his memory or condition when he was in the Senate or when he left the vice presidency and took the classified document subject to his investigation, it's true, I actually think that's not the case.

Right, Congressman, one of the things in the report is an assessment of the president's memory based on recordings of conversations between Mr. Biden and his ghostwriter from 2016 and 2017 and comparing them to the president's memory that he exhibited during our interview with him in October 2023, so there was a comparison, okay, but unless there was some issue not disclosed to the American people during his 50 years in office, you found that Mr. Biden fully understood his legal responsibility related to the handling of classified information. materials, that is why he concluded in his report that Mr. Biden subpoenaed intentionally withheld and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen.

You state that on page one is correct. I think what I said on page one was that we identified evidence. that Mr. Biden intentionally withheld classified information after the end of his vice presidency, but we ultimately concluded that the evidence was insufficient to justify. I understand, please listen to my

question

, what I mean is that Mr. Biden fully understood that he could not keep classified information in his house as a former senator and vice president, right? He understood that the correct thing is that, based on the evidence, my assessment was that a jury, that was not my question, please listen. my question my question was that Mr.

Biden understood when he was a senator and vice president that he could not keep classified materials in his house, in his garage and in other offices. That's fair. I don't think that's accurate, Congressman, because when Mr. Biden was vice president, he was authorized to have classified material in his house, but after he left he knew that he had no right to properly maintain classified information in the house. his house After he left, there is evidence to suggest that he knew he couldn't legally have her. classified information in his house, however, there is evidence regarding his notebooks that he believed he was authorized to keep the notebooks at home based on precedent based on precedent, you know, I guess the way I would put it is like this, President Biden knew better than him.

He knew that he did not have the right to keep these documents from when he was a senator and he knew that he did not have the right to keep these documents after he had left the vice presidency, but because he now suffers from a deterioration of his memory as you put it so delicately that it came out with yours, is that fair congresswoman what I said in my report is that there is certainly evidence that some jurors could infer to suggest that Mr. Biden intentionally withheld and revealed National Defense information, but in my opinion, probable outcome of a trial the likely outcome of a trial not a conviction I have represented a variety of clients over the years in actions against the federal government for, in fact, several decades of time, in my experience, the federal government, the Department of Justice specifically, has essentially unlimited resources to pursue and prosecute citizens and will spare no expense in doing so.

In my experience, the Department of Justice is not only overly aggressive in these cases, but they make it clear that part of the reason for such aggression is to make an example of the poor soul who is the target of such action, in other words, so that others people do not engage in the same type of behavior. Mr. Ella, having been a prosecutor for the Department of Justice for a long time, could you explain why those people without a last name? Clinton's or Biden's are usually treated very differently and seem to be the only ones who are never held accountable for breaking the law, Congressman.

One of the things I explain in my report is the fact that there are historical precedents regarding former occupants of the White House and their retention of classified materials after they leave. I'm asking specifically about Mrs. Clinton and Mrs. Hillary Clinton and Congresswoman Joe Biden. I have no opinion to articulate regarding the investigation related to Mrs. Clinton. A gentleman from Texas is recognized