Biden Too Old to Be Indicted

So the primary sources for this (interview transcripts) for this are out, and it turns out Hur really mischaracterized things.

*shocked pikachu meme*

Surprise, surprise!

Imagine how evil a soul you have to have to lie about a man not being able to remember when his child died.

https://x.com/notcapnamerica/status/1767631515897184277

As others have pointed out Hur had to know the transcript would come out. But like Barr’s ‘summary’ of the Mueller Report Republicans are post-truth. All that matters is spin. Even when shown to be a lie later it is too late, the story has already been set.

(Little kid voice)
But I really, really, REALLY want Truuuump!!
I punched my little sister because I really wanted her markers, and I lied about Biden because I want Trump.
I really want it in my feelings!!
If you don't care about my feelings, then your head is made of ka-ka.

there’s the headline:

q: you said to president biden, “you appear to have a photographic understanding and recall.” did you say that?

hur: those words do appear in the transcript

q: never appeared in your report

hur: it does not appear in my report

https://x.com/ianbremmer/status/1767625524279378085

Video at link. What a piece of shit.

Explain how he mischaracterized things.

Explain how your brain generates enough power to keep your legs moving.

after you explain whether or not it is stupidity or dishonesty that prevents you from admitting to facts.

Wow, that's some projection right there.

How about from that transcript you back up the claim that "he couldn't remember key dates like when his son died".

He himself brought up Beaus death as having happened during this time period, in the context of it being a big traumatic event that obviously had his attention, and then immediately gives the date in the year it happened and Ms. Cotton interjects to say 2015, which is in the time period he is talking about and Biden then confirms.

The most generous interpretation of that fitting the way you presented it is "Biden needed to stop and think about exactly what year he died" which is a very common thing when it comes to recalling dates. Most people will have to stop and think when asked what year various life events happened.

To reiterate, yes it is stupid that the US insists on picking candidates that are this old, but that transcript gives barely any support for the claims of senility made.

FF NEEDS it to be true.
He NEEDS it.
Like a junkie to smack, or Trump to a hamberder.

Is there also covfefe?

In his report, Hur stated that Biden presented himself as having a poor memory. See page 6 at the link.
https://www.justice.gov/storage/report-from-special-counsel-robert-k-hur-february-2024.pdf

The following story compares the claims to the transcript of the interview.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/politics/hur-biden-memory-transcript.html

One of the things Hur talked about was that Biden allegedly didn't know when his son Beau died. As the link suggests, that was misleading.

It also seems -- at least from the story above, Hur attributes typical misstatements to memory problems.

​

They heard the saying "a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is getting its shoes on," and they said "hmmmm, good to know. Good to know."

https://x.com/IanSams46/status/1767558624065335333?s=20

A certain person could really counter this argument by campaigning all the time and being in our face awake and alert more than once a year. Trump may be visually stumbling, but at least he is out there almost daily ranting. At the rate joe is going the next time we will see him awake and alert will be when he is angrily giving his concession speech to trump.

His people need to keep kicking grumpy old joe into waking the fuck up because he signed up to run for this job. No one forced it on his old and tired ass. he fucked every other dem over to be the man when he could have retired and now he needs to do a lot more than one night of the SOTU if he wants to energize his voting base.

Since FF continues, for reasons passing understanding, to believe the Biff/Biden documents cases are somehow exactly the same, maybe he'll take thT Hur fellow's word for why he didn't indict the current president.

https://wapo.st/3IBVuDH

FF: ok, but that still doesn't explain why they would charge Trump for keeping documents but not Biden

Hur also said that Old Yeller did willfully retain the documents. This notion that Biden gave them back when asked is a false narrative. He knowingly had them and only returned them when he was about to indict Trump. The reason Biden wasn’t charged is because, according to Hur thought he was a forgetful old man who would be seen as sympathetic to a jury. It’s the same type of bullshit excuse Comey gave for not charging Hillary. It’s the good ol’ boy network in the FBI. The Washington Compost is carrying water for them. They’re also the mouthpiece for the intelligence community. Having the documents in the first place is a crime in of itself.

Do you enjoy being thought of as an obvious and transparent liar?

No, Hur said there was evidence that Biden willfully retained the documents. I know this might be subtle but it is important to understand that some cases a fact can be evidence toward two different theories. The fact is that Biden knew at some point that he had the documents that were classified. He told his ghostwriter in recorded statements that he had classified documents.

But that could be taken as evidence of several possibilities, including:
1. Biden knew that he had classified documents that he was supposed to return and he willfully did not.
2. Biden knew that there were classified documents at some point but mistakenly thought that he arranged for their return and only recently realized that they weren't returned
3. Biden knew he had classified documents but thought that he was entitled to keep them so he did not return them.
4. Biden knew that he had classified documents at one point, but forgot about the fact that he had them and that's why he still had them.

It would only likely be criminal if it was possibility 1. There is no way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was 1.

Hur explains at length, I'm sure, that it is not a crime in and of itself to have the documents.

He could just be really stupid and stubborn. (and of course, porque no los dos?)

I would just like to point out again that there is a really big difference between a notebook that has some notes that turned out to be classified information and actual classified documents which look something like this:



Billy and all the other Trumpists can continue to call personal notebooks ‘classified documents’ because some of the personal notes turned out later to contain classified information but no serious person could believe in any kind of equivalency.