Today, we @ProPublica] are releasing the full, 21-minute interview, unedited as seen from the view of the single camera focused on #Biden. We understand that this video captures a moment in time 9 months ago & that it will not settle the ongoing arguments about the president’s acuity today. Still, we believe it is worth giving the public another chance to see one of Biden’s infrequent conversations w/a reporter.
In the wake of President Joe #Biden’s poor #debate performance, his opponents & most major #media orgs have pointed out that he has done few interviews that give the public an opportunity to hear him speak w/o a script or teleprompters.
So much has been made of this limited access that the impressions from Special Counsel #RobertHur about his 5 hrs of interviews w/the president on Oct 8 & 9 drove months of coverage.
AG #MerrickGarland used an appearance on Capitol Hill on Tues to forcefully defend the #DOJ against “repeated attacks” from #Republicanlawmakers that have undermined investigations & put federal employees in #harm’s way.
#MerrickGarland’s testimony before the #House#Judiciary Cmte came as #GOP House leaders#threatened to hold him in #contempt in their efforts to gain access to audio recordings from special counsel #RobertHur’s investigation into President Biden’s handling of #classified materials. #Biden last month exerted executive #privilege …after Garland requested he do so over concerns releasing them could #harm future efforts to get ofcls to cooperate w/investigations & sit for taped interviews.
Full #transcript of #Biden’s interview paints nuanced portrait #POTUS doesn’t seem as absent-minded as #Hur said
Biden was in the early stages of his interview w/ SC #RobertHur when the topic of #BeauBiden came up — initially w/Biden raising it & later as Biden was attempting to get his chronological bearings.
“What month did Beau die? [to introduce the topic] Oh God, May 30,” he said, naming the correct day, acc/to a transcript of the exchange.
In one of the toughest exchanges at the hearing so far, Rep Adam Schiff excoriated fmr special counsel #RobertHur for issuing a “deeply #prejudicial” report that hurt President #Biden’s #political standing by suggesting his mental faculties were failing.
“You were not born yesterday, you understood exactly what you were doing,” Schiff said. “You cannot tell me you’re so naive to think your words would not have created a political firestorm.”
#RobertHur said that AG #MerrickGarland did not interfere w/his investigation or attempt to modify his report. Rep Joe #Neguse asked #Hur a series of yes/no questions about whether #Garland —or any #DOJ ofcls— attempted to impede the investigation.
The appointment of a #SpecialCounsel is intended to make high-profile, sensitive investigations as #independent & #apolitical as possible. A SC has more independence from DOJ ldrs than other fed prosecutors, but still ultimately answers to the #USAG.
#Hur, the special counsel, who is appearing …at the request of… #JimJordan, has arranged to resign from the #DOJ …one day before he is scheduled to appear….
“That makes it even more problematic...if he was still a federal employee, #DOJ would have to approve his #testimony & they’d be involved in his appearance,” they said.
In addition to the timing of his departure raising alarms…, sources have also been alarmed by #Hur’s choice of assocs during the lead-up to his appearance.
In preparing for the hearing, #RobertHur has turned to William Burck, a veteran DC atty w/deep ties to the #Republican#political establishment to serve as his counsel….
"This was flanked, on the opinion side, by the Times editorial board weighing in with 'The Challenges of an Aging President,' Bret Stephens declaring 'Democrats Can No Longer Stay Silent About Biden,' Maureen Dowd demanding 'Mr. President, Ditch the Stealth About Health,' and Ross Douthat adding 'The Question Is Not If Biden Should Step Aside. It’s How.'"
This is called manufacturing news while pretending to report it — a NYTimes speciality.
"Within about 48 hours of the Hur Report’s release, the New York Times news coverage included prominently placed pieces titled 'Special Counsel’s Report Puts Biden’s Age and Memory in the Spotlight,' 'Biden Cleared in Documents Case; Report Raises Concerns About His Memory,' and 'How Old Is Too Old to Be President? An Uncomfortable Question Arises Again.'”
"[Turning the Hur report into a media freakout] required deploying multiple reporting teams, an investment of resources reserved for only the most consequential stories. Much of it what they produced was presented not only with the cowardly use of the passive voice ('Questions are being raised'), but with a willful lack of self-awareness of the self-fulfilling prophecies at work."
So why did this happen? There are a number of reasons, the most important of which is that nothing attracts journalists more than a piece of news that reinforces something they already believe. …
Hur’s report gave news organizations a peg on which to hang stories that expressed their own belief that Biden is too old to be president."
Once again: and Trump is HOW MANY years younger than Biden? And he's made HOW MANY gaffes, with no media freakout?
"Popular Information analysis found that just three major papers — the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal — collectively published 81 articles about Hur's assessment of Biden's memory in the four days following the release of Hur's report. Incidents that raised questions about former President Trump's mental state received far less coverage by the same outlets."
"Perhaps no mainstream media publication handled [the Hur report] as poorly as the New York Times, which used the report's language to whip up an absolute frenzy over Biden’s cognition, running four separate pieces on the same day, all fretting about Biden’s ability to keep governing."
Margaret Sullivan quotes New York Times' front-page, above-the-fold article after the Hur report:
"While Mr. Biden, 81, has been dogged by doubts and concerns about his advancing years from voters, Mr. Trump, who is 77, has not felt the same blowback.'
Then she asks:
“'Dogged by,' you say? Who, exactly, is doing the dogging?
Maybe the Times and other major media outlets ought to look in the mirror."
The fact that far too many people cannot recognize fascism unless it looks exactly like Nazi Germany is very dangerous — @Strandjunker#quotes#quote#fascism
“Does U.S. want a "well-meaning elderly man," or one who means ill? Would rather have a POTUS who briefly confused Egypt for Mexico, or one who'd start a war on the border?
On the slow train wreck of democracy - it doesn't have to be this way.”
"Hur spent a year trying to find facts that would allow him to charge Joe Biden, charge a President, doing backflips with the evidence along the way, and then writing up a report that provides far more evidence about 40 year old documents covered by Speech and Debate than we’ll ever learn about the stolen documents at Mar-a-Lago."
"This was never an ethical prosecutorial pursuit. It was always about writing a novel for a rabid audience.
Or, as you might consider it, just an exercise in box-ticking for partisan ends."
In other words, there is no there there, when it comes to Biden's malfeasance with these documents. Hur had no choice except to make things up — a long, diversionary narrative designed to be the kind of poison pill the corporate media lust for, when it comes to Biden.
"My own opinion is that Hur took those political shots at Biden in order to cover for the fact that he had decided not to bring any charges. That decision likely would have made him a target for anger and even threats by MAGA had he just done his job and kept it professional."
"But political pressure, and even open hostility from Trump and his base, is now a common facet of our legal system, and it will remain so until not only Trump but his kind of weaponized, anti-democratic tactics are well in our national rearview mirror."
And perhaps we can conclude by now that the media have no interest in protecting the nation from a takeover by thugs who use threats and intimidation to rule?