Biden pulls a Trump

[Matt]

President Joe Biden has asserted executive privilege to block House committees from obtaining audio recordings of his own interviews with special counsel Robert Hur about Biden’s handling of classified documents.

The White House counsel’s office notified House GOP investigators of the move hours before Republicans were expected to recommend holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over the audio. Rather than changing the GOP’s plan, the privilege assertion sparked a wave of outrage from Republicans, who are moving forward with their planned contempt vote.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/1 ... s-00158323

[Rate This]

President Joe Biden has asserted executive privilege to block House committees from obtaining audio recordings of his own interviews with special counsel Robert Hur about Biden’s handling of classified documents.

The White House counsel’s office notified House GOP investigators of the move hours before Republicans were expected to recommend holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over the audio. Rather than changing the GOP’s plan, the privilege assertion sparked a wave of outrage from Republicans, who are moving forward with their planned contempt vote.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/1 ... s-00158323

What’s the upside to handing them ammunition even if the recording contains nothing bad? They’ll selectively edit and take out of context any stutters and hesitations and make hay for 6 months. Releasing it would be stupid.

[Matt]

President Joe Biden has asserted executive privilege to block House committees from obtaining audio recordings of his own interviews with special counsel Robert Hur about Biden’s handling of classified documents.

The White House counsel’s office notified House GOP investigators of the move hours before Republicans were expected to recommend holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over the audio. Rather than changing the GOP’s plan, the privilege assertion sparked a wave of outrage from Republicans, who are moving forward with their planned contempt vote.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/1 ... s-00158323

What’s the upside to handing them ammunition even if the recording contains nothing bad? They’ll selectively edit and take out of context any stutters and hesitations and make hay for 6 months. Releasing it would be stupid.

Snippets from today's WSJ Editorial:

The privilege claim is bogus on two grounds. First, once a President waives a privilege right, it can’t be reclaimed. Mr. Biden conceded that the interview wasn’t privileged, and there’s no legal basis to say that a recording is different from a transcript.

...

Mr. Siskel complains in his letter that the transcript should be sufficient and the “absence of a legitimate need for the audio recordings lays bare your likely goal—to chop them up, distort them, and use them for partisan political purposes.” No doubt partisanship is at play, as it was for Democrats on Capitol Hill against Mr. Trump.

But Republicans want the audio to judge the tenor and credibility of Mr. Biden’s responses and Mr. Hur’s conclusion that the President’s faulty memory was cause not to bring an indictment in the case. The White House claim of privilege over the recordings isn’t intended to protect executive power. It’s intended to avoid presidential embarrassment.

That’s a political goal, not a legitimate legal justification. If Mr. Trump had tried this, he’d have been denounced far and wide. Mr. Biden deserves the same treatment.

[bmw]

From a purely legal standpoint, the WSJ is correct. Waived privileges can't be reclaimed. That is well-established, and I can think of no reason that the principles at play would be any different when dealing specifically with executive privilege (other than maybe Biden could assert that he is so old and feeble that he didn't understand the implications of having conceded that the interview wasn't privileged).

[Rate This]

President Joe Biden has asserted executive privilege to block House committees from obtaining audio recordings of his own interviews with special counsel Robert Hur about Biden’s handling of classified documents.

The White House counsel’s office notified House GOP investigators of the move hours before Republicans were expected to recommend holding Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress for refusing to hand over the audio. Rather than changing the GOP’s plan, the privilege assertion sparked a wave of outrage from Republicans, who are moving forward with their planned contempt vote.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/05/1 ... s-00158323

What’s the upside to handing them ammunition even if the recording contains nothing bad? They’ll selectively edit and take out of context any stutters and hesitations and make hay for 6 months. Releasing it would be stupid.

Snippets from today's WSJ Editorial:

The privilege claim is bogus on two grounds. First, once a President waives a privilege right, it can’t be reclaimed. Mr. Biden conceded that the interview wasn’t privileged, and there’s no legal basis to say that a recording is different from a transcript.

...

Mr. Siskel complains in his letter that the transcript should be sufficient and the “absence of a legitimate need for the audio recordings lays bare your likely goal—to chop them up, distort them, and use them for partisan political purposes.” No doubt partisanship is at play, as it was for Democrats on Capitol Hill against Mr. Trump.

But Republicans want the audio to judge the tenor and credibility of Mr. Biden’s responses and Mr. Hur’s conclusion that the President’s faulty memory was cause not to bring an indictment in the case. The White House claim of privilege over the recordings isn’t intended to protect executive power. It’s intended to avoid presidential embarrassment.

That’s a political goal, not a legitimate legal justification. If Mr. Trump had tried this, he’d have been denounced far and wide. Mr. Biden deserves the same treatment.

So as a matter of principle he should hand them over so they can be chopped up, distorted and used for partisan political purposes? Recall that the WSJ doesn’t love Trump but it is a Murdoch property. The “fairness” they seek is actually a pretty naked ask for some audio should it get released that they can make some hay out of. They have the transcript. The only goal in hearing him since the transcript didn’t show a whole lot of problems is hearing him sound old or deed bow or whatever other opinions Hur put into it that they hope to find an example of. This is political theatre rather than a serious attempt at anything.

Keep in mind too that they are trying to hold Garland in contempt. That case would be referred to… Garland. So unless we really think he’ll prosecute himself this is a waste of time by Jordan and company.

[bmw]

You're raising a bunch of red herrings. All the WSJ is saying is that if there is a legitimate reason for Biden to withhold the recordings, executive privilege isn't one of them.

[Rate This]

You're raising a bunch of red herrings. All the WSJ is saying is that if there is a legitimate reason for Biden to withhold the recordings, executive privilege isn't one of them.

Obviously it’s an excerpt but I was reading this as they demand he release them because we all deserve to know. If that’s not their argument I stand corrected.

[paul8539]

So when in Trump going to pull a Biden?

[Matt]

So when in Trump going to pull a Biden?

Good one, misogynist.