Hur’s report: Biden ready for Memory Care

We knew that special counsel Robert Hur was never going to bring charges against President Biden for his mishandling of classified documents, but we didn’t see this coming (per Axios):

[Hur’s] report said that “Biden’s memory also appeared to have significant limitations,” citing his interview with the special counsel’s office and recorded conversations with his ghostwriter.

• “He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died,” the report said. “And his memory appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him.”

• “We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.”

And this:

“He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended (‘if it was 2013 — when did I stop being Vice President?’), and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began (‘in 2009, am I still Vice President?’),” the report says.

Why not charge him? Hur gives this damning explanation based on the mental element of the criminal offense(s) or, perhaps more accurately, his present diminished capacity, related to Biden’s possession of the Afghanistan-related documents:

In a case where the government must prove that Mr. Biden knew he had possession of the classified Afghanistan documents after the vice presidency and chose to keep those documents, knowing he was violating the law, we expect that at trial, his attorneys would emphasize these limitations in his recall.

As Philip Klein puts it at NRO, “Too old and senile to prosecute, apparently…”

Hur’s report is posted online here. The White House has posted a statement in Biden’s name here. As I wrote coincidentally this morning, Biden is increasingly ripe for institutionalization of the Memory Care variety.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.

Responses