DOJ putting its thumb on the scales AGAIN

[JustWinBaby]

I haven't followed that closely because I really don't care, but the special counsel(?) investigating Biden's trove of documents announced no charges, and then went on to basically claim Biden has dementia and would be too sympathetic to convict.

That has to be a fire-able offense. They don't owe an explanation, and we're not even supposed to know about investigations unless they bring charges. I realize that's not always possible, but the sidebars are inappropriate. Shouldn't even have been an investigation because Biden returned the documents. I realize that's not the letter of the law, but that has been SOP up until Trump refused to return documents and then lied about what he had.

Comey really damaged that department, and it looks like a lot of work remains to be done.

[Belsnickel]

So, Hur, a lifelong Republican was appointed as a special counsel. He prepared the report that is then provided to the AG and Congress. That's how the process works. SC reports are supposed to be made public like this; it's not a DOJ decision.

[Mickeypoo]

Interesting scenario.

Not mentally fit to be convicted, then how can he be mentally fit to be Prez?

If he is mentally fit to be Prez, then how can he be mentally unfit to be convicted?

None of this is a surprise to me. I could see something was very wrong with him well before he was elected.

[JustWinBaby]

(02-09-2024, 03:40 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, Hur, a lifelong Republican was appointed as a special counsel. He prepared the report that is then provided to the AG and Congress. That's how the process works. SC reports are supposed to be made public like this; it's not a DOJ decision.

Ahh, thanks.  Makes sense, though I'm not sure why those particular points were all that relevant, but maybe in the context of the full report it works.

Biden is no genius, and plenty of people have gotten confused by law enforcement to the point of confessing to a crime they didn't commit.  It's really not hard to imagine them pushing some emotional buttons, and Biden getting angry and not thinking clearly as a result.

Not making excuses for him.  Plenty of his gaffes are concerning, but I don't believe for one minute he forget how or when his son died.  But probably adds credence to the perspective that he simply got confused under emotional duress, and from the DOJ perspective it's proof they didn't come at him with kid gloves.

[JustWinBaby]

(02-09-2024, 03:53 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Interesting scenario.

Not mentally fit to be convicted, then how can he be mentally fit to be Prez?

If he is mentally fit to be Prez, then how can he be mentally unfit to be convicted?

None of this is a surprise to me.  I could see something was very wrong with him well before he was elected.

Might be more to the point.  Just say you didn't believe you could prove intent - the ad hominem about being too sympathetic and senile to get a conviction just seems unnecessary and overtly political.

That explanation is just utter bullshit.  Do prosecutors factor that in?  Possibly.  But it seems to be more a case of fearing jury nullification, and that's not a prosecutor's concern - you either can prove intent beyond a reasonable doubt or you can't.

[Luvnit2]

(02-09-2024, 03:40 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, Hur, a lifelong Republican was appointed as a special counsel. He prepared the report that is then provided to the AG and Congress. That's how the process works. SC reports are supposed to be made public like this; it's not a DOJ decision.

This does not confirm your claim. If so, why did 2 Democratic US Senators support him?

Maryland’s Democratic senators, Ben Cardin and Chris Van Hollen, have not publicly made any specific statements about Robert Hur, the special counsel appointed to investigate whether President Joe Biden improperly handled sensitive government documents. However, it was up to them to interview candidates and make recommendations to the White House on Hur’s successor when he stepped down from his position as the U.S. attorney in Maryland1.


As for Robert Hur, he is a former high-ranking Justice Department official with experience in prosecuting sensitive leak investigations. He concluded the probe into Biden’s handling of classified materials about Afghanistan after leaving the vice presidency in 2017 and determined that Biden will not be criminally charged. Hur was appointed by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland in January 2023 and has a background in prosecuting cases related to classified information. He served as the U.S. attorney in Maryland during the Trump administration and was involved in prosecuting the case of former National Security Agency contractor Harold Martin, who stole classified material from U.S. intelligence agencies2.

In summary, while Maryland’s Democratic senators played a role in recommending Hur’s successor, they have not publicly commented on his specific investigation into Biden’s handling of classified documents.

[Luvnit2]

(02-09-2024, 03:53 PM)Mickeypoo Wrote: Interesting scenario.

Not mentally fit to be convicted, then how can he be mentally fit to be Prez?

If he is mentally fit to be Prez, then how can he be mentally unfit to be convicted?

None of this is a surprise to me.  I could see something was very wrong with him well before he was elected.

The average voter sees unfair persecution of Trump while Biden and Hillary were both not charged with crimes while the DOJ said they both committed crimes.

I agree, it appears Hur is saying he is unfit to face trial, yet his party continues to say Joe Biden is sharper than ever. 

[Belsnickel]

(02-09-2024, 04:45 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Ahh, thanks.  Makes sense, though I'm not sure why those particular points were all that relevant, but maybe in the context of the full report it works.

Biden is no genius, and plenty of people have gotten confused by law enforcement to the point of confessing to a crime they didn't commit.  It's really not hard to imagine them pushing some emotional buttons, and Biden getting angry and not thinking clearly as a result.

Not making excuses for him.  Plenty of his gaffes are concerning, but I don't believe for one minute he forget how or when his son died.  But probably adds credence to the perspective that he simply got confused under emotional duress, and from the DOJ perspective it's proof they didn't come at him with kid gloves.

So, if you read the full report the context is not as bad as conservative media is making it seem. Most of the "confusion" is related to details that any of us would have considered to be insignificant at the time they occurred and not really something we would necessarily be able to recall. Now, there were some instances that were, quite frankly, unusual. The thing everyone seems to do, though, is not understand the circumstances and context of the situation. I am someone to give the benefit of the doubt in most scenarios. All of that being said, though, I don't know why we would think that we would get anything different from an old guy in office. Trump and Biden both show their age at times and at others seem to shine.

Now, the reason for all that in the report is about making their case. So, they laid out their findings as well as their rationale for further action. They were highlighting the likelihood of reasonable doubt to be introduced based on this and for that reason they did not feel it was appropriate to bring charges. Federal prosecutors are notoriously cautious in their filings and if they don't think they can win they aren't going to file. So the conversations about all of that was highlighting the reasonable doubt that would prevent them from successfully bringing charges.

[samhain]

I think that the report is potentially more damaging than possible charges over his handling of the documents. It puts Biden's age and mental fitness back at the front of the discussion. If the story doesn't die down, then there's a potential opening for a challenger in the primary.

If I get Uber-conspiratorial, then I might say that the special investigator (who is MAGA) knew that chances of a conviction on any grounds at all were slim. This has been talked about since the beginning of the investigation. Then I might get even crazier and say that Hur felt that he could get his pound of flesh by further enhancing the image of Biden as senile. Impuning his mental state is a lot less work that actually trying to convict a president, and there's not a lot of liability in it. It's not a conviction, but in this case it may be worse. NOTE: I seriously doubt that this is the case. If this was planned by the MAGA right, then they would have tried to find a way to drop the news in October. February is an eternity from Election Day on a campaign timeline, so a recovery is highly possible. It also give the Biden campaign time to paint Trump in the very same light, and there will be no shortage of chances to do so.

Other conspiracy/strategy: If I were the Dems, I'd let Biden continue as long as possible with the intent to ultimately replace him. Knowing your opponent this far out is an advantage. Switch it up late and let them scramble to deal with an unexpected opponent. Trump undoubtedly expects to have a softball when he debates this fall. Change the picture and make him deal with someone he hasn't been preparing for for 4 years. Pick a younger candidate. Turn the right's emphasis on age and mental fitness right back in their faces. Everyone on the left would be massively relieved to move on from Biden, and enthusiasm would increase significantly.

This is a historically bad choice of candidates. All one party needs to do is pick a new contender that's not Trump or Biden.

[JustWinBaby]

Going to make up my own conspiracy theory (though I'm sure this is already fully fleshed out on right-wing sites)...

That it was a Trump-appointed prosecutor gives plausible deniability, so now you have a Republican laying the grounds to invoke the 25th on Biden so the Dems can run Newsome subverting the primary process with a brokered convention....

[*Nately120*]

(02-09-2024, 06:07 PM)samhain Wrote: I think that the report is potentially more damaging than possible charges over his handling of the documents.  It puts Biden's age and mental fitness back at the front of the discussion.  If the story doesn't die down, then there's  a potential opening for a challenger in the primary.  

If I get Uber-conspiratorial, then I might say that the special investigator (who is MAGA) knew that chances of a conviction on any grounds at all were slim.  This has been talked about since the beginning of the investigation.  Then I might get even crazier and say that Hur felt that he could get his pound of flesh by further enhancing the image of Biden as senile.  Impuning his mental state is a lot less work that actually trying to convict a president, and there's not a lot of liability in it.  It's not a conviction, but in this case it may be worse.  NOTE: I seriously doubt that this is the case.  If this was planned by the MAGA right, then they would have tried to find a way to drop the news in October.  February is an eternity from Election Day on a campaign timeline, so a recovery is highly possible.  It also give the Biden campaign time to paint Trump in the very same light, and there will be no shortage of chances to do so.  

Other conspiracy/strategy: If I were the Dems, I'd let Biden continue as long as possible with the intent to ultimately replace him.  Knowing your opponent this far out is an advantage.  Switch it up late and let them scramble to deal with an unexpected opponent.  Trump undoubtedly expects to have a softball when he debates this fall.  Change the picture and make him deal with someone he hasn't been preparing for for 4 years.  Pick a younger candidate.  Turn the right's emphasis on age and mental fitness right back in their faces.  Everyone on the left would be massively relieved to move on from Biden, and enthusiasm would increase significantly.

This is a historically bad choice of candidates.  All one party needs to do is pick a new contender that's not Trump or Biden.

Newsom is almost certainly on speed dial for Democrats, though Id rather see Mark Kelly. 

[Matt_Crimson]

(02-09-2024, 04:58 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So, if you read the full report the context is not as bad as conservative media is making it seem. Most of the "confusion" is related to details that any of us would have considered to be insignificant at the time they occurred and not really something we would necessarily be able to recall. Now, there were some instances that were, quite frankly, unusual. The thing everyone seems to do, though, is not understand the circumstances and context of the situation. I am someone to give the benefit of the doubt in most scenarios. All of that being said, though, I don't know why we would think that we would get anything different from an old guy in office. Trump and Biden both show their age at times and at others seem to shine.

Now, the reason for all that in the report is about making their case. So, they laid out their findings as well as their rationale for further action. They were highlighting the likelihood of reasonable doubt to be introduced based on this and for that reason they did not feel it was appropriate to bring charges. Federal prosecutors are notoriously cautious in their filings and if they don't think they can win they aren't going to file. So the conversations about all of that was highlighting the reasonable doubt that would prevent them from successfully bringing charges.

Is this really a "conservative" media thing though?

Multiple left leaning news outlets have been calling the special counsel report a disaster for Biden. They even double down on this negative reporting by calling his speech in response to the report a disaster.

This isn't a conservative media vs liberal media story when both parties are saying the same thing. Rather than come out and say something like "Conservative media howls about special scounsel report, but it's really nothing to worry about", which the media is known to do when fighting it's opposition, the liberal media has been instead calling this a "political nightmare" or "disaster" while also calling out the memory and mental problems he has exhiiited while being Preseident. In other wiords, the liberal media hasn't been making things better for BIden in response to the report. Instead they are sounding the alarm.

If anything, iit alsmost looks like the liberal media is looking for someone else to beat Trump.

[Belsnickel]

(02-11-2024, 11:45 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Is this really a "conservative" media thing though?

Multiple left leaning news outlets have been calling the special counsel report a disaster for Biden. They even double down on this negative reporting by calling his speech in response to the report a disaster.

This isn't a conservative media vs liberal media story when both parties are saying the same thing. Rather than come out and say something like "Conservative media howls about special scounsel report, but it's really nothing to worry about", which the media is known to do when fighting it's opposition, the liberal media has been instead calling this a "political nightmare" or "disaster" while also calling out the memory and mental problems he has exhiiited while being Preseident. In other wiords, the liberal media hasn't been making things better for BIden in response to the report. Instead they are sounding the alarm.

If anything, iit alsmost looks like the liberal media is looking for someone else to beat Trump.

I'll be honest, I don't listen to much in the media these days and was going primarily off of what I had seen from some of the conservative punditry. What I have seen in recent days from across the media spectrum has caused me to reassess my take on all of this. You are definitely correct in your assessment here, though.

So, I wrote this off as SOP as far as how this all goes. After talking with some former federal prosecutors I know and listening to a few others that have podcasts talking about these sorts of issues, I have been forced to reevaluate. What I have learned is that a declination report, as this would often be referred to as in the DoJ, is a common practice and is something that exists for every single investigation wherein there is a choice not to file charges. However, those reports don't see the light of day. They are passed up the chain in the DoJ and get stored in a file somewhere for reference. They are an entirely internal document. A lot of what Hur wrote in his report is reminiscent of such a declination report. However, according to all of those I have heard from, there are very opinionated and political statements in the report, even starting on the first page of the executive summary. There was a difference among these folks as to the relevance of some of the information re: Biden's memory. Some felt it was relevant, others not so much. All of them agreed, though, that bringing things like Biden's memory of his son's death into the discussion was not relevant.

There was also agreement among all of them that given the typical view of DoJ on these sorts of things, Hur should have tempered his report on these things, anyway. That because Garland had already made it known that the report would be made public well in advance, Hur should not have engaged in as much politicization of the process as he did. There was a lot of comparison to Comey's moves in 2016 as JWB remarked on in the first post of the thread.

Now, knowing what I do about the context of the situation (the ~5 hour interview occurred in the aftermath of the October 7th Hamas attack, which would take a lot of Biden's attention) as well as hearing from folks who know or meet with Biden regularly (I think back to McCarthy talking about how with it Biden was in negotiations), I don't see any real concern with Biden's mental acuity. Media is going to be hyperbolic about everything. I don't want Biden on the ticket for a long list of reasons, but his mental capacity is not among them. Washington is a giant rumor mill and we would be hearing a lot more concerns from Democratic officials about him if it were really that bad.

Is this a giant game of lowering expectations for the general election? Is it an attempt to get someone else on the ticket? Maybe remove him for a President Harris? Who knows. I know how little secrets can be kept inside the beltway, so I keep little stake in those theories.

[*Nately120*]

(02-11-2024, 11:45 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: If anything, iit alsmost looks like the liberal media is looking for someone else to beat Trump.

They are looking for someone to beat Trump, and folks know that an 81 year old Biden and/or Harris are dancing dangerously close to another 2016.  Keep in mind that Trump being a republican makes it so he can pull in 3+ million fewer voters and still win in a landslide, so right or wrong democrats have to go into 2024 up 5+ points in the polls to feel even semi-comfortable and going in at a -5 or more is just begging for another Trump term.

As I've said before, the democrat's saving grace is that trashing Biden isn't likely to leading their base to rally around him and insist he's the only man for the job. 

(02-11-2024, 02:56 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Is this a giant game of lowering expectations for the general election? Is it an attempt to get someone else on the ticket? Maybe remove him for a President Harris? Who knows. I know how little secrets can be kept inside the beltway, so I keep little stake in those theories.

I'm skeptical on the Harris stuff, in that I don't think the powers that be want her to run and they don't think she can win.  The only path to a president Harris is if Biden wins in 2024 and she has to take over.  If they put Harris and a VP up against Trump in 2024 the odds of winning seem exceedingly low in my semi-educated mind.  Biden was brought in in 2020 like a mediocre veteran system QB to beat Trump and I think Newsom is going to be the one they turn to to instantly take over for 2024 if they don't just roll with Biden. Newsom isn't Biden, he isn't old, and he isn't part of the unpopular Biden administration.

Basically, if voters had any interest or faith in president Harris they'd be fine with voting for Biden in 2024. 

[Matt_Crimson]

(02-11-2024, 02:56 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I'll be honest, I don't listen to much in the media these days and was going primarily off of what I had seen from some of the conservative punditry. What I have seen in recent days from across the media spectrum has caused me to reassess my take on all of this. You are definitely correct in your assessment here, though.

So, I wrote this off as SOP as far as how this all goes. After talking with some former federal prosecutors I know and listening to a few others that have podcasts talking about these sorts of issues, I have been forced to reevaluate. What I have learned is that a declination report, as this would often be referred to as in the DoJ, is a common practice and is something that exists for every single investigation wherein there is a choice not to file charges. However, those reports don't see the light of day. They are passed up the chain in the DoJ and get stored in a file somewhere for reference. They are an entirely internal document. A lot of what Hur wrote in his report is reminiscent of such a declination report. However, according to all of those I have heard from, there are very opinionated and political statements in the report, even starting on the first page of the executive summary. There was a difference among these folks as to the relevance of some of the information re: Biden's memory. Some felt it was relevant, others not so much. All of them agreed, though, that bringing things like Biden's memory of his son's death into the discussion was not relevant.

There was also agreement among all of them that given the typical view of DoJ on these sorts of things, Hur should have tempered his report on these things, anyway. That because Garland had already made it known that the report would be made public well in advance, Hur should not have engaged in as much politicization of the process as he did. There was a lot of comparison to Comey's moves in 2016 as JWB remarked on in the first post of the thread.

Now, knowing what I do about the context of the situation (the ~5 hour interview occurred in the aftermath of the October 7th Hamas attack, which would take a lot of Biden's attention) as well as hearing from folks who know or meet with Biden regularly (I think back to McCarthy talking about how with it Biden was in negotiations), I don't see any real concern with Biden's mental acuity. Media is going to be hyperbolic about everything. I don't want Biden on the ticket for a long list of reasons, but his mental capacity is not among them. Washington is a giant rumor mill and we would be hearing a lot more concerns from Democratic officials about him if it were really that bad.

Is this a giant game of lowering expectations for the general election? Is it an attempt to get someone else on the ticket? Maybe remove him for a President Harris? Who knows. I know how little secrets can be kept inside the beltway, so I keep little stake in those theories.

I'm not going to act like I read every inch of every news outlet, but I have definitely been noticing more negative reporting coming from left leaning news sources. Which is part of what makes me believe the media is starting to realize Biden might not be the candidate to beat Trump this go around. Whether that's true or not? I don't know.

 
But what I do know is that multiple outlets have been reporting that Biden's age is a top concern for voters. I know people like to claim there is an even playing field here and like to portray Biden and Trump as equals when it comes to the "old guy" argument, but I would caution this approach. The criticism’s of Biden's age are much worse for Biden than they are for Trump in my opinion for a few reasons.
 
1. Both Biden and Trump "Show their age", but Biden is showing it more.
 
Anyone paying attention to the news going around on social media will know of all the blunders and missteps Biden has had since becoming President, and there's a lot of them. It's not just the forgetfulness. It's that outright confusion he shows on stage when giving speeches. When trying to shake someone's hand. When trying to find his chair etc.... It's really sad. And I don't mean that in a demeaning way. I was telling my wife this last night. Although I don't like Biden at all, I feel bad for him because he honestly seems like a completely lost old man at times, and I can't say that about Trump. Yes, Trump does say some things that make you scratch your head, but there's just something different about Biden. His "not all there" is worse than Trump's "Not all there" and he continued to show this when he came out and responded to the special counsel report.
 
2. Biden is a politician, whereas Trump isn't.
 
Some may ask, "Why does that matter?". Well, in terms of arguing about the mental fitness of Biden vs. Trump, it matters a lot actually. When Trump gives speeches, it's always being chalked up to Trump just being his dumb, uneducated, inexperienced, idiot self and rambling about whatever comes to mind. When he forgets things, people laugh at it, call him an idiot, whatever.
 
With Biden however, he has been at this game for years. When he forgets the names of prominent people it makes people go "But wait.... haven't you been involved in politics for 40 years? Shouldn't you know these people?". When Biden is standing on stage looking like he doesn't know where he is, people think back to the Obama days of how he stood there loud and proud and it makes people go "Man..... Biden seems kind of off.....".
 
This is why I bring up the point of Biden being a politician and Trump not being one. The point of reference of Biden's political career is making his cognitive failures look much worse than Trump because by default Biden is already held to a higher standard due to his political career. So, when people see him failing the way he does, in the back of their minds they're thinking "This isn't the same Biden".
 
For Trump there isn't much of a reference there. Trump has never been seen as some intelligent politician with a lot of foreign policy experience that has been around politics for years and knows all the people that Biden does and knows how to give speeches the way Biden knows and so on and so forth. The irony that I'm pointing out is that Trump's lack of experience politically here is actually helping him, whereas with Biden it is starting to destroy him. Take for instance the fact that Biden even came out and gave that speech in response to the report. It was a clear political move to save himself from the report and it absolutely backfired. Why? Because he failed to show people he was still as strong as he had been in the past.
 
What would Trump have done? He would have posted on Twitter about how it was all fake news etc... and people would have laughed him off as being "big dumb orange man". But Biden took the experienced rout and it cost him.