House Republican investigators leading the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden are pressing for more details on his interview with Robert Hur as part of the special counsel’s classified documents investigation.
Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and Ways & Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.) sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Monday, asking for any records, including recordings, related to Biden’s interview with Hur’s team. They also want classified documents identified in the report related to Ukraine.
In addition to the documents request, House Republicans are in talks with Hur to have him testify about his report, according to a person familiar with the discussions.
House Republicans are giving the Justice Department until 5 p.m. on Feb. 19 to hand over the requested materials. Otherwise, they warned, GOP lawmakers are “prepared to compel the production of this material if necessary” via a subpoena. They are also requesting any communication between the Justice Department, Biden’s personal counsel and the White House about the special counsel report.
“For our investigatory purposes, the Committees require certain records relating to Mr. Hur’s investigation and report,” the three GOP lawmakers wrote to Garland.
They added that they “require this transcript and any other records of this interview, including, but not limited to, any recordings, notes, or summaries of the interview.”
The Justice Department released Hur’s report last week, which found that criminal charges against Biden wouldn’t be warranted even if DOJ lacked an internal policy against prosecuting sitting presidents. Hur’s investigation found evidence that Biden “willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency,” the report states, but it didn’t “establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”
Congressional Republicans have also emphasized the report’s descriptions of Biden, including that he would be perceived in any court proceedings as a “sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory.” Comer called last week for the Justice Department to provide access to classified documents referenced in the report, as well as release the transcript with Biden. But Monday’s letter is the first formal request for information since the report’s release.
Biden has denied that he improperly shared classified information. Hur’s report alleges that he shared it with a ghostwriter. The president and other Democrats have also publicly criticized Hur’s descriptions of Biden’s memory.
Richard Sauber, a special counsel to the president, and Bob Bauer, Biden’s personal counsel, sent a joint letter to Hur last week asking that he revise his descriptions of Biden's memory “so that they are stated in a manner that is within the bounds of your expertise and remit.”
In addition to the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden — which has largely focused on the business deals of his family members, but also delved into his handling of classified documents and the years-long federal investigation into Hunter Biden — Republicans said in their letter on Monday that they also needed the information for a separate investigation into the federal investigation of former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents.
Republicans have tried to draw an apples-to-apples comparison of Biden’s and Trump’s mishandling of classified documents, arguing that the Justice Department’s decision not to charge Biden but to pursue charges against Trump is an example of a politicized justice system.
But Hur’s report draws a contrast between the two cases, noting that Trump allegedly refused to return classified documents for months while Biden turned in the classified documents and cooperated with the investigation.
If there’s anything The New York Times seems to enjoy, it's coming up with a focused attack on a Democratic candidate and then running that attack over and over and over again. Maybe their writers enjoy the simplicity of copy-pasting their remarks. Maybe there’s pleasure in patchwriting existing articles into something “new.” Whatever it is, once the Times has latched on to their Great White “But Her Emails,” they are inclined to never let it go.
For Joe Biden, the line of attack doesn’t even require misunderstanding how email servers work, a pretense that some kind of rule has been broken, or James Comey coming in with a holier-than-thou hot take. Because Biden is old. Case closed. Break out the Xerox machine and just keep slapping that copy button.
Over the weekend, The New York Times filled every slot on its editorial page with a piece attacking Biden’s age and memory. That didn’t just include the Times’ conservative columnists calling for the president to step down, but the paper’s editorial board jumping in to tell you that Americans think Biden is too old. As for 77-year-old Donald Trump? Now there’s someone who “does not appear to be suffering the effects of time in such visible ways.”
How many times can a single article tell you that Biden is old, but Trump is in his prime? Well, there’s the headline:
Why the Age Issue Is Hurting Biden So Much More Than Trump
And the subhead:
Both Donald J. Trump and President Biden are over 75. But voters are much less likely to worry that Mr. Trump is too old to serve.
And then there’s this paragraph about Trump, which has to be read in its entirety to appreciate how embarrassing it would be to Kim Jong Un’s publicist.
Mr. Trump, by contrast, does not appear to be suffering the effects of time in such visible ways. Mr. Trump often dyes his hair and appears unnaturally tan. He is heavyset and tall, and he uses his physicality to project strength in front of crowds. When he takes the stage at rallies, he basks in adulation for several minutes, dancing to an opening song, and then holds forth in speeches replete with macho rhetoric and bombast that typically last well over an hour, a display of stamina.
Strength. Physicality. Stamina. Those are the words attached to Trump.
In the previous paragraph, the same article had different words for Biden: Tentative. Frail. Stiff.
In the middle of this article is a link to a New York Times/Siena College poll that reportedly showed 70% of Americans believing Biden to be too old for his office, while fewer than 50% said the same of Trump.
Gee. Where did they get an idea like that?
On Monday, a story on Biden’s age and memory is still at the top of The New York Times’ editorial page. Even if the contents of that story are far less caustic than the articles that ran over the weekend, it's still written from a tedious middle-of-the-road perspective that is not far off special counsel Robert Hur describing Biden as a “sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.” It also serves to keep "Biden," "Age," and "Memory" right at the top of the headlines.
What’s especially convenient about this storyline for the Times is that they’ve already been doing it for decades. Here are a few past headlines:
The first two items on this list come from the last couple of years. The middle pair are from 2019, when Biden was only starting to gear up for his campaign to win the White House. The last item on that list is from 2008, when Biden had just been selected as Barack Obama’s running mate.
Joe Biden has always been the gaffe guy. If The New York Times assigns someone to cover a Biden speech, they know what’s expected: Forget everything else—just bring back the moment when Biden mixed up a name or mispronounced a city. Just as the Grey Lady had its fixed set of things to say about Hillary Clinton, which it trotted out on any occasion, for Biden it's always there to catch even the slightest slip. "Gaffe-prone" Biden has been their schtick for decades, which conveniently ignores Biden’s well-documented (and largely successful) effort to overcome a severe stutter. Now the Times is delighted to tie its grammar police to the Hur report and claim that this is all about age. Copy-paste. Copy-paste. Copy-paste.
Occasionally the Times will mount a small, milquetoast defense, like the piece titled, “I’m a Neuroscientist. We’re Thinking About Biden’s Memory and Age in the Wrong Way” at the top of the op-ed page at this moment, which powerfully argues that Biden isn’t “Forgetting” as Hur suggests, he’s merely “forgetting.” Because that distinction is certainly something that will be easily conveyed in a 30-second spot.
Compare that bland language to the explicitly negative editorial columns over the weekend that called Biden "decrepit" and insisted he should step aside. Or this piece that kicks off by comparing Biden to an aging parent with dementia. “One of the most difficult conversations you can have in life is with a parent or peer who is becoming too old and infirm to work,” it declares. Apparently, it’s not so difficult, because the Times is having this conversation with its readers every day.
The New York Times, along with other media outlets, has created an opinion ouroboros. The publication provides stories that emphasize how Biden is old, slipping, and gaffe-prone. Then they circulate the news that people, shockingly, believe them. Then they use those poll results as an excuse to do it all again.
When it comes to Trump … don’t worry about it. He dyes his hair and wears makeup and talks for a long time. According to the Times, that means you shouldn’t be concerned about his age. In fact, they have a poll that shows you’re not concerned. And now, here’s an article about how you’re not worried about Trump’s age. Watch him dance.
Republicans demanded border security, worked on a compromise deal with Democrats, and now want to blow the whole thing up. Biden is promising to remind Americans every day that the Republican Party is at fault for the lack of solutions to the problems they claim are most important.
Campaign ActionFIRST ON FOX: House Republicans leading the impeachment inquiry against President Biden are demanding the Justice Department turn over the transcript and any recordings of Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur in his investigation into Biden's mishandling of classified documents.
Hur, who released his report to the public last week after months of investigating, did not recommend criminal charges against Biden for mishandling and retaining classified documents and stated that he wouldn't bring charges against Biden even if he were not in the Oval Office.
Those records included classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan and other countries, among other records related to national security and foreign policy, which Hur said implicated "sensitive intelligence sources and methods."
Hur did not recommend any charges against the president but did describe him as a "well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory" — a description that has raised significant concerns for his 2024 reelection campaign.
On Monday, House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, House Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan and House Ways & Means Committee Chair Jason Smith penned a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland to request that he turn over the transcript and any recordings of Biden's October 2023 interview with Hur and the special counsel team. The three committee leaders are leading the impeachment inquiry against Biden.
Comer had asked Hur if any of the classified records that Biden held were related to the countries with which his family allegedly conducted business.
Comer told Fox News Digital last week that he wants "unfettered access to these documents to determine if President Biden’s retention of sensitive materials were used to help the Bidens’ influence peddling."
The letter sent to Garland and obtained by Fox News Digital on Monday detailed the concerns that "Biden may have retained sensitive documents related to specific countries involving his family’s foreign business dealings."
"Further, we seek to understand whether the White House or President Biden’s personal attorneys placed any limitations or scoping restrictions during the interview that would have precluded a line of inquiry regarding evidence (emails, text messages, or witness statements) directly linking the President to troublesome foreign payments," they wrote.
"Additionally, the Committee on the Judiciary requires these documents for its ongoing oversight of the Department’s commitment to impartial justice and its handling of the investigation and prosecution of President Biden’s presumptive opponent, Donald J. Trump, in the November 2024 presidential election," they continued.
"Despite clear evidence the President willfully retained and transmitted classified materials willfully, Mr. Hur recommended 'that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter,'" they wrote. "Although Mr. Hur reasoned that President Biden’s presentation ‘as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory’ who ‘did not remember when he was vice president’ or ‘when his son Beau died’ posed challenges to proving the President’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the report concluded that the Department’s principles of prosecution weighed against prosecution because the Department has not prosecuted ‘a former president or vice president for mishandling classified documents from his own administration.’"
They added, "The one ‘exception’ to the Department’s principles of prosecution, as Mr. Hur noted, ‘is former President Trump.’ This speaks volumes about the Department’s commitment to evenhanded justice."
Comer, Jordan and Smith demanded the materials by Feb. 19.
A fifth-generation Arizona rancher accused lawmakers of refusing to secure the border for political purposes as the ongoing migrant crisis worsens, potentially giving terrorists the opportunity to sneak into the U.S. through his land.
"It's people talking about the issues, arguing about the issues. Border security has always been a political football," Jim Chilton, owner of the Chilton Ranch, told Fox News. "That's the nature of our system."
WATCH MORE FOX NEWS DIGITAL ORIGINALS HERE
A long-awaited bipartisan border security deal aimed at gaining control of an overwhelmed asylum system at the southern border collapsed just days after it was revealed with all but four Republicans voting against the legislation advancing in the Senate. From the outset, GOP leaders in both chambers criticized the bill, with House Speaker Mike Johnson repeatedly calling it "dead on arrival." Democrats accused conservatives of killing it for political purposes.
"Secure the international boundary and develop a program to bring people into this country legally," Chilton told Fox News as a plea to Congress. "We're a nation of the rule of law. We need to stop people just having the idea that they can walk into the United States."
HOUSE MEMBER SAYS ‘EULOGY HAS ALREADY BEEN READ’ ON BORDER BILL AS BIDEN BLAMES TRUMP FOR STALEMATE
The bill would have given President Biden and the Department of Homeland Security authority to close the border if migrant encounters reached a certain threshold and allocated $20 billion for immigration enforcement. It also included $650 million for border wall construction and reinforcement.
But Republican critics, including House GOP leaders, said the legislation wasn't aggressive enough to curb illegal immigration with migrant crossings skyrocketing under the Biden administration. In December, migrant encounters reached an all-time high of 302,000, according to Customs and Border Protection data.
And while lawmakers fumble solutions, the southern border crisis worsens, Chilton said.
‘HE’S DELUSIONAL': BIDEN'S BORDER COMMENTS SPARK STIFF REBUKE ON CAPITOL HILL FROM SOME LAWMAKERS
"The problem in our area in the last three years has intensified immensely," Chilton told Fox News. He said hidden cameras on his property have caught thousands of people illegally entering the country.
Some dress in all camouflage, Chilton said, and others use "carpet shoes" — footwear with carpet attached to the soles to hide footprints.
"They're entering our country unseen, and they could be terrorists," he said.
Officials encountered 169 people on the FBI terror watchlist illegally crossing the southern border in fiscal 2023, according to CBP data. That's more than the previous year's record-setting 98 encounters, as well as the last six years combined.
"I'm really concerned," Chilton said. "If our adversaries around the world want to bring terrorists into our country, this is a route."
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas denied blame for mass crossings at the southern border, he said Sunday on NBC's "Meet The Press." Mayorkas, who's expected to soon face a second impeachment attempt for failing to curb the migrant crisis, instead blamed Republicans for sinking the bipartisan bill and said Congress should be held accountable for America's broken immigration system.
The failed border security deal also included a $95 billion foreign aid supplemental package. A standalone bill, which would include $60 billion for Ukraine, $14 billion for Israel and $8 billion for Taiwan, passed a 67-27 test vote Sunday.
But Chilton told Fox News keeping Americans safe should be lawmakers' top priority.
"It would be outrageous not to secure our border first," Chilton said. "Take care of America first. Seal the border."
The Senate voted to move forward on the $95 billion aid bill for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan in the first-ever Super Bowl Sunday session. The vote was 67-27, meaning that it will easily pass in the Senate when they finally get to it. Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul has been up to his usual obstructing tricks, refusing to agree to shortening the debate time on the bill. That means it will likely not pass until Wednesday, when all the pressure will be on House Speaker Mike Johnson to either get this bill done or prove his MAGA mettle and block it.
There’s a threat looming over Johnson from Georgia’s contribution to the dumbing-down of the nation, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has said she will bring a motion to oust him as speaker if he puts Ukraine aid on the floor. In aid of Greene’s MAGA cause, GOP Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio is circulating a conspiracy theory that the bill contains a setup to impeach Donald Trump again if he is reelected in November. The theory goes that because the bill extends aid into 2025, Trump would either be forced to honor it or face another impeachment if he cancels it.
That’s an implicit warning to House Republicans—and Johnson—to stay on Trump’s good side and block the aid. But Johnson is getting plenty of pressure from the pro-Ukraine side, including from a powerful Republican.
House Intelligence Committee Chair Mike Turner, an Ohio Republican, recently led a delegation of members to Ukraine, where he met with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to assure him that he had allies among Republicans in Congress and that U.S. aid would continue. He returned with an urgent message for Johnson and Congress. The situation is so bad, he told Politico, that Ukrainian troops “are already rationing munitions” and “are unable to fully defend themselves on the battlefield.”
“We have to get this done,” he continued. “This is no longer an issue of, ‘When do we support Ukraine?’ If we do not move, this will be abandoning Ukraine.” He predicts that there will be “overwhelming support” for the bill in the House, adding, “The speaker will need to bring it to the floor.”
It isn’t an empty threat, because Democrats have the tool to go over Johnson's head to put the bill on the floor with a discharge petition, and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries is ready to use it. “House Democrats are prepared to use every available legislative tool to make sure we get comprehensive national security legislation over the finish line,” Jeffries said during the annual House Democrats’ strategy retreat last week. He called on Johnson to “move to consider parallel national security legislation immediately.”
The discharge petition needs 218 signatures to be put on the floor. That means as of now, they need six Republicans to join them. That math could change a little depending on the result of tomorrow’s special election in New York to replace expelled Republican George Santos. If Democrat Tom Suozzi wins, Democrats will need just five Republicans, and it sounds like Turner might be willing to be one of them.
So might Nebraska Republican Rep. Don Bacon. "I know we need to get aid to Israel quickly, and it’s in our national security interests to keep Ukraine independent and help Ukrainians defeat Russia’s barbaric invasion by sending them military weapons,” he told Politico last week. “I’ll work with the likeminded folks and the Speaker to determine what is best way to move forward.”
There is strong support for Ukraine even among House Republicans—101 of them voted for it as recently as September. If this new package makes it to the floor, it will surely pass. Which means the stunningly incompetent Johnson has a tough decision to make: stand with Ukraine or stand with Trump?
RELATED STORIES:
House Democrats need to dust off discharge petition and pass Ukraine aid
Republicans get Ukraine demands met, so of course they change their minds
Speaker Mike Johnson had a stunningly awful day—and he did it to himself
Campaign Action