country illegally ten years ago and committed at least 46 crimes. mentally the nurse is still in pain and angry because the bronx d.a.'s office have asked her two times to less en the charges against johnson but she refuses. we want to present it to a grand jury for felony charges. >> the change, i think mayors, senators, governors need to come together and make stronger laws that will keep these people inside of the prisons. >> do you think this guy should have been out on the street in the first place? >> no he shouldn't have any reason to be on the street. >> now the bronx d.a.'s office says they are looking for the felony charges and see what plays out in new york. he is still out in the street, johnson. police are still looking for him. we'll see if they can find him.

>> dana: we wish her the best. thank you. now fox news alert. white hot spotlight highlighting one of the biggest liabilities for president biden's reelection campaign, his age. as we await today's testimony by robert hur concerning the president's mishandling of classified documents. the committee hearing is live. jim jordan already there. welcome to a new hour of "america's newsroom." i'm dana perino. >> bill: good morning. here we go. bill hemmer. good morning at home. today's testimony coming as fox news obtains the written transcript of president biden's recorded interview with special counsel robert hur. it went for five hours. there is a lot there. opening statements will get underway in moments as the house judiciary committee takes a deep dive into hur's testimony. in a moment we'll hear from jordan. word there are protestors inside that room from code pink. they might be cleaning everything out and resetting as

we speak. anyway, hur will explain why he declined to recommend charging president biden for his mishandling of classified documents along with his observations about the president's advancing age and fuzzy memory and declining mental acuity. >> dana: karl rove, mark meredith, david spunt and others. mark meredith starting us live from the white house. i bet they're paying attention, too. >> they sure are. the white house is well aware. it will bring the president's age into the spotlight and we've already seen the white house play defense insisting the probe that hur was conducting was very intrusive as we take these live pictures from the committee room where we expect it to get underway any moment. hur's investigation for more than a year found there wouldn't be enough evidence to charge the president with a crime. a transcript that came out this

morning allows you to read what the president was telling investigators when he sat down with them last year and finds the president was in a somewhat cordial mood joking with them at times what else he might find in his garage. when it came to the death of his son, the president did need a little help from aides trying to remember when that occurred as weighs discussing when he would not would not seek the democratic nomination back in 2016. in the transcript he says if i ran again i would be running for president and what was happening. what month did beau die, may 30th. another speaker says 2015. president repeats it 2015 and they go back and forth here. the transcript was once again spotlighting that the president was relying on some of the aides in the room with him as he was trying to get the timeline exactly right about how these documents could have ended up in his home in wilmington and an office in d.c. we have heard from the white house making it clear they'll respond in realtime to what hur

is saying and want to mention we heard from the former president who believes it is a double standard. back to you. >> dana: fox news contributor karl rove, jonathan turley, andy mccarthy. set the stage for us and former special counsel says he has a duty to show his work and we are bow to hear from him. >> the fascinating aspect this morning is hur has not backed off. he doesn't deny that the report is desisparaging. he said i had a duty to determine if i could prove a case and i had someone who we've now seen invoke the lack of memory about four dozen times. and he said i just don't think that a jury would find that a compelling defendant. he is going to find some rough going on both sides. you can charge just the mishandling of evidence, not just the intentional act of

removal. this period was roughly 40 times that of the period involved in the trump case. you had a classified documents coming out when he was senator, when he was vice president, moving from house to house, office to office and he just simply says i have no memory at all of any of that. >> bill: he is age 51, he is in the chair now. born in new york city to south korean parents, robert hur. attended harvard, went to stanford law and he is being sworn in. pledge allegiance first. andy mccarthy one of the things that came up in this transcript is a memo that biden wrote for president obama about biden's position on afghanistan. he was asked why did you keep it? i wanted to hang on to it just for posterity's sake. now there will be a comparison between the conclusion for biden and the prosecution of trump and we'll see together as we move throughout the day how this unfolds.

i hear jim jordan talking. andy mccarthy, give us a 15 second setup before we drop in? >> i just think it's the difference between trump and biden trump obstructed, biden didn't. they charged trump with obstruction and drop all the classified information count for both of them. >> bill: okay. we'll see in the end if that's the verdict. let's drop in now for robert hur's testimony. >> uncovered evidence that president biden willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency when he was a private citizen. he further writes mr. biden willfully retained marked classified documents about afghanistan and handwritten notes in his notebooks which he stored in unsecure places in his home. joe biden kept classified information and joe biden failed to store classified information properly. mr. hur made these

determinations after interviewing 147 witnesses. he examined 7 million documents, including emails, text messages, photographs, videos, phone records and other materials from both classified and unclassified sources. there is more. he not only -- joe biden not only kept information he wasn't allowed to keep and he not only failed to secure that information properly, he also shared it with people he wasn't -- who weren't allowed to see it. shared that information with his ghost writer and remember, this is information that only individuals with the security clearance are supposed to see. mr. hur told us on page 200 of his report it's the kind of information that, quote, risks serious damage to america's national security. what did joe biden have to say about all this? what was his explanation?

page 94 of mr. hur's report joe biden said he took his notebooks with him after his vice presidency because, quote, they're mine. and every president before me has done the same exact thing. never mind the fact that he had never been president when he took this information. but what comes through is joe biden felt he was entitled. you can almost hear it. you can feel the arrogance in the statement they're mine. but even with all that, mr. hur chose not to bring charges. because quote, mr. biden would likely present himself to a jury as he did in our interview of him as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory. a forgetful old man who mr. hur said did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended, and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term

as vice president began. mr. hur produced a 345 page report but in the end it boils down to a few key facts. joe biden kept classified information. joe biden failed to properly security classified information. and joe biden shared classified information with people he wasn't supposed to. joe biden broke the law. because he is a forgetful old man would be appear sympathetic to a jury he did not bring charges. we think it's important to respond to president biden answer response to your report. we'll play a short video of president biden's press conference after your report was released. there are things in this press conference that the president says that are contradicted by what you found in your report. if we could play that video.

>> president biden: hey, buddy. let me say a few things before i take your questions. as you know, the special counsel released his findings today about looking into my handling of classified documents. >> something the special counsel said in his report is that one of the reasons you were not charged is because in his description you are a well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory. >> i'm well-meaning and i'm an elderly man and i know what the hell i'm doing. i've been president and put this country back on its feet. i don't need his recommendation. >> how good is your memory and can you continue as president? >> my memory is so bad i let you speak. that's the -- >> do you think your memory has gotten worse? >> president biden: my memory is fine. take a look at what i've done since i've become president. none of you thought i could pass any of the things i got passed. how did that happen?

i guess i just forgot what was going on. >> mr. president, worries about your age. do you fear that this report is only going to fuel further concern about your age? >> president biden: only by some of you. >> mr. president -- do you take responsibility about being careless with classified material? >> president biden: i take responsibility for not having seen exactly what my staff was doing. it goes in and out. things that appeared in my garage, things that came out of my home. things that were moved not by me but my staff. but my staff. [shouted questions] >> when asked about your age you would respond with the words watch me. many american people have been watching and have expressed concerns about your age. >> president biden: that is your judgment. that is your judgment.

that is not the judgment of the press. >> they express concerns about your mental acuity say too old. you said you believe there are many other democrats who could defeat donald trump. why does it have to be you now? >> i'm the most qualified in this country to be president of the united states and finish the job i started. [shouted questions] >> i did not share classified information. i did not share with my ghost writer. guarantee i did not. what counsel said -- i did not say that. >> mr. president -- >> president biden: let me answer your question. the fact of the matter is what i didn't want repeated. i didn't want -- i didn't read it to him was i had written a long memorandum to president obama why we should not be in afghanistan. and i was -- multiple pages. so what i was referring to i

said classified, i should have said it was -- should be private because it was a contact between the president and the vice president as to what was going on. that's what he is referring to. it was not classified information in that document. that was not classified. [shouted questions] >> when you look back at this incident is there anything you would do differently now? do you think a special prosecutor should have been appointed in the first place in both of these cases? >> president biden: first of all, what i would have done is oversee the transfer of the material that was in my offices. i should have done that. if i had to go back. i didn't have the responsibility. it was my staff social security spaceded to do that and i referenced that in the report. my staff did not do it in the way that -- for example, i

didn't know how half the boxes got in my garage until i found out staff gathered them out put them together and put them in the garage in my home. all the stuff that was in my home was in filing cabinets that were locked for able to be locked. it with as in my house, it wasn't out in like mar-a-lago in a public place and none of it was high classified. didn't have any of the red stuff on it. you know what i mean around the corners? none of that. so i wish i had paid more attention to how the documents were being moved and where. i thought they were being moved to the archives. i thought it was all being moved. that's what i thought. what was the last part of your question. >> whether a special counsel should have been appointed in the case and in the case of your rival. >> i think a special counsel should have been appointed. the reason i think that is because i did not want to be in a position that they looked at trump and weren't going to look at me. just like they looked at the vice president and the fact is

they made a firm conclusion. i did not break the law. period. thank you all very much. [shouted questions] >> president biden: i'm of the view, as you know, that the conduct of the response in the gaza strip has been over the top. i think that, as you know, initially the president of mexico, cici did not want to

open the gate to allow humanitarian aid to get in. i talked to him. recognize them fully and return for certain things that the united states would commit to do. the commitment that we were proposing to do related to two items i won't go in detail. one of them was to deal with the protection against their arch enemy to the northwest -- northeast, i should say. the second one by providing ammunition and material for them to defend themselves. coincidentally that's the time frame when this broke out. i have no proof what i'm about to say but it is not unreasonable to suspect that the hamas understood what was about to take place and wanted to break it up before it happened. [shouted questions]

>> chair recognizes mr. nadler for an opening statement. >> i'm glad you have such admiration for the president you allowed him to take the first ten minutes of this hearing. mr. chairman. house republicans may be desperate to convince america that white conservative men are on the losing end of a two tier justice system. the maga crowd and has no basis in reality. your comments make me wonder if you've read the special counsel's report at all. the hur report draws a distinction between president biden and donald trump. not the one you want. two distinctions actually. first, the report is clear that quote, at no point did the special counsel find evidence that mr. biden intended or had reason to believe the information would be used to injure the united states to the benefit of foreign nations. with respect to the classified document found in president biden's possession, quote, the decision to decline criminal charges was straight forward, close quote. with respect to the special

counsel's investigation, quote, mr. biden turned in classified documents to the national archives and the department of justice, consented to the search of his homes. sat for voluntary interview and other ways cooperated with the investigation, close quote. he acted spurns jibly, cooperated completely and the decision to decline criminal charges was relatively straight forward. in short, to borrow a phrase from the last administration, the hur report represents the complete and total exoneration of president biden. how does that record contrast with president trump? documents he retained and the criminal charges pending against him in florida? we know that trump deliberately took large amounts of classified information from the white house. he has admitted as much. occasionally pretending he classified this information without telling anyone on his way out the door.

we know that he stored that information around mar-a-lago in the craziest of places, on the bowling stage, spilled in an unlocked closet, next to a toilet. he showed classified military plans to an author interviewing him at bedminster. as president i could have declassified it trump says, now i can't, you know, but this is still a secret. still a secret, close quote. so much for the declassification theory. we know from the indictment that trump is alleged to have shared these classified documents with many other visitors to mar-a-lago and we know that despite this outrageous conduct, the department of justice gave trump every opportunity to avoid criminal charges. again in the special counsel's words, quote, after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution mr. trump did the opposite. he not only refused to return the documents for many months,

but he also obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence and then to lie about it. close quote. why did the president charge former president trump but not president biden? not because of some vast conspiracy. not because of so-called deep state was out to get him. but because former president trump was fundamentally incapable of taking advantage of even one of the many, many chances he was given to avoid those charges. which brings me to the second distinction this report helps us draw between president biden and donald trump. simply put, president biden had the mental acuity to navigate this situation. donald trump did not. much has been made of the special counsel's comments about the president biden's age. let's set the context. after returning every classified

document, after opening his home to federal investigators and managing the first hours of the crisis in israel, president biden volunteered to sit through a five-hour interview with the special counsel. i believe as is his habit that president biden probably committed a verbal slip or two during the interview. i'm not sure any of that matters. when the interview was over mr. hur completely exonerated president biden. and then there is donald trump. what kind of man bungle chance episcopal to avoid criminal liability? what does it say about his mental state? the record speaks for itself. >> one of the great memories of all time. james. -- did anyone hear about urban.

nikki haley is in charge of security. >> three years later how about that. >> did you have a one-on-one? >> not much. not even that i remember. >> we have languages coming into our country we have nobody that even speaks those languages. they were foreign languages. saudi arabia, russia -- >> i have a really good memory. >> your next wife was a woman by the name of marla maples. do you recall what years you were married to her? >> you don't remember saying -- >> i don't remember that. >> putin has so little respect for obama he is starting to throw around the nuclear word. >> we have to win in november or we're not going to have pennsylvania, they will change the name. >> i talked to putin a lot.

>> did you ask him? >> i don't remember that. i saw that this morning. i have a good memory and all that stuff. a great memory. 20 years they were fighting isis. i defeated isis in four weeks. we won an election. what i am you are going to be the first people -- i know my people. you say all right, trump, you did a good job rick get the hell out of here, that's it. >> thank you for being here today, mr. hur. thank you for illuminating a stark choice for the country in the months to come. look forward to your testimony

and i yield back. >> chair recognizes the chairman of the oversight committee mr. comer for an opening statement. >> in august of 2022 president biden questioned in a 60 minutes interview how anyone can be that irresponsible when asked about classified documents in the possession of former president trump. but when president biden said this, he knew that he had stashed classified materials in several unsecure locations for years dating back to his time as vice president and even as a u.s. senator. president biden, the white house and his personal attorneys have not been honest with the american people about his willful retention of classified material and continue to hide information from congress. president biden's attorneys claim to have first discovered classified material at penn biden center on november 23, 2022. president biden and lawyers kept it secret from the american people before the mid-term elections. cbs news broke the story in

january 2023 leading americans to wonder if the white house had any intention of ever disclosing that president biden hoarded classified documents for years. one of my first actions of becoming the house oversight committee is launch an investigation into president biden's mishandling of classified documents. it started before special counsel hur was named and what we found is alarming. information obtained through multiple interviews conducted by the oversight committee contradict the white house's and president biden's personal attorney's narrative about the discovery of classified documents at the penn biden center. it began in the spraining of 2021, not november of 2022 as the white house claimed. the classified documents were not kept in a locked closet as asserted by the white house. five white house employees and

department of defense employees were coordinating the organizing, moving and removing of boxes later found to contain classified materials. there is no reasonable explanation as to why so many white house employees were concerned retrieving boxes they believed had personal documents and materials. why did president biden keep these specific documents in unsecure locations for years? many questions remain but now the white house is obstructing congress as we seek the truth for the american people. we've subpoenaed former white house counsel to appear for a deposition to provide information to our committee. the white house is seeking to block the testimony. we've also subpoenaed the department of justice for audio recordings and transcripts of the interview of hur. these were due the morning of the state of the union. only this morning a couple of hours before today's hearing the department of justice finally provided the transcript of president biden's interview with

special counsel hur. the timing is not coincidental. we have had little time to review the transcript but it is clear the white house did not want special counsel hur's final report to be released. the white house refused to be transparent with the american people about the president's mishandling of classified documents. and worse, they have appeared to have lied about the timeline, about who handled the documents, and even about the contents of president biden's interview with special counsel hur. that's why today's hearing is important, transparency is what we seek today and look forward to special counsel hur's testimony. i yield back. >> chair recognizes the ranking member of the oversight committee mr. raskin for his opening statement. >> there are just three basic points that all americans need to understand about mr. hur's report. number one, the special counsel exonerates president biden. the very first line of the report says it all quote, we conclude that no criminal

charges are warranted in this matter. we would reach the same conclusion even if department of justice policy did not foreclose criminal charges against a sitting president. the report establishes that president biden offered complete and unhesitating cooperation with the special counsel's investigation. justice department national archives were notified of the classified documents and were turned over. the president allowed the f.b.i. to search his homes and sat for a voluntary interview even as he was busy responding to hamas's vicious terrorist attack in israel. the report thus demonstrates president biden's fair department of justice. he did not exert executive privilege or claim absolute immunity from presidential crimes and did not hide boxes of documents under his bed or in a bathtub. he did not fight investigators

nor did he seek to redact a single word of mr. hur's report. he consented to the search of numerous locations including his homes and he did everything he could to cooperate, not obstruct. third, special counsel hur repeatedly emphasizes that president biden's conduct contrasts sharply with that of former president trump. hur observed that unlike president biden, quote, the allegations set forth in the indictment of mr. trump, if proven, would clearly establish not only mr. trump's willfulness but also serious aggravating factors. he sets forth these points of difference in detail, quote, most notably after being multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution trump allegedly did the opposite. according to the indictment he not only refused to return the documents for months but obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence and then to lie about it.

unquote. he returned only a portion of subpoenaed documents and deliberately withheld the rest. unlike president biden trump did not alert the national archives or d.o.j. of the documents nor turned over the classified materials in his possession and did not agree to sit down with a voluntary interview with special counsel and never consented to a search of his home. he suggested that his attorney hide or destroy evidence requested by the f.b.i. and the grand jury. trump carefully instructed his aide to move boxes of classified documents to hide them from the f.b.i. trump tried to delete incriminating security tape footage from mar-a-lago and he got his attorney to provide a false certification the f.b.i. saying he had produced all the documents in his possession. he did not. given this report is so -- it is hard for me to see why our colleagues think this hearing

advances their flailing and embarrassing quest to impeach the president of the united states. what america sees today is evidence of one president who believes in the rule of law and works to protect it and one who has nothing but contempt for the rule of law and acts solely in pursuit of his only constantly multiplying corrupt schemes. >> all other opening statements will be included in the record. we'll introduce today's witness, robert hur was appointed as special counsel in january of 2023 to investigate the removal and retention of classified documents discovered at the penn biden center for diplomacy and global engagement. he was a deputy attorney general in the department of justice and district attorney for maryland. chief justice for rehnquist and clerked for a judge on the ninth circuit court of appeals. we'll begin by swearing you in. stand, raise your right hand.

do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury the testimony you are about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief so help you god. let the record reflect with witness answered in the affir affirmative. we ask you summarize your testimony. mr. hur you may begin with your opening statement. make sure you have that mic on if you could, mr. hur. thank you. >> thank you, chairman. chairman jordan, ranking member nadler, chairman comer, ranking member raskin, members of the committee, good morning. i'm privileged to have serve my country for a decade and a half most with the department of justice. i have served as a line prosecutor, a supervisor, principal associate deputy attorney general, united states attorney and special counsel. i have served in these roles

with gratitude as the son of immigrants to this country. the first member of my family to be born here. my parents grew up in korea and young children during the korean war. my father remembers being hungry and grateful for the food that american g.i.s shared with him and his siblings. my mother fled north korea in her own mother's arms heading south to safety. they met, married and came to the u.s. seeking a better life for themselves and for their children. their lives and mine would have been very different were it not for this country. no matter the role, no matter the administration, i have applied the same standards and same impartiality, my respect for the justice department and commitment to this country are why i agreed to serve as special counsel when asked by the attorney general. i resolve to do the work as i did all my work for the department fairly, thoroughly

and professionally with close attention to the policies and practices that govern department prosecutors. my team and i conducted a thorough, independent investigation. we identified evidence that the president willfully retained classified materials after the end of his vice presidency when he was a private citizen. this evidence included an audio recorded conversation during which mr. biden told his ghost writer that he had, quote, just found all the classified stuff downstairs, end quote. when mr. biden said this, he was a private citizen speaking to his ghost writer in his private rental home in virginia. we also identified other recorded conversations during which mr. biden read classified information allowed to his ghost writer. we did not, however, identify evidence that rose to the level of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. because the evidence fell short of that standard i declined to recommend criminal charges

against mr. biden. the department's regulations required me to write a confidential report explaining my decision to the attorney general. i understood that my explanation about this case had to include rigorous, detailed and thorough analysis. in other words, i needed to show my work just as i would expect any prosecutor to show his or her work explaining the decision to prosecute or not. the need to show my work was especially strong here. the attorney general appointed me to look at the actions of the sitting president of the united states. i knew that for my decision to be credible i could not simply announce i recommended no criminal charges and leave it at that. i needed to explain why. my report reflects my best effort to explain why i declined to recommend charging president biden. i analyzed the evidence as prosecutors routinely do by assessing its strengths and

weaknesses including by anticipating the ways in which the president's defense lawyers might poke holes in the government's case and seek to persuade jurors the government could not prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. a lot of attention has been paid to language in the report about the president's memory. let me say a few words about that. my task was to determine whether the president retained or disclosed national defense information willfully. that means knowingly and with the intent to do something the law forbids. i could not make that determination without assessing the president's state of mind. for that reason, i had to consider the president's memory and overall mental state and how a jury likely would perceive his memory and mental state in a criminal trial. these are the types of issues that prosecutors analyze every day. and because these issues were important to my ultimate decision, i had to include a discussion of them in my report to the attorney general.

the evidence and the president himself put his memory squarely at issue. we interviewed the president and asked him about his recorded statement, quote, i just found all the classified stuff downstairs, end quote. he told us that he didn't remember saying that to his ghost writer. he also said he didn't remember finding any classified material in his home after his vice presidency. and he didn't remember anything about how classified documents about afghanistan made their way into his garage. my assessment in the report about the relevance of the president's memory was necessary and accurate and fair. most importantly, what i wrote is what i believe the evidence shows and what i expect jurors would perceive and believe. i did not sanitize my explanation nor did i disparage the president unfairly. i explained to the attorney general my decision and the reasons for it. that's what i was required to

do. i took the same approach when i compared the evidence regarding president biden to the department's allegations against former president trump. there i called it like i saw it. as a prosecutor i had to consider relevant precedence and explain why different facts justified different outcomes. that's what i did in my report. i'm confident the analysis set forth in chapters 11, 12 and 13 of my report provides a thorough evaluation and explanation of the evidence and i encourage everyone to read it to inform their opinions of the report. prosecutors rarely write public reports for testify by b their investigations. that's the justice department's policy and protects important interests. my team and i prepared the report to the attorney general with care and the report stands as the primary source of information. my responses today will be limited to clarifying information for the committee. i will refrain from speculating or commenting on areas outside

the scope of the investigation. nor will i discuss what investigative steps we did or did not take beyond what's in the report. in conclusion, i want to express my heart felt thanks to the attorneys, agents, analysts and professional staff who helped us do our work thoroughly and independ en dently. i'm grateful and privileged to serve to them and one was a former united states attorney himself who brought wisdom, skill and judgment to our task. thank you. i welcome your questions. >> thank you, mr. hur. chair recognizes the gentleman from north dakota. >> how could that possibly happen? how could anyone be that irresponsible? i thought what data was in there that could compromise sources, methods, and it's just totally irresponsible? that's president biden's statement about donald trump and the classified documents. mr. hur, classified documents

were found at the penn biden center. >> that's correct. >> found in president biden's garage? >> in wilmington, delaware. >> and in his basement den? >> in the same home. >> main floor office and third floor den? >> correct. >> at the university of dell care? >> correct. >> at the biden institute. >> correct. >> the elements of the crime we get into all of this. the element of the crime are simple. president biden had unauthorized possession of a document that's correct? >> correct. >> document writing or note related to national defense. >> correct. >> the defendant we may talk about the willful part in a second. retained the document, writing or note and failed to deliver it to an employee or officer entitled to receive it. there zbloo there was a willfulness intent. >> those are the elements of the crime. >> including the intent element yes. >> at least two different quotes

he told his ghost writer, this is february 16th, 2017, that he had just found all this classified stuff downstairs. >> he did make that statement was captured anon an audio recording. >> april 10th he read aloud a classified passage relateded to a 2015 meeting in the situation room. >> that's in the report yes. >> national security documents, afghanistan has been mentioned, a whole bunch of those things, right? >> correct. >> at one point they argued about notes taking all the different things and compared it to reagan. >> could you repeat that? >> president biden's personal attorneys talked about the notes and why they didn't actually account for the presidential records act but you found that argument in your report a little per --

>> we concluded the executive order does apply and did govern former vice president biden at the time. >> you have audio recording from his ghost writer where the president acknowledges that the information he has is classified and he is sharing with his ghost writer. >> we have an audio recording capturing a statement from mr. biden saying to his ghost writer in february of 2017 quote i just found all the classified stuff downstairs, end quote. >> then again reciting passages from a meeting in the situation room. >> yes. >> those are in president biden's own words. >> correct. >> the ghost writer has no classified -- he has no clearance, no classified clearance to anything, correct? >> that's our understanding that he was not authorized to receive classified information. >> okay. the elements are possess documents, documents related to national defense, and willfully retain those documents and in this case shared them with

somebody not allowed to receive them. >> there are different subsections of 18usc. >> the willful retention have a penn biden center, garage, basement den, main floor office, the university of delaware and biden university. 50 year career of a person who has not been very great at dealing with classified documents throughout even prior to his time as vice president when he was in the u.s. senate. >> we address each set of those documents in the report. >> i think this is really important because the difference is it appears just from reading the report and we heard all about exonerated and all those different things. it appears from the report he met every actual element of the crime. i want to talk about the department principles on federal prosecution. that actually has nothing to do with the under lying element, correct? whether or not you can prove this at trial. >> under the department's

justice manual and principles of federal prosecution a prosecutor has to assess the evidence and determine whether in his or her judgment the probable outcome will be a conviction at trial. >> whether or not you meet the elements of the crime. it is clear that he does. the second part of that is this and where it gets into the sympathetic well-meaning man with a poor memory. you could say you don't prosecute sitting presidents. you didn't. that doesn't have having to do with the elements of the crime but getting a conviction at trial, correct? >> part and parcel of a prosecutor's judgment whether or not a conviction is the probable outcome of trial is assessing how the evidence identified during the investigation lines up with the elements and what proof can be offered to a jury during a trial. >> his well-meaning elderly old man -- presentation to the jury. >> it has something that --

>> it has something to do with the way a jury is going to perceive and receive and consider and make conclusions based on evidence at trial, congressman. >> chair recognizes ranking member mr. nadler. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. hur, in your written testimony, you say that you found some evidence that the president might have willfully retained classified materials at the end of his vice presidency, correct? >> correct. >> ultimately you concluded you could not prove that charge in the court of law and proof to a reasonable doubt. >> that's my judgment. >> you have been a prosecutor for a long time. would you agree there is no such thing a being a little bit charged for a crime. you are either charged or not. >> correct. >> could you please repeat the question? >> would you agree there is no such thing as being a little bit charged for a crime. you are charged or not charged . >> either one is charged or not

charged. >> so many people taking your words out of context. your ultimate conclusion was that president biden could not be charged with a crime because even after your thorough investigation you could not find sufficient evidence to charge him, correct? >> my conclusion was that based on my evaluation of the evidence as a prosecutor. >> correct? >> i didn't hear your last question. >> i said based on your conclusion, your ultimate conclusion that president biden could not be charged with a crime because even after your thorough investigation you could not find sufficient evidence to charge him, correct or not correct? >> my ultimate conclusion was criminal charges were not warranted. >> correct. i have limited time. when i say correct or not correct answer the question. let's talk about why in sharp contrast to president biden president trump faces 40 charges related to the unlawful retention of highly classified documents. that's apart from the additional 51 counts in cases alleging he incited a rebellion and lied

about his finances. you found president biden reported the possible classified documents in possession to the f.b.i. as soon as he learned about them. >> there was a voluntary disclosure by his attorney. >> let's contrast this with president trump. are you aware that the f.b.i. only learned that trump was in possession of classified material after the national archives discovered them? >> congressman, i'm not intimately familiar with the facts relating to former president trump. i'm prepared to comment on them to the extent i wrote about them in the report. >> president biden would not have handed the documents from his home on a silver platter if he willfully retained those documents for years. part of understanding president biden's intent was that he quickly and voluntarily returned those documents to the government, correct? >> that was a factor in our analysis, yes. >> by way of contrast to the best of your knowledge, why did the department of justice seek a

warrant to search mar-a-lago? >> congressman, i am not familiar with those deliberations. that's a matter i had no participation in. >> i will tell you it was because they were concerned trump lied about possession of those documents and might conceal or destroy them. special counsel smith found that president trump obstructed his investigation by suggesting that his attorney falsely represent to the f.b.i. and grand jury that trump did not have the documents called for by the grand jury's subpoena. at any point in your investigation did you have any reason to believe the president biden lied to you? >> i do address in my report one response the president gave to a question that we posed to him that we deemed to be not credible. >> was it clear he didn't lie? >> i'm sorry, congressman? >> the report is clear he didn't lie or that he caused his staff and that he didn't cause his staff to lie to you. your report is clear on that. do you agree causing someone to

lie to the f.b.i. is obstruction of justice? >> it is as obstruction. >> trump directed one of his employees to move boxes to concealed from the attorney, f.b.i. and grand jury. at any point in your investigation did you find that president biden directed his staff to conceal documents from you or anyone else? >> we did not reach that conclusion. >> you would agree hiding documents is obstructing an investigation. >> an example. >> donald trump instructed his staff to delete security footage. do you agree adementing to delete video footage is an attempt to obstruct an investigation? >> congressman, i don't want to characterize the evidence in the case against former president trump. >> if it happened would you agree the deleting video footage is trying to -- >> it's the type of evidence

>> donald trump is charged with willfully retaining classified documents and conspiring to conceal those documents and facing additional charges for lying to investigators, isn't that correct? >> those are allegations that are in a pending case against former president trump. >> the reason president biden is not facing a single charge is not because you went easy on him but because after reviewing 7 million documents and interviewing nearly 150 witnesses including the president himself, you could not prove that he had committed a crime. i yield back. >> the gentleman from california is recognized. >> thank you, mr. hur. i want to get this straight. is it now okay if i take home top secret documents, store them in my garage, and read portions of them to friends or associates? >> congressman, i wouldn't recommend it but i don't want to entertain hype that calls. >> is that okay? i can do that now under this new

doctrine >> i wouldn't recommend you do that. >> you have essentially said so in your report and certainly it would be exculpatory if i simply told you hey, i'm getting old and i don't remember stuff the way i used to. >> i'm not here to get into hypotheticals. >> it's not a hypothetical. this is the issue at hand. you correctly noted in your report that former presidents and other senior officials have been given wide latitude in their possession of classified information and i believe your decision to not prosecute biden for the same offense is consistent with that precedent. but the problem is that precedent changed with the administration's decision to prosecute donald trump. and the irony is that as president trump had full discretion over handling classified material and full discretion in deciding which records to retain as the senator

or vice president joe biden didn't have that. now we get to this glaring double standard. i think it would be toxic to the rule of law on its face if it was just two ordinary citizens. the fact the only person being prosecuted for this offense happens to be the president' political opponent makes it an unprecedented assault on our democracy. this is the worst we could expect from a banana republic. i wonder how you square this >> congressman, i do address, as i was required to as a prosecutor, a relevant precedent in the form of the allegations in the indictment against former president trump. i set forth my explanation and assessment and comparison of those precedents in my report and i am not here to comment any further. >> you said, for example, there was no evidence beyond reasonable doubt. you got the fact that he had classified material in his

possession and control in multiple settings for multiple years and told others he was aware of this and shared that material with others. the mind bog wills at what beyond reasonable doubt would actually mean. >> as i set forth at length in my explanations in chapters 11 and 12 of the report my assessment is that the evidence, if presented at trial alongside potential defense arguments would not probably result in a conviction at trial. >> one of the points you make is president biden is likely to be an elderly sympathetic person with a poor memory. isn't that a question for a judge or your decide after guilt or innocence is determined? donald trump is being prosecuted for the same act you've documented joe biden committed. >> if i understood your question

correctly isn't that a question for a jury. it most certainly in the lens of -- >> does that bear on the guilt or innocence of an individual? >> it bears on how a jury is going to receive and perceive and make decisions. >> the answer to my earlier question is correct. all i have to do when i am caught taking home classified materials i'm sorry, i'm get evening old my memory isn't so great? this is the doctrine that you've established in our laws now and it is frightening. >> congressman, my intent is not to establish any sort of doctrine. i had a particular task. i had a particular set of evidence to consider and make a judgment to one particular set of evidence and that's what i did. >> here is the fine point of the matter. the foundation of our justice system is equal justice under law. that's what gave the law its respect and its legitimacy.

the law is devoid of any moral authority. justice is depicted as blindfolded for this reason. it doesn't matter who comes before her, all are treated equally. you destroyed this foundation. and the rule of law becomes a sick mockery. it becomes a weapon to wield against political rivals and a tool. and i'm desperately afraid this decision of the department of justice has how crossed a very bright line. i yield back. >> gentleman yields back. >> can i introduce the state of the union into the hearing? >> without objection that will be introduced. the ranking member is recognized for unanimous consent. >> i ask unanimous consent that a copy of an article in this morning's "washington post" entitled full transcript of biden special counsel interview paints portrait the president doesn't come across as absent

minded as they made him out to be. >> chair recognizes the gentleman from california for five minutes. >> thank you for being here today. i found your report very interesting and i learned some things about the law and the precedents. there are clear differences between the cases of and precedents set by presidents reagan, trump and biden. it was widely known that president reagan kept diaries from his presidency that included classified information. what i didn't know and learned in your report was that the department of justice, quote, repeatedly described the diaries in public court filings as mr. reagan's personal records, unquote and that no agency ever attempted to remove his diaries on page 195 of your report. very interesting. so the investigation found that

president biden believed that his notebooks were his personal property, including work and political notes, reflections, to do lists and more that he was entitled to take home. you found that on page 232. so while much of his notebook was work-related he still had some purely personal subjects like again i quote, gut wrenching about the illness and death of his son beau on page 82 and 253 of your report. so it's clear based on the reagan precedent, that no criminal charges were warranted in this matter relative to personal notebooks. now i want to be clear that although the notebooks contained some very personal information and president biden considered them his personal property, the president allowed your team to seize and review all of the

notebooks you found. is that correct? >> that is correct. >> that's in stark contrast to ex-president trump's case. he obstructed and diverted all the investigations. now, you also interviewed president biden about other classified documents you found outside his notebooks, didn't you? >> yes, congresswoman. >> did the president tell you that he believed any of those documents other than his own handwritten works were his personal property, yes or no. >> we did not hear that from the president during his interview. >> it is very different from ex-president trump. ex-president trump said all of the documents marked classified were his personal property. president biden did not consider documents that were produced by other entities with classification markings as his personal records. now, i think since the majority has tried to assert that there

is a disparity based on politics and the differences in the prosecution, it is worth quoting page 11 of the report, which says, and i quote, several material distinctions between mr. trump's case and mr. biden's case are clear. most notably, after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution, mr. trump allegedly did the opposite. according to the indictment, he not only refused to return the documents for many months, but he also obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence and then to lie about it. that's on page 11. quote, in contrast, mr. biden turned in classified documents to the national archives and the department of justice, consent et to the search of multiple locations including his home. sat for a voluntary interview and in other ways cooperated with the investigation.

it's clear that these cases are not the same. frankly, i was surprised to learn that some of the classified documents were actually personal diaries that many executive officials have taken home with them because it was in their own handwriting and what they produced. based on the department of justice public statements during the reagan administration, it is understandable that a person could believe that their personal diaries that they produced were not to be turned over, just as president reagan did not turn them over. i appreciate your report. i appreciate your being here, mr. hur. i would also like to ask mr. chairman unanimous request to include in the record a september 11th letter from the special counsel to the preside