Rib. Well, its your reports. I think it actually is more fitting that you read those most notably after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution, mr. Trump allegedly did the opposite you going 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. You may stop there. Thank you. You mentioned the indictment against mr. Trump for mishandling sensitive classified National Security information. That indictment says at the end of his presidency, mr. Trump, im looking for my indictment here. I have it here mr. Trump himself ordered that boxes containing classified materials go to maralago where he hosted Tens Of Thousands of guests. Then he kept these sensitive materials carelessly about the property as you can see here, classified documents ended up in a bathroom, a ballroom on a floor spoon about and when a grand jury subpoena the documents, what did donald trump do . The indictment again shows against him what he responded by suggesting that his attorney falsely represent that the fbi and grand jury that he did not have documents called for by the subpoena he directed his employee, waltine nauta, to move boxes of the documents to conceal them from mr. Trumps attorney, and then lied to his attorney and the fbi and The Grand Jury, suggesting his attorney might hide or destroy documents called for by The Grand Jury investigation mr. Hur, are those the type of aggravating facts to which you refer to in your report congresswoman, the app the aggravating facts that are referred to in the report are set forth and described in my report at page 11 very good mr. Herrera, to the best of your knowledge and investigation to President Biden, ever direct an employee to lie about hide, or destroy Classified Information . Yes or no . We did not identify such evidence. Did he do so himself we did not identify such evidence. And i want to give you a chance since the transcript is out to correct the record on an important point. Very sadly your report on page 20 wait, says that mr. Biden couldnt come up with the date, the year of his son, beau bidens death when in fact, in the transcript, its shows that you asked him the month. And do you know what he said mr. Hur . He said, oh god, may 30. Would you like to correct the record . His memory was pretty firm on the month and a day. Congresswoman, i dont believe thats correct. With respect to the transcript, but if you could refer me to a specific page, id be happy to look. Ive read about it, new reporting. Thank you. I yield back chair. Now recognizes mr. Kiley mr. Her, why did the white house asked you to remove parts of the report . What was the reason they gave for that i dont have the letter in front of me, congressman, i believed that among the reasons was that they contested or that they they asserted that certain language in the report was inconsistent with doj policy. The day that your report came out, the president gave a alive a News Conference on national television. Did you watch that News Conference . I watched the Press Conference, yes. What was your reaction to seeing the president personally attack you and your team . Congressman, im here to talk about the work that went into the report and My Declination Decision and my explanation of it for the attorney and it wasnt just the president anthony coley, former spokesman for Merrick Garland, has said that democrats should focus their ire on her. The president s personal attorney, bob bauer, said that your report is a shabby piece of work and a shoddy work product. Do you agree with that characterization of your report . I disagreed vehemently with that characterization of my report. I also disagree think its very wellwritten. Well considered and comprehensive. Do you think its appropriate for the administration to be attacking the work of a Special Counsel that it appointed itself congressman. Im not going to comment on the propriety of the administrations reaction to my report. What i can tell you is that i stand by the report and the work that went into it today, the Ranking Members started his Opening Statement by saying mr. Her completely exonerated president President Biden then called your report a total and complete exoneration. Theres a hurted you completely exonerate President Biden. That is not what by report does. Was your report a total and complete exoneration that is not what the report says. The statement by the Ranking Member who is incorrect, yes. As i said, that the report is not an exoneration. That word does not appear in my report based on the facts in anticipation of defenses presented in your report, could a reasonable juror have voted to convict . As i said in the report, some reasonable jurors may have reached the inferences that the government would present and its case and chief, its a reasonable juror could have voted to convict based on the facts that you present direct if you were on the jury, would you have voted to convict . I have not engaged in that thought exercise, congressman. And so what id like to stick to is whats in the report, which is my assessment as a prosecutor. Sure. What you did find in the report . Is that the president . This page 200 risks serious damage to americas National Security through his handling. And ms of classified materials and you identify, quote, a strong motive for the way he handled those materials. Two of the motives you cited was his desire to run for president and his desire to sell books. So a reasonable in france for your report is that the president risks serious damage to americas National Security in order to make money and advanced his personal political ambitions. Is that correct . The report includes a description of the evidence and different inferences that reasonable jurors could draw from the evidence. And you also note that the president described his presence as theres handling of classified material as totally irresponsible and your report concludes that mr. Bidens emphatic and unqualified conclusion that keeping marked classified documents, unsecured, and ones home is totally irresponsible, applies equally to his own decisions. Is that correct . That language does appear on the report you cite as a Mitigating Factor. The fact that the president cooperated in the investigation. But at the time that the investigation was happening and these acts of cooperation occurred, the maralago investigation was already a matter of public record, correct . I believe thats correct. So we already had a public debate about the handling of classified documents and the potential application of the criminal laws to that general set of circumstances. I think thats fair and so the president , when he decided to cooperate or not cooperate, had to know that that decision to cooperate or not cooperate would become known to the public. And he would be judged according accordingly. Is that correct . Im not in a position to opine on what was or was not in the present, but its relevant to your analysis as to whether or not it counts as a Mitigating Factor if he knew that he was going to have to be judged based on whether he cooperated or not. That would have less than its value as a Mitigating Factors. So did that in your analysis and lessen its value we undertook a comprehensive that that specific factor did it less than its value as a Mitigating Factor that all facts relating to the president s cooperation with our investment. Another factor you discussed as a deterrence, and you say that deterrence actually, the factor actually counsels against bringing charges here because you said, as for general deterrence, future president s and Vice President s are already likely to be charged with deterred by the multiple recent criminal investigations. And one prosecution of current and former president and Vice President s for mishandling classified documents. So that one prosecution of course, is the indictment brought by jack smith. So by the very terms of urinalysis, jack smiths indictment actually counseled against and was accounted against bringing charges in this case. Is that correct . Im sorry, congressman, i dont follow your drift. Well, you said that theres already deterrence because theres this prosecution out there in a prior case related to classified documents. So we dont need to bring another case to establish the truth value thats that was the essence of urinalysis, correct . Congressman, what ill say is that i will stand by the way in a specific words in which i characterize my assessment of Deterrence Value of a case of principles of federal prosecution thats on page 254. 2, 55 of my room thank you. My time is out, but ill just add the perverse implication here is that the administration by the very terms of urinalysis actually made it less likely that the president would face charges by jack smith bringing an indictment. Thank you. And i yield back. Mr. Chairman, i have anatomists consent request. Thank you. I asked unanimous consent to enter into the record to documents first, the superseding indictment against donald trump in the Southern District of florida, where he is currently britley facing criminal charges on 40 counts, including Obstruction Of Justice, lying to the fbi is unlawful willful retention of National Defense . Objection. The indictment is is It Concealment of documents from Law Enforcement, among other things . That was the shortened version. And my second document to clarify for you, sir, mr. Her from the transcription, page 82 the boards are President Bidens. What month did you die . Oh god. May 30th. A searing memory. I asked unanimous consent out. Objection. The gentlewoman from georgias recognize. Thank you mr. Chairman, Ranking Member for this hearing. And thank you so much for spending so much time with us todays Special Counsel, her in accordance with the law, Classified Information must be treated he did with the highest respect and also protected. And President Biden has made it clear during this investigation and long before that, he agrees. In response to mr. Hurs report, he said and i quote, over my career in public service, ive always worked to protect americas security. I take these issues seriously, and no one has ever questioned that in quote, the Special Counsels report makes clear that this is unfortunately a common occurrence for classified documents to get swept up into members of congress or Executive Branch of branches, officials, personal effects and as soon as President Biden discovered that hit mistakenly kept classified material, he took swift and immediate action to ensure that those materials wereeturned. Any fully cooperated with every step of your investigation. President bidens predecessor when dealing with the issue of having classified materials took very different steps 2016, donald trump declared, and i quote, im going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of Classified Information. No one will be Above The Law in quote yet when his lawyer told him that it was going to be a crime if he didnt return the classified documents that he had after naras the doj and the fbi requested multiple times that trump returned the classified documents, yet he hid them. Trump himself acknowledged that the same year that Service Members have risked their lives too. Acquire classified intelligence to protect our country. Yet, he decided that his desire to keep these documents outweighed the potential loss of life for these people. If those papers got out not only did trump have a legal obligation, he also had a moral obligation to all of us and he failed to live up to that mr. Her. Thank you for being here today. Id like to talk about your report regarding President Biden and some of your findings and for the sake of time, if you dont mind just answering yes or no please answer this question. Page 187 as your report reads, at no point that we find evidence that mr. Biden intended or had reason to believe the information would be used to injure the United States or to benefit a foreign nation. Is this what you reported . For the second time, please answer yesterday yes or no congresswoman, you said page 187 of your report . Yes. Yes. At no point did we find evidence . Yes. That language is on page 187. Okay. So then this is what you reported, correct . That languages in my report. Ok. And mr. Hur, you acknowledged on page 12 of your report that there are as you said, numerous previous instances in which marked classified documents have been discovered intermixed with the personal papers or former executive Branch Officials and members of congress please once again, can you confirm for us yes or no the answer whether this is what you reported, that language appears at page 12 of my report page 323 also reads, as a matter of historical context, there have been numerous previous incidents and which marked classified documents had been discovered, intermixed with a personal papers of former executive Branch Officials and members of congresss this, what youre, what you reported. That language appears at page 323. Thank you. Now, its my understanding that that this has happened before or classified documents are swept up into official papers. Mr. Aside from donald trump, are you aware of similar instances in history where officials who those documents from federal Law Enforcement officials the one case that comes to mind that we do address in the report is the prosecution of General Petraeus so are these historical examples aside from donald trump, where officials instructed their aides to delete evidence pertaining to those classified documents that was not present in the petraeus prosecution . No. Okay so the American People deserve, as weve always been saying, all along here, that we deserve a leader who will not put themselves Above The Law but well work with Law Enforcement and hold themselves accountable thank you. And i yield back the gentlewoman from wyoming is recognized Special Counsel. Her when you determine that no criminal charges should be brought against President Biden in this matter, you focused on this specific to fix that facts surrounding the classified documents where President Biden stored them and on his memory in age you wrote the President Bidens memory was significantly limited during his recorded interviews with the ghostwriter in 2017 and during his interview with the Special Counsels office in 2023 you also expressed concern that prospective jurors will be persuaded by President Bidens presentation as a sympathetic, wellmeaning elderly man with a poor memory your assessment however, was focused on how President Biden would currently present to a jury if he stood trial. Is that correct . That was an element of my explanation to the Attorney General for my decision. It was not the only element. Okay. That wasnt my question, but it was one of the things that we were considering was his current state of mind, his current memory all right correct. One of the things that i consider would be how if a trial whenever a trial theoretically were to be held, how President Biden would present himself to the jury if he elected to testify, you did not compare President Bidens current memory or condition with his memory or condition when he was in the senate or when he left the Vice Presidency and took the classified documents subject to your investigation, is that right . Actually, i believe thats not correct. Congresswoman, one of the things thats in the report is an assessment of the president s memory based on recording some of the 2016 2017 timeframe recordings of conversations between mr. Biden and his ghostwriter and comparing that with the president s memory that he exhibited during our interview of him in october of 2023. So there was a comparison there. Okay. So unless there was some issue and disclosed to the American People during his 50 years in office you found that mr. Biden fully understood his legal responsibility related to the handling of classified materials, which is why you concluded in your report that mr. Biden, quote, willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his Vice Presid