Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

LetMyPeopleVote

(145,894 posts)
123. 'Confidential' in name only: Merrick Garland's delicate decision to release the Hur report
Fri Feb 9, 2024, 09:35 PM
Feb 2024

In theory, the attorney general could have kept the report secret. In practice, he had only one option. If AG Garland did not release the Hur report, it was going to be either leaked or disclosed by the GOP in a hearing which would give the report far greater exposure and coverage.



https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/09/garland-decision-release-hur-report-00140806

The White House is livid over the Justice Department’s release of a special counsel report that painted a devastating portrait of Joe Biden. But Attorney General Merrick Garland’s decision to release it was a foregone conclusion — and anything short of publicizing the full report would have been worse.....

In practice, though, burying or censoring the report would have been untenable, former Justice Department leaders say.

They described a high-stakes calculus for both Garland and Hur informed by previous politically sensitive investigations: Special counsel reports have always been made public in recent years, and Garland would have been slammed by Republicans and the press if he tried to keep this one under wraps. Hur, meanwhile, clearly understood that political reality, so the harsh language he included was exactly what he expected the public to see.....

While the DOJ regulations used to appoint special counsels call for their final reports to be confidential and Hur labeled his as such, in recent years it has become customary for attorneys general — facing political pressure — to vow to release them publicly to the extent the law allows.

Despite the caterwauling from the White House this week, the conclusion of Hur’s probe was sure to draw a flurry of Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits from news organizations and Biden’s political foes. House Republicans could also have subpoenaed the report and related records. The letter Biden’s lawyers sent to Hur indicates transcripts exist of the prosecutor’s interviews with Biden, so the memory lapses Hur cited may have become public whether Hur had colorfully characterized them or not......

And while some Justice Department veterans said the buck stops with Garland, others argued that the attorney general had no choice but to release the report Hur delivered. Hur and his team likely would have understood that their words would become public, even though the report was labeled “confidential.”

“Mr. Hur’s report had to be released unedited lest the attorney general were to be accused of protecting President Biden,” Rossi said.

Even if the full report was not leaked, the report would had eventually come out when Comer or Gym Jordan subpoenaed Garland, Hur and the report itself. Disclosure of the full report would have been a bigger deal than releasing the report in full this far in advance of the general election.
Be sure to let his boss know. brooklynite Feb 2024 #1
In other words, if I am disappointed, I should just shut up and not complain. Totally not surprised by JohnSJ Feb 2024 #4
Welcome to the dark side. Prepare thyself for lame, canned, illogical responses to any of your concerns, Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #12
I have! Wuddles440 Feb 2024 #18
Biggest Threat to Democracy Cthulu on call Feb 2024 #108
Yes, your shtick is well known Orrex Feb 2024 #116
Post removed Post removed Feb 2024 #117
Was I assigned George Santos in the last election? brooklynite Feb 2024 #121
Sounds really serious. Torchlight Feb 2024 #120
Truth be told, Garland and his actions never sat well with me. sprinkleeninow Feb 2024 #2
I didn't like him when Obama nominated him as SCJ, just had a feeling about him. Merlot Feb 2024 #3
.... sprinkleeninow Feb 2024 #7
I have no clue how the guy became beloved TheKentuckian Feb 2024 #31
Many here don't grasp this, newdayneeded Feb 2024 #87
yeppers, I hadn't ever heard Garland speak until his confirmation hearings.. that was when I intuited msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #91
Exactly this Farmer-Rick Feb 2024 #101
I have been defending him for quite some time, but with his appointments of republican special JohnSJ Feb 2024 #6
Or he could have appointed a Democrat or someone neutral. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #49
Why should he consider political affiliation? TexasDem69 Feb 2024 #52
That's a somewhat... druidity33 Feb 2024 #75
I don't pay all that much attention. He seemed alright to me. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #73
this is nonsense bigtree Feb 2024 #5
There was no need forva special prosecutor edhopper Feb 2024 #8
Exactly, and why did it take so long to appoint a special counsel against trump? JohnSJ Feb 2024 #10
Smith was named Special Counsel six days after trump declared he was a candidate for president. onenote Feb 2024 #63
Yes, thanks though JohnSJ Feb 2024 #65
But most of the stuff known newdayneeded Feb 2024 #124
The special counsels to investigate the BIdens,were appointed by Garland, and they are partisan republicans. and as far JohnSJ Feb 2024 #9
If I remember correctly... ShazzieB Feb 2024 #29
A thoughtful reply JohnSJ Feb 2024 #32
Thank you. ShazzieB Feb 2024 #119
That Sick Fuck made his intentions to run for office again was made to ALL before he left the white-house msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #94
This particular appointment was bad judgement. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #72
Zero input from Garland? Only if he chose to give zero input. It was his job to review... Silent3 Feb 2024 #85
Everything the GOP has to CYA for Ayatollah Complainy is nonsense at this point, defending Mr. 91 and LOSER! Brainfodder Feb 2024 #107
He prosecuted the OKC Tim McVeigh trial which I followed closely, being in Denver at the time... hlthe2b Feb 2024 #11
People always cite that case. But despite the horror of the result, McVeigh was one kid, Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #13
McVey was not wealthy, connected, or a Republican politician TheKentuckian Feb 2024 #115
Well done FHRRK Feb 2024 #14
Thanks. I have never had a problem admitting an error in judgment or being incorrect JohnSJ Feb 2024 #33
No one else is obligated to change their mind just because you or anyone else thinks they should. ShazzieB Feb 2024 #34
Duly noted FHRRK Feb 2024 #62
Sorry for the misunderstanding. ShazzieB Feb 2024 #69
"Be sure to let his boss know" has been posted many multiple times in every single thread that expresses concern Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #81
I had no idea that's been posted repeatedly. ShazzieB Feb 2024 #118
It is not the week before the election. Thus I don't think it will hurt Biden. Demsrule86 Feb 2024 #15
I agree, next up will be presidential immunity or lack thereof BeyondGeography Feb 2024 #17
Yup, I do not not believe that Trump wins the immunity case. Demsrule86 Feb 2024 #19
That's What I've been saying, Dems.. Cha Feb 2024 #23
Some of us hear you and agree! 😁 ShazzieB Feb 2024 #36
Mahalo, Shazzie! Cha Feb 2024 #39
true, but he might not be done talking yet. ecstatic Feb 2024 #24
CNN tapper was laying it on against Biden today, but that is par for the course for him. JohnSJ Feb 2024 #35
But it is many, many weeks beyond 1/6/2021. jaxexpat Feb 2024 #44
I don't think this will go away they have a SC saying Biden is old and doc03 Feb 2024 #53
Yes it does. Trump's Attorney General would never allow such a partisan report to come out. Shit, his AG didn't dem4decades Feb 2024 #80
NBC coverage was disastrous. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #71
That's true regarding the Faux News viewers, Wuddles440 Feb 2024 #83
But, what worries me is Farmer-Rick Feb 2024 #104
Oh well. Oopsie Daisy Feb 2024 #16
It's not a fun club to be in, but welcome aboard, I guess. ecstatic Feb 2024 #20
Garland was a bad choice. Biden felt sorry for him. No good deed goes unpunished dalton99a Feb 2024 #21
Of course many DUers assured us that Garland's milquetoast kowtowing to the GQP Sky Jewels Feb 2024 #47
So Biden didn't know what he was doing when he appointed him? Why hasn't he replaced him? onenote Feb 2024 #64
Joe made a mistake. People do. Do YOU think less of him because of that? I never expected he was infallible. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #78
Should he have corrected his "mistake"? onenote Feb 2024 #82
That's nice. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #84
Cleaerly, he doesn't. at least not enough of a mistake to take action on. msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #99
This one is a truly case in point on "no good deed goes unpunished" msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #96
The language and conclusions in Robert Hur's Special Counsel report amount to prosecutorial misconduct. sop Feb 2024 #22
TY.. I'm hoping something can Cha Feb 2024 #25
I don't think so Cha except to push back on Hur's accusations. JohnSJ Feb 2024 #37
Thanks John.. At least it's in February and Cha Feb 2024 #41
Absolutely. A least not a comey fiasco JohnSJ Feb 2024 #42
Team Biden.. Cha Feb 2024 #48
This type of garbage works well for the GOP. hadEnuf Feb 2024 #113
Agree- push back is necessary TxGuitar Feb 2024 #105
President Biden crowing about the report. TomSlick Feb 2024 #26
His old and forgetful comments are anything but helpful in my view JohnSJ Feb 2024 #38
It's the only smart response for him to have. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #55
We could have done without the commentary. That was political, unprofessional total BS. LeftInTX Feb 2024 #74
Agreed. TomSlick Feb 2024 #110
I am not holding my breathe that he is going to go anywhere.. DemocratInPa Feb 2024 #27
That is up to Biden. That is up to the postal board of governors JohnSJ Feb 2024 #40
+1 TeamProg Feb 2024 #28
i felt ag garland should have left along time ago. but i was ignored. AllaN01Bear Feb 2024 #30
Join the club. lees1975 Feb 2024 #43
I'll take this Joe Biden, today, over ANY day in years past calimary Feb 2024 #45
A lot of us knew Garland was terrible long ago, Sky Jewels Feb 2024 #46
+1 People are starting to realize Garland is not a Democrat. Emile Feb 2024 #79
I Agree, Sir The Magistrate Feb 2024 #50
I just read the report on Politico. It couldn't be worse if Trump himself doc03 Feb 2024 #51
Is there anything you think is wrong about the report? TexasDem69 Feb 2024 #54
Only One Sentence Required, Sir The Magistrate Feb 2024 #56
After the SC finds no cause to prosecute Biden, he basically makes a doc03 Feb 2024 #57
Interview for yankee87 Feb 2024 #122
It also isn't the job of the special counsel to make appraisals of Biden's JohnSJ Feb 2024 #59
"Swift Boating", a very appropriate description of the SC's editorial pointlessly set within his "finding of fact". jaxexpat Feb 2024 #112
cosigned jcgoldie Feb 2024 #58
We have just been swift boated by this special counsel, and anyone who JohnSJ Feb 2024 #61
Oh, damn, are we looking a little political. republianmushroom Feb 2024 #60
You take a lot of heat for this, but, yep. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #77
I agree with you Takket Feb 2024 #66
"Unprofessional report." Exactly. nt sprinkleeninow Feb 2024 #67
You state this eloquently. I'm all out of hearts....Wish I had one.... LeftInTX Feb 2024 #70
I don't want to beat a dead horse, and we are in agreement about how Garland should go forward. Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #76
Garland is a coward budkin Feb 2024 #68
People give him too much credit for Oklahoma City dalton99a Feb 2024 #86
Garland okay'd that summary. He is responsible for it. spanone Feb 2024 #88
You are darn right he is. JohnSJ Feb 2024 #90
I've not supported him. Duppers Feb 2024 #89
Garland had no business allowing this report to be published 'as is,' because PatrickforB Feb 2024 #92
Well said! n/t msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #97
It was a frustrating experience to express feelings and thoughts of doubt right out the gate... msfiddlestix Feb 2024 #93
If my goal in life were to be a Supreme Court Justice... 3825-87867 Feb 2024 #95
What are you talking about? President Obama nominated Garland for SC justice JohnSJ Feb 2024 #98
I know Obama nominated him. 3825-87867 Feb 2024 #100
DUers finally coming to conclusion that TFG will not be tried before election. Sneederbunk Feb 2024 #102
You can't criticize Garland cactusfractal Feb 2024 #103
It's almost funny to watch the doubling down on "Everything Garland touches is three-dimensional-chess gold," Scrivener7 Feb 2024 #111
And the light does come after the darkness..... republianmushroom Feb 2024 #106
Dem DOJ's damifino10 Feb 2024 #109
"Garland is the gift that keeps on giving." - Mitch McConnell TomDaisy Feb 2024 #114
'Confidential' in name only: Merrick Garland's delicate decision to release the Hur report LetMyPeopleVote Feb 2024 #123
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I have been an ardent def...»Reply #123