Today was kind of an interesting day legally in the Joe Biden, why are
we not charging him with crimes for misplacing classified documents situation, because the Special
Council released the transcripts of the interview that they had with President Biden on October
eighth and October ninth of last year, twenty twenty three, and this was
something that Republicans were kind of clamoring for. They wanted to see the exact
transcript because basically, the Special Council said, well, look, we're deciding
we're not going to charge President Biden for a couple of reasons, among which
his memory is terrible, and Republicans basically said, well, we want to
see the transcript of this. We want to see if this decision to charge
or not to charge was fair or not. So the transcript's been released,
and in this interview, you've got Biden there, you've got his attorneys there
with him, and clearly Biden is really struggling with dates. It's pretty obvious
he's struggling with dates. So he was struggling to figure out when it was
that he announced he was running for president. That was in twenty nineteen.
He was he asked the question if it was twenty thirteen. He was talking
about the year twenty thirteen, and then he asks when did I stop being
vice president? And the math here is not that hard. He started being
he was elected vice president in two thousand and eight. He started being vice
president in two thousand and nine. He remained vice president until January of twenty
seventeen. He was alone elected president in twenty twenty. He started serving as
president in twenty twenty one. The timeline is not that complicated. He asked
the question in two thousand and nine, am I still vice president? Still?
Well, you just started being vice president in two thousand and nine.
He then asked the question, well, so did Trump get elected in November
of twenty seventeen, which is like, no, Trump didn't get elected in
November of twenty seventeen. Trump got elected in November of twenty sixteen. No
one gets elected in an odd number year. Everyone knows that. So here's
Biden clearly like really struggling with dates, and the most significant being trying to
recall the date when his son Bo died. So Biden is talking about stuff
that was going on in twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen. So it's after he
left the vice presidency, before he ran for president. At this time,
he's just a private citizen. He's talking about those years. And Biden says,
remember, and this is a quote from the transcript, Remember in this
timeframe, he's talking about twenty seventeen and eighteen. Remember, in this timeframe,
my son is either being deployed or is dying. And then he adds,
and so what was happening though, what month did Bo die? Oh?
God, May thirtieth. Then someone in the room with him, I
think is one of his lawyers cuts in and clarifies, No, he died
in twenty fifteen. So Biden's off by like two or three years here.
He's talking about stuff that happened after he was vice president, and he thought
for some reason that that was when Bo died. No, Bo didn't die
then. He died like two or three years earlier, in twenty fifteen.
So he's got a totally off frame of reference. Not just like it's not
a thing of saying, you know, Bo died in twenty fourteen when I
was vice president. Will No, it's extra twenty fifteen, Like it wasn't
even something like that. He's going on about this is the stuff that was
happening at this time in twenty seventeen, twenty eighteen, and he's going on
and on and on about it and saying that that's when Bo was deployed or
sick, and it's not. It was. He's off, He's way off.
Now the Democrat spin on this is pretty aggressive, But the transcript is
the transcript, like, it's not. There's nothing much you could do one
of the other things that happened that a lot of people predicted. So when
Robert Herr's Special Council report was least a couple of weeks ago, where it
talked about her saying I'm not going to charge President Biden because his memory is
so faulty he couldn't even remember when his son Bo died, Biden responded to
it angrily, saying, how dare he ask me that question? How dare
he even bring that up? And a lot of people at the time,
not having seen the transcript, were guessing, I bet her I bet the
Special counsel who is here concerned with is President Biden unlawfully retaining classified documents?
I'll bet anything that the Special Counsel was not the one who brought it up.
I'll bet anything because Biden brings up his own son's death. Biden does
that all the time, and a lot of people predicted I bet that Robert
her did not raise the issue of his son Bo. I bet Biden raised
it during this interview. And indeed, that is precisely what happened. Biden
was the one who raised the issue of his son Bo, and then was
struggling after he raised the issue. He was struggling on his own to figure
out when Bo died and was off by several years, including like different points
in his life. Bo died while he was vice president. He was talking
about this timeframe, critically important timeframe in this discussion, by the way,
when he was not vice president anymore, he was out of office. Now
what does this all mean? How is it significant? How is it not
significant? The problem for Biden is that he's in a little bit of a
damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If he tries to
claim no, no, no, I'm sharp as attack, My memory is
fine. They're cherry picking these quotes from this interview, this deposition, this
interview. It wasn't a deposition. I think I think it was just an
interview. They're cherry picking the quotes from here in order to, you know,
in order to attack me. But I've my memory's sharp as attack.
I'm I'm totally fine. Well. One of the main reasons why Robert Hurr
decided not to bring charges against President Biden at that time is quite frankly,
because President Biden, he thought, had too faulty of a memory. He
thought that a jury wouldn't convict Biden of having the necessary mental state, that
the jury would not convict an eighty something year old defendant, which is how
old Biden would be after the presidency. He thought that no jury would convict
President Biden because his memory was so faulty that the jury could would likely conclude
that Biden didn't know what he was doing. That's the only reason, according
That's like the main reason, according to Robert Herr, why he's not charging
Biden or not recommending a charge against Biden. There are other reasons not to
charge Biden. I think one of the chief reasons being Department of Justice policy
that you don't charge a president while he's in office. But her is basically
saying like, no, I wouldn't charge him in spite of that you know,
outside of that circumstance, we don't think he would be charged because a
jury wouldn't be able to convict him because his memory is so faulty. So
on the one Biden has to choose, he's either sharp as attack, but
then he should be found guilty for squirrelling away national security documents that he knows
or should know that he's not supposed to keep. Or his memory is so
bad that he can't be found guilty of scrolling away the documents. But he
probably shouldn't be president for four more years. And that's the rub, that's
where he is. He is stuck between these two options. He has to
pick one, and he's trying to sort of He and his campaign people,
his spin doctors are trying to bulldoze their way through to sort of have their
cake and eat it too. They're trying to make this argument that no,
no, no, Robert Hurr was totally wrong and inappropriate even to raise this,
and Biden's memory is great, and see her decline to charge him,
which also means that Biden he did nothing wrong, like he clearly did a
lot of stuff wrong. Now I'm of the opinion, I'm of the opinion
that both Biden has terrible memory, and I think he probably should be prosecuted.
I think the fact that he has poor memory, which is clear,
I don't know that his memory was that poor at the times that he was
stealing classified security material and keeping it for years and years. Because he was
stealing stuff and keeping it for decades when he wasn't supposed to. He was
stealing documents while he was in the Senate, and I'm saying that word stealing.
The way that senators look at classified documents is they go to a class.
They go to a secure room in a federal government owned bills building that
gets guarded and protected by the relevant intelligence and security officials. The documents are
put there for members of Congress to review. The members of Congress go in,
they review the documents, they leave. They don't take the documents with
them. How are those documents in Joe Biden's house? Not a lot of
good answers other than either he stole it, or he had someone steal it
from him, or he received a stolen document. Furthermore, even the stuff
that he had is that the classified documents he was receiving as vice president,
he retained them and I think he knew that he was retaining them. Like
I remember I had this. I know I've talked about this on the show,
but I had thisscussion with my dad. My dad was sort of taking
the view of like, well, would Biden really know like all the stuff
that's in his boxes, like after he leaves being vice president. Like so
it's that four year stretch from twenty seventeen to twenty twenty one, Joe Biden
is just John Q. Citizen at this point, he's not the vice president,
his vice presidency is over, he hasn't yet run for president. And
my dad was sort of like, well, is that I don't know.
Maybe people do have boxes of stuff shuffled around all the time. And my
response to my dad was, I think that's a reasonable question, but I
don't think it's so with Biden. Because the thing Biden was doing with his
ghost writer who's helping him write this autobiography he was working on in twenty seventeen,
which is discussed in the which you know, records of that audio recordings
of Biden's discussion with his sort of ghost rider who helped him write his autobiography
show that Biden had classified documents specifically about Afghanistan. He said, I got
the Afghanistan stuff. That's one of the things that was on that of that
audio transcript of Biden talking with his ghost writer back in twenty seventeen. A
lot of the stuff that was found in Biden's house were his as vice president
notes that he was generating based off of his documents that he had. So
it was classified documents that he had received about Afghanistan and notes that he himself
was taking. And by the way, when the vice president gets classified documents
about Afghanistan and starts writing his own notes on a legal pad, the stuff
on the legal pad is also highly classified. He can't just squirrel that away
in his pocket and hold on to it forever. Okay, that stuff has
sensitive material on it. It can't just go to his house and just sit
in his garage after he's done being vice president. And Biden was specifically squirreling
away all this stuff about Afghanistan. Why In two thousand and nine, Biden
was really opposed to President Obama doing a big troop surge in Afghanistan. Biden
wanted to get out of Afghanistan. He thought Afghanistan would become a quagmire.
He just loves that Vietnam terminology his only frame of reference. He wanted to
develop this record that he was the guy who was right within the Obama administration.
He was the guy, and he was trying to develop this kind of
historical narrative for himself. So it wasn't just his aids through some stuff in
a box. Biden was clearly squirreling away a lot of this Afghanistan stuff.
All right, when we return, Is it really so inappropriate that Robert Hurr
was talking about Biden's mental lif lapses as Democrats are arguing, I'm going to
say, no, it's not inappropriate, and I'll explain that. Why that's
next on the John Girardi Show. Why did the Special Counsel Robert Hurr go
into such detail about Biden's memory as the reason not to prosecute him. We
now have the transcript of HER's interview with Biden, and we can see Biden
was forgetting things left right and center. He was way off on when his
son bo died, totally wrong frame of reference. Biden was talking about stuff
that was happening in the years after he was done being vice president, and
he was trying to explain to her that, you know, in this time,
Bo was really sick or dying, And no, that's not when Bo
was sick and dying. Bo was sick and dying several years earlier, in
twenty fifteen while Biden was vice president. So Biden was trying to use Bo's
death, you know, trying to use that to contextualize why he had documents
during twenty seventeen and twenty eighteen when he wasn't supposed to have them. Now,
why is her noting all this stuff? A lot of the Democrats are
trying to argue, Well, Robert Herr, who was a Trump appointed US
attorney whom Merrick Garland himself selected to be the special counsel to investigate Biden for
the unlawful retention of documents. So what's a special counsel? When the Department
of Justice has an internal conflict of interest that it can't credibly investigate something,
the Attorney General can appoint somebody from the outside to serve as a special counsel.
Special counsel has the authority to investigate and bring charges if necessary. The
special counsel then has the task of providing the Attorney General when he's he or
she is done with his or her investigation in charging or whatever it is,
provides the attorney general with a report summarizing their activity, what they did,
what they didn't do, what they charged, what they didn't charge, why
they charged, why they didn't charge, and then, practically speaking, the
Attorney General has to release it. Politically speaking, the Attorney General just can't
get away with not releasing it. So Robert Hurr did that. He investigated
Biden's retention of these documents, and by the way, her was sort of
universally liked prior to the release of his report. Democrats liked him. They
thought he was a fairly you know, he was a fairly He was not
a maga hat wearing, fire breathing Trump Republican by any stretch. He was
a right leaning guy, but was kind of respected across the board as someone
who throws balls and who calls balls and strikes. Garland picked him. Let's
remember that he didn't just fall from the sky Merrick. Garland picked him,
and Garland probably wanted to pick someone who would credibly be thought of as not
just being like a Biden tody to investigate Biden. You wanted someone whose decisions
would have some credibility to it, so no one ever impeached HER's character prior
to this point. Her release is this report. And this is the weird
thing about a special council. A special counsel has to give out this report.
And part of the special counsel's report is to explain, if you don't
charge somebody, why aren't you charging him? And that's not something that most
prosecutors do. All right, If Lisa Smith Camp is investigating me for crimes
or something and she decides not to charge me, she doesn't release to the
public a report saying well, I thought about charging John Girardi with X,
Y, and Z, but I decided not to because of this, this
and this. She doesn't do that. She just doesn't charge me, and
then she just moves on. But the special counsel has to explain why he
or she didn't bring charges, And so the stuff that her brings up is
the kind of thing that a prosecutor would discuss in deciding whether or not they're
going to charge someone. Hey, is this person gonna be competent to stand
trial? Is a jury ever gonna convict this person? This person can't remember
what you're their son? Died. Is a jury really gonna believe that this
person willingly deliberately stole these documents retain them? Are we really credibly think we
can get a jury to convict this man beyond a reasonable doubt. Also,
we can't can't really bring charges against this guy until he's done being president,
which at which time he's going to be eighty something, he'll be even older,
even more frail. Do we really think a jury's going to convict this
guy. That's the kind of discussion that prosecutors have with each other trying to
figure out, well, can we get a conviction on this guy? And
aspects of the possible defendant's personality, the suspects personality, their mental state,
all of that comes into play. So her is just in this awkward position
of having those kinds of deliberations, which usually just happened behind closed doors in
a prosecutor's office. He has to, by law because of his position,
he has to broadcast that to the whole country. So Democrats yelling at scream
at Robert Hurst, just a political hack? How dary you know what a
political hack would have done? He probably would have charged Biden, is what
a political hack would it have done. He would have ignored the DJ guidance
that you're not supposed to charge a president during his presidency, or he would
have said President Biden should be charged, but he's president, so I'm not
going to charge him right now. That's what a political hack would have done.
Heck, I think that's what I would have done. I think I
would be convinced by the argument of yes, his memory is poor, but
he knew what he was doing. He was clearly grossly negligent with his handling
of these documents. He was trying to squirrel away all this stuff about Afghanistan
so he could brag about how smart he was. Not to support the Afghanistan
troop surge in two thousand and nine because he wanted to create this historical record
for himself when he was about himself when he was writing his autobiography in twenty
seventeen. I think there's plenty of reason to charge Biden. Her was far
kinder, milder, maybe too soft than I would have been. So for
Democrats, Oh, Robert Hurt, it was so unprofessional of him. How
dare he even raise it? He has to raise it, He has to
tell why he's not charging this man. Why he's not recommending charging this man.
He has to explain why, by law, he has to give this
report to the Attorney General. It's not his fault that the president raises the
issue of his son's death and wildly is off about when his son died.
So it's pretty interesting to actually see the transcript because again, I just to
make this point by nest to pick, he's either too mentally frail to remember
when his son died and therefore shouldn't be prosecuted, but then also probably shouldn't
be president, or he's still razor sharp sharp as a tackle joe, but
if he is, then he should probably be prosecuted for unlawfully retaining a bunch
of classified documents. When we return, we're going to talk about two horrible
bills in front of the California legislature having to do with euthanasia, yes,
actual euthanasia, as well as turning every er in California possibly into an abortion
clinic. That's next on the John Girardi Show. There hasn't been a lot
of activity on this issue for a little while, though I could tell that
there was some groundwork being laid for it. I think maybe efforts to expand
physician assisted suicide in California were a little bit on hold because of the pandemic
and stuff like that. But I am here to ring the bell, the
ring the alarm bell for all of you that not just physician assisted suicide,
but actual euthanasia might be coming to the state of California soon as in this
year. Now, before I get into it, I want to define my
terms. California right now has legalized physician assisted suicide, and I think we
need to define our terms between assisted suicide and euthanasia. Right So what are
the They're slightly different things. Assisted suicide means a doctor helps you to kill
yourself under various kinds of conditions. You present yourself to doctors. Doctors do
some kind of pro form a check which isn't really a very significant check or
really significant limitation to see that you're mentally competent. You have to be an
adult, and the doctor gives you a prescription for deadly life ending drugs.
Okay, you take the drug yourself, though it's a pill that you ingest.
They just give you the prescription. Euthanasia means that the doctor or some
other medical professional is the actual one killing you. Is the actual one administering
the drug to you. Both are bad. I think euthanasia is worse.
It's worse because, for one thing, you're fundamentally changing the nature of the
relationship between doctor and patient. And you've now the only thing that's providing some
kind of dividing line between a patient and a doctor killing the patient is the
patient's quote consent. But and we've seen this in countries that have legalized assistant
suicide and then euthanasia, what does consent mean? Consent is not necessarily the
strong brick wall dividing lawful euthanasia and unlawful murder that a lot of people like
to pretend it is okay. What if I tell you I don't want to
live with Alzheimer's back when I'm lucid, but then when I have Alzheimer's,
I say, don't kill me, don't kill me, don't kill me,
don't kill me, don't kill me. Whom do you listen to? Who's
consent? Do you acknowledge me before I had Alzheimer's or me now while I
have Alzheimer's, while I might still be enjoying my life. Whose consent are
we getting? What if the wife? What if the man isn't able to
What if someone, let's say a man falls out of lucidity and mental capacity
for giving consent one way or another? Does his wife get to decide?
Does his wife say yep, off the old geezer? Does she get to
decide? Should we extend it to children? Should we not? Why do
eighteen year olds get to make this decision but seventeen year olds don't? Seems
like kind of an artificial line. So this line of quote consent or you
know, well, he wants to live, but his quality of life is
terrible. Is this really what we should want for this person? Is he
right in wanting to live? And then there's the cost factor that's associated with
assisted suicide, and you think, asia, the dirty, little money grubbing
cost factor that's associated with all of this. Euthanasia and assisted suicide are way
cheaper than actually taking care of a person towards the end of his or her
life, Way cheaper. It's cheaper than chemo, it's cheaper than surgeries,
it's cheaper than dialysis, it's cheaper than all that crap. Giving someone rat
poison is a heck of a lot cheaper than actually taking care of someone it's
heck of a lot cheaper than palliative care. It's a lot cheaper than comfort
care. It's just way cheaper, no two ways around it. And oh,
what a shocker that Canada, after Canada has expanded physician assisted suicide and
expanded, expanded, expanded it, who's eligible the pool of people gets expanded?
Oh, all of a sudden, people note, Oh, how surprising
that all the tens of thousands of people who are assisted suiciding themselves in Canada,
with Canada with their single pair healthcare system which has to look at dollars
and cents and balancing things and costly chem you know, costly chemo therapy versus
not so costly rat poison to kill someone at the end of their life.
Oh, we've experienced all these cost savings from physician assistant suicide. Oh,
Collie Gene willakers. Who could have predicted that other than literally everyone? And
that that is obviously a little part of a motive that some people have is
wanting to save costs. Oh, you don't think insurance companies will notice that?
Yeah they will. Now, what is going on in California. California
currently, since twenty fifteen, has legalized physician assisted suicide. You get prescribed
the drugs, you take them yourself. You're only eligible if you have a
six month terminal prognosis. Doctor looks at you, says, I think you
have about six months or less to live here pills. Well, there's a
bill in front of the California Legislature. S B one one nine six.
S B one one ninety six will expand the California Assistant Suicide Law by one
changing the criteria from terminally ill a six month prognosis to the Canadian model a
grievous and irremediable medical condition. What this means is that there's no time limit.
You don't have to have a doctor say well you've got six months to
live. Someone could just say, well, you're gonna die of this,
But it might be ten years from now, it might be five years from
now. We don't know a person in that situation can be assisted suicided or
as we'll get into, genuinely euthanized. Two, we're lowering the standards for
who can decide whether or not they want assisted suicide euthanasia. This bill will
allow people with early to mid stage dementia to consent to assisted suicide. Or
euthanasia even though they have a condition that impairs their capacity to consent. And
this is maybe the big EIE. Three. We are straight up allowing euthanasia,
not just assisted suicide. Not a doctor prescribes, gives you the pills
that you ingest. Nope, doctor can hook up the IV for you and
pump the deadly drug straight into your veins. The doctor is killing you.
The bill would allow euthanasia by IV as happens in Canada. Currently, California
only permits assisted suicide lethal poison that a person takes orally at the time in
place of their own choosing, with or without witnesses. By the way,
this is written all by Alex Schadenberg, who's a great guy. He's the
executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. He does work all over the world
actually documenting the growth of pro euthanasia movements. He's based in the US.
Four. Another thing else to B. Eleven ninety six will do. It
will remove the California residency requirement. So right now, for legal physician assistant
suicide in California, you got to be a California resident. Will This bill
would join Oregon and Vermont and allow people just to get on a plane to
California to come kill themselves. Five removing the forty eight hour waiting period between
the first and second requests by the PATI same day death. Six remove the
sunset that currently exists for California's current physician assistant suicide law. So let's just
lay this out what this is an attack on This is an attack on the
week. And I think it's particularly when one of the main groups that maybe
wouldn't expect that are so strongly opposed to physician assistant suicide are disabled people,
people with various kinds of physical disabilities. Why, because their healthcare is the
most expensive, and physician assistant suicide is going to be pushed on them more
so than anyone else. Their healthcare is the most expensive, people will make
judgments about their quote quality of life that they won't make about people who don't
have disabilities. So it's precisely people with disabilities who often sort of disability advocacy
groups sort of lean a little soft left, not on assisted suicide, not
on euthanasia. And let's understand what happens if California starts adopting the Canadian program
of assisted suicide allowing direct euthanasia, no time limit on what your prognosis is.
I mean as flimsy as the sixth month prognosis is, because frankly,
there have been plenty of people who've gotten, you know, a six month
prognosis and have lived for the next twenty years, people who've gotten a twenty
year prognosis and have lived for a month. Okay, doctors are doing their
best faith estimate, but that's all it is. It's an estimate. We
don't know. The human body is a very complex thing. There's a million
factors that you just don't know. But let's think about this for context.
The number of assisted suicides that happen in Canada, which by the way,
has a population roughly the same size as California, has increased significantly thirteen two
hundred and forty one people assisted suicide in themselves in twenty twenty two or were
euthanized in twenty twenty two, which is a thirty one point two percent jump
over twenty twenty one. So you're going to be talking about tens of thousands
of Californians committing assisted suicide or being euthanized. People flying into California from other
states to get assisted suicide or euthanasia. People will be flying in from Texas,
coming from Arizona, coming from Nevada to kill themselves. It is a
money grubbing thing. It is an attack on the weak and the disabled.
It's an attack on people who are poor to pressure them into cheap did suicide
rather than more costly medical care or paliative care, and paliative care provision is
going to suffer. It has suffered in every jurisdiction where physician assistant suicide is
allowed. We'll talk about this more Unright to Life Radio on Saturday, along
with the bill about trying to make every ear in Californian abortion clinic. When
we returned. One last thought on Joe Biden. Another possible motive for his
mishandling of classified documents. That's next on the John Girardi Show. One thing
that people have pointed out about President Biden as the transcript of Special Counsel Robert
Hurr's interview with Biden back in October of twenty three was released, one of
the things some people have pointed out is why was Biden squirreling away all these
classified documents? And I've made the point that it wasn't just his aids moving
boxes around, and one of the boxes accidentally found its way into his garage.
Biden was deliberately squirreling away stuff specifically about Afghanistan, and he wrote about
in his autobiography or the book that his ghostwriter wrote with him. He wrote
about his position within the Obama administration, saying, I don't think we should
do an Afghanistan troop surge. I think this is the wrong thing. Biden
was trying to create this historical narrative that he Joe Biden was correct about Afghanistan,
that Afghanistan was a quagmar, and he was telling Obama that we need
to end this, and Obama didn't listen to him, and Joe Biden was
right. And so what we see is that Biden squirreled away a bunch of
Afghanistan specific stuff. We have audio of him. Robert Herr, the Special
counsel anyway, has audio of him talking with his ghostwriters saying, I've got
all the Afghanistan stuff here. And we find in his house a bunch of
Afghanistan stuff. It's either classified documents or his notes on classified info, which
when the vice president takes notes on classified info. Those notes become classified,
and we know it's Biden's own notes because he misspells Afghanistan in it. It's
his characteristic way of misspelling Afghanistan. He always left the h out. Let's
just note that dan Quail got run out of laughed out of American politics because
he misspelled potato once. So Biden, yes, he was squirling away this
material to create this record, but it was also for a book that he
made eight million dollars on eight million dollars. Can't believe that many people bought
his stupid book. So Joe Biden makes eight million dollars on this book that
he's using this classified material to help him write. It wasn't just to create
this historical narrative. It was also to make himself a bunch of money.
That'll do it for John Gerardi Show. See you guys next time on Power Talk