Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Live Event/Special
Special Counsel Hur Testifies On Biden Classified Docs Investigation; Schiff Rips Hur For "Political Firestorm" Over Biden Memory Remarks. Aired 1:30-2p ET
Aired March 12, 2024 - 13:30 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[13:30:00]
REP. LAUREL LEE (R-FL): And then, if we could turn back to the concept of those principles of federal prosecution, those are the additional factors aggravating or mitigating that you might consider and ultimately reaching a charging decision here, is that right?
ROBERT HUR, FORMER SPECIAL COUNSEL: They do include such things that are referred to as aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
LEE: There's one thing I want to go back to, though, to be clear. It's been said today that your report is tantamount to a total exoneration of President Biden. That's not correct, is it?
HUR: That is not correct.
LEE: All right. Thank you, sir.
I yield the balance of my time to the chair.
REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): Gentle Lady yields back.
The chair now recognize Gentle Lady from North Carolina.
REP. DEBORAH ROSS (D-NC): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you, Mr. Hur, also, for your patients, you're almost to what, three-and-a-half-hours? So almost as much as Biden.
Throughout your report, you repeated -- you repeatedly cite and credit a number of innocent explanations for the presence of classified materials at the president's home and other locations.
Innocent explanations that you admit that you cannot refute. And I'd like to just focus on a few of them. And I'll give you citations.
One of these explanations for the presence of classified documents is that a member of the president's staff maintained those documents when he was the vice president and then mistakenly included them in sets of documents that we're later sent to the two locations such as the Penn Biden Center and the University of Delaware. Is that correct?
HUR: I believe that's correct. But if you have a specific page number for me, that would help me. ROSS: We'll get you one. That would be great.
You also found that another innocent explanation to be more likely than a criminal explanation for the presence of classified documents that we're found at the Penn Biden Center and the University of Delaware. Is that correct?
HUR: Correct.
ROSS: Right.
And then let's talk about the documents in the president's garage. As you noted, a reasonable juror could conclude that the location of the documents surrounded by household junk is not a place where a person knowingly and intentionally stores classified documents that are critical to his legacy.
Instead, it looks more like a place where a person stores classified documents that he's unaware of. That's on page 2019 of your report, correct?
HUR: That is something that a reasonable juror could factor into his or her consideration of whether or not the prisoner had criminal willful intent.
ROSS: Great.
And you also noted that President Biden was allowed to have classified documents in his home for eight years as vice president. And then again, when he was president.
And that he also had layers of staff who we're responsible for assembling, carrying, storing, and retrieving these types of classified documents.
HUR: Correct.
ROSS: And because of these facts, you determined it was, quote, "entirely possible that the president did not know he still had some of these documents in his home when his vice presidency ended in 2017."
That's on page 215.
Entirely possible.
HUR: Entirely possible yes.
ROSS: So that's the citation.
I'm going to keep going because my time is running while you're looking.
So you cite -- you also cite the president's cooperation with your investigation as evidence that he did not have criminal intent. And I want to quote you here because this is important. You wrote, "Most significantly, Mr. Biden's self-reported to the
government that the Afghanistan documents we're in his Delaware garage and consented to the search of his house to retrieve them and other -- and other classified materials.
"He also consented to searches of other locations. And later in the investigation, he participated in an interview with our office that lasted more than five hours and provided written answers to most of our written questions.
"Many will conclude that a press up president who knew he was illegally storing classified documents in his home would not have allowed such a search of his home to discover those documents and then answered the governments questions afterwards."
Page 210.
And then you said that you "expect this argument about the president's innocence to carry real force for many reasonable jurors."
Because in your words, "reasonable jurors will conclude that Mr. Biden, a powerful sophisticated person with access to the best advice in the world, would not have handed the government classified documents from his own home on a silver platter if he had willfully retained those documents for years."
[13:35:07]
Just as a person who destroys evidence and lies, often proves his guilt, a person who produces evidence and cooperates will seem by many to be innocent."
Again, page 210.
You -- as you said in your report, "It would be reasonable for juror to reach that conclusion.
"And that a president advised by counsel would not have informed investigators at the presence of classified documents in his home, invited agents in to search of every nook and cranny of his home or other residents or sat for an hours-long interview or answered pages of written questions all going to his full cooperation and his lack of criminal intent."
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I yield back.
JORDAN: Gentle Lady yields back.
Mr. Hur, we've got three more we're going to do and then we're going to take votes and then we'll just have a couple more after that.
So I'm going to start with the gentleman from Kentucky, is recognized.
REP. THOMAS MASSIE (R-KY): I yield to the chairman.
JORDAN: I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Hur, are you opposed to the U.S. Congress having access to the audio tapes of the people you interviewed during your investigation?
HUR: Chairman, I am not in a position to articulate an opinion one way or the other. That is not really up to me.
I'm a former employee of the Department of Justice. I would refer you to the White House and DOJ leaders.
JORDAN: You're an accomplished lawyer. Is there any reason why we shouldn't, why the United States Congress shouldn't have access to the same information you had access to and that was the basis of your decision?
HUR: Chairman, it's not for me to opine on what materials --
JORDAN: The Justice Department released the transcripts the day of the hearing. It'd be nice if we'd had them in a more, I think, a better time for the committee to prepare for our questioning for you.
They released him today, White House and Justice, but just - pardon -- releasing today.
Be nice if we actually had the audio tapes, too. Again, is there any reason why you can see why the American people and their representatives in the United States Congress should not have access to those tapes?
HUR: Chairman, what I can tell you is that my assessment that went into my conclusions that I described my report was based not solely on the transcript. It was based on all of the evidence, including the audio recordings.
JORDAN: Great point. And that's where I was going.
So this was valuable evidence for you as the special counsel named to investigate this issue, valuable evidence for you to reach your conclusion and the statements you put in your report.
And what I'm asking, is shouldn't the United States Congress have access to that same information?
HUR: Chairman, again, it is not for me to weigh into what information Congress should or should not have.
But what I will tell you is that the audio recordings were part of the evidence, of course, that I considered in coming to my conclusions.
JORDAN: I'll yield back to the gentleman from Kentucky. And hopefully, he'll yield to the gentlemen from North Dakota.
MASSIE: Yield to the gentleman from North Dakota.
REP. KELLY ARMSTRONG (R-ND): Thank you. Mr. Hur, chapters of your book, or your report, you detail that Mr. Biden retained in his Delaware basement classified documents relating back to his time as a U.S. Senator in the 70s, correct?
HUR: Correct.
ARMSTRONG: And even more Senate papers, dating back to the '70s through 1991, we're found in the University of Delaware Morris Libraries and in Biden Senate papers collection, correct?
HUR: Correct.
ARMSTRONG: And even more Senate papers dating back to the 1970s and 1980s were found in Biden's Delaware garage?
HUR: I believe that -- yes, that's correct.
ARMSTRONG: And, quote, "Mr. Biden had nearly 50 years' experience dealing with classified information, including as a member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and a member and chairman of the Senate Committee on Judiciary, a member and chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and vice president of the United States.
"And that he was deeply familiar with the measures taken to safeguard classified information and the reasons for them," correct?
HUR: That language certainly sounds familiar, Congressman. But if you have a page citation for me, I can continue.
ARMSTRONG: And as vice president, is it correct that, in 2011, Mr. Biden received advice from his staff about the need to secure classified information in the form of notes?
HUR: Correct.
ARMSTRONG: Including his first counsel -- or his first counsel, Cynthia Hogan?
HUR: Correct.
ARMSTRONG: And he was advised in writing in 2011 by Hogan that classified notes must be attained in secure safes and stored in a secured facility?
HUR: Correct.
ARMSTRONG: His second counsel, John McGrail (ph), also advised Biden that all of Mr. Biden's records, including his notes, would be sent to the National Archives and Biden understood and accepted that, correct?
HUR: That's correct, with the exception that Mr. McGrail (ph) was Vice President Biden's final counsel, not his second one.
ARMSTRONG: All right.
And on his way out, Mr. Biden was also appraised of his obligations by the National Archives staff twice more that his classified notes should be secured in a SCIF? HUR: That particular fact is not immediately coming to mind,
Congressman, but if you have a page citation, I can confirm it for you.
ARMSTRONG: Well, did Mr. Biden have 30 years' experience handling this information? He received advice from at least two separate counsels, the National Archives staff, and he has demonstrated enough knowledge of the law to attack -- attack President Trump in public over the same exact issue in detail.
This is where I can't get into this. I just have a problem with this. In your report and this testimony, a reasonable person would conclude that Mr. Biden knowingly retained national defense information and failed to deliver it to an appropriate government official.
[13:40:06]
And that he knew his conduct was unlawful. And I think that's where we end up here and that's what the point is.
Over the last three election cycles, there's only been three people who have ran for president, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Donald Trump. All three of them had been accused of mishandling classified documents. Only one of them has been prosecuted. And that's what the American people see. That's what we see.
We had Hillary Clinton who ran a program called BleachBit on our server. They used hammers to destroy evidence. Joe Biden has a 50-year history of misplacing classified documents and numerous different positions -- places.
All of these cases have the same underlying elements of the crime, the same fact patterns, and yet we only see one person being prosecuted.
And with that, I yield back to the gentleman from Kentucky.
UNIDENTIFIED CONGRESSMAN: My time's expired. I yield back.
JORDAN: The gentleman yields back.
The ranking member is recognized for unanimous consent.
REP. JERRY NADLER (D-NY): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, in light of what the chairman previously said, I asked unanimous consent that all transcribed interviews taken by the committee this year be made public.
JORDAN: There's an objection to that.
The Gentle Lady from Missouri is recognized for five minutes.
REP. CORI BUSH (R-MO): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you for being here, Mr. Hur.
St. Louis and I are here today, once again, to focus on the real issues that affect our communities instead of partisan hit jobs.
Let me start by saying that the potential mishandling of classified information is a serious issue. And I believe it was appropriate for the attorney general to appoint both special counsels in the Biden and Trump cases.
As my colleagues have pointed out, President Biden fully complied with the investigation conducted by Special Counsel Hur, who did not find evidence sufficient to warrant criminal charges.
Despite this outcome, Republicans have used the special counsel's report to further their long-standing efforts to reelect -- reelect the former white supremacists-in-chief, Donald Trump, who faces 40 criminal charges related to the mishandling of classified documents, including obstruction of justice.
While President Biden returned all of the classified material and complied with the special counsel's investigation, let's remind ourselves what Donald Trump has said and done.
He refused to turn over the classified documents in his possession to the National Archives. He is on tape sharing documents he said he could have declassified when he was president.
He wrongly claimed in an interview that the Presidential Records Act allows him to do whatever he wants and he was allowed to do everything he did.
He also said on his right-wing social media platform, quote, "I'm allowed to do all of this." He continues to admit to his possession of these documents on the campaign trail.
So this hearing is not a good-faith oversight effort. It is just the latest in a long line of dysfunctional and destructive actions taken by this Republican majority.
They don't care about responsible governance or making peoples' lives better. They don't have an affirmative agenda. They are throwing whatever they can at the wall and hoping it sticks.
And they have zero credibility to talk about mental acuity when they support Donald Trump, the same Donald Trump will mix up Joe Biden and Barack Obama and Nikki Haley and Nancy Pelosi.
The same Donald Trump, who incorrectly pronounced the words Venezuela respected and United States. The same Donald Trump who calls January 6th defendants hostages.
And the same Donald Trump who believed bleach injections would treat COVID-19.
It is deeply hypocritical for anyone who champions this man for the presidency to talk about the mental acuity of anyone else.
But this is nothing new. This has been a consistent pattern of the Republican majority in this Congress, from the sham impeachment investigation that has completely collapsed, to the absurd impeachment of Secretory -- Secretary Mayorkas.
Republicans have solely focused on destroying the incumbent president, destroying the Democratic Party, destroying progressive movements for social justice, all so that they can reelect one of the worst presidents of all time.
Now, it is well known that I have disagreements with President Biden on certain issues. My concerns are rooted in the desire to resolve policy matters and help him take better positions that save more lives.
That's not what Republicans are doing. That's not what these investigations and attacks are about. They are trying everything they can to turn back the clock on our rights and our freedoms. And we cannot take the bait.
Let's focus on policy, let's focus on substance, let's focus on saving and improving the lives of our constituents. Not misusing the precious time and resources of this committee, not being dishonest just because this serves our political interests?
[13:45:07]
We are better than that. And our country deserves better than all of this.
I will continue to reject these absurd distractions from the investments we need in the communities that we represent. Let's focus on that instead of this irresponsible and easily repudiated Republican clown show.
Thank you, and I yield back.
REP. NATHANIEL MORAN (R-TX): The Gentle Lady yields back.
I recognize myself for five minutes.
Special Counsel Hur, thank you for a number of things. First, thank you for agreeing to testify today.
Second, thank you also for sharing your family's story at the beginning of your testimony. It is an extraordinary story of them coming to America.
Third, let me also thank you for your in-depth investigation and your detailed report and generally for your service as special counsel. It's not something that I think many people would look for. And certainly comes with a lot of burdens. So thank you for your work.
In your opening statement, you described your investigation as, quote, "thorough and independent," and I agree with that.
One where you attempted to give, quote, "rigorous and detailed analysis." I also agree with that. And one where you say, you, quote, "must show your work," which we very much appreciate today. We don't normally see that. Did I recall your opening statement correctly as it relates to those quotes?
HUR: Yes, sir, you do.
MORAN: In fact, as part of your investigation, you interviewed about 150 different witnesses. You looked at millions of different documents. Because you wanted to do a thorough investigation, isn't that true?
HUR: Correct.
MORAN: And you did this because you took your investigation extremely seriously and you want it to reach accurate conclusions, correct?
HUR: Very much.
MORAN: Then let's review some of your specific findings regarding the issues pertaining to competency and mental capacity of President Biden because, as you say, this is very important to whether or not there was criminal willful intent.
As you can see, I've set forth a number of different quotes up here on this board that I've prepared, some of which I'll read to you.
Page five, you say, Mr. Biden's -- quote, "Mr. Biden's memory was significantly limited."
Then again, on page six, you say, "Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."
And then on page 207, you say, "Mr. Biden's memory also appeared to have significant limitations."
And then again, on page 208, "He did not remember when he was vice president, and he did not remember even several -- even within several years when his son, Beau, died."
You finally make the statement, on page 248, quote, "For these jurors, Mr. Biden's apparent lapses and failures in February and April 2017 will likely appear consistent with the diminished capacities and faulty memory he showed."
Those we're astounding conclusions to me. And as I looked through those quotes, I'd say I harken back to my time before Congress. I was a judge. And one of the things that I oversaw was guardianships.
And frankly, when I read your -- when I read your conclusions, red flags began to go up on my mind because I oversaw hundreds of guardianships back in Texas.
And as I saw your conclusions, I began to wonder, what is the D.C. statutes say about guardianships and how you define an incapacitated individual in Washington, D.C.?
And I want to show the statute because I presume -- are you familiar with the statute at all?
HUR: I am not, Congressman.
MORAN: So I didn't think you'd probably reviewed that. So let me just read to you some of these -- some of the definition here.
"An adult who is -- whose ability to receive and evaluate information effectively and/or communicate decisions is impaired to such an extent that he or she lacks the capacity to manage all or some of his financial resources."
That's the first part of the definition of incapacity, an incapacitated individual under the guardianship statute in the District of Columbia.
And quite frankly, I see tons of overlap from what you set forth in your testimony, in your written report, and the definition here. The phrases are almost identical.
I would posit that if he cannot manage national top-secret resources, I'm not sure how he can manage his personal financial resources.
And given your reports findings that his memory was, quote, "significantly limited" and that he is a person with, quote, "diminished faculties" and with, quote, "fact -- faulty memory," it makes me wonder how close he is coming to meeting this definition of an incapacitated individual.
Cites that he should have a guardian appointed by the D.C. courts for his personhood. There's at least I believe a prima facia argument to say that there is substantial evidence to indicate such.
And you mentioned is not just what you've written in the report, but it was your -- the demeanor of President Biden as you interviewed him?
[13:50:06]
I'll say, in conclusion, whether he does or does not meet this definition, I believe your findings raise significant concerns about his current fitness for the office of president, and certainly, it's his fitness going forward in the future.
And I appreciate the fact you are brazen enough to raise this issue in this report. Because you knew this would be significant in your findings, but you did so based on a very significant, very detailed, very thorough, independent report.
And I praise you for that, doing your duty in such a way. Thank you, Special Counsel.
I yield back.
JORDAN: Gentleman yields back.
Mr. Hur, we have votes on the floor. We have a few more members who will do their five minutes of questioning. So we're going to reassess and then we will convene 10 minutes after
the conclusion of the last vote.
I believe we only have a couple of votes? Is that right?
Two votes. So you know, Congress had, that'll take a while. But well get back to you as soon as we can.
And there's -- there's food in the backroom for -- I think we still have some left that you're welcome to.
But that we're -- we stand in recess until 10 minutes after the last vote.
ANDERSON COOPER, CNN HOST: And welcome to CNN's breaking news coverage. We have been watching former Special Counsel Robert Hur testify to Congress on the Biden classified documents probe.
I'm Anderson Cooper in New York, alongside Jake Tapper in Washington.
And for some four hours now, lawmakers from both parties had been grilling and sparring with Hur for very different reasons.
Republicans argue he dropped the ball by not pursuing charges, despite concluding in his report that Joe Biden mishandled classified documents. Democrats say the Hur's characterization or President Biden's age and memory was an unnecessary detail.
JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: That's right, Anderson.
And some Democrats went much further, accusing Hur of purposely trying to damage Biden in order to score political points with Donald Trump suggesting that he was fishing for an appointment in a second Trump Justice Department. It's a motivation that Hur denies.
Let's -- let's talk about this if we can.
Paula Reid, let me start with you.
What do we want to run these clips? Let's -- Let's -- OK, let's run these clips from the -- from the hearing.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
HUR: My assessment and 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.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: All right, let's talk about this.
Paula Reid, what's your take on it so far? PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Special Counsel,
former Special Counsel Rob Hur, he understood the assignment. He showed up today, not to show favor with either side.
He did not reveal much new information. He took hits from members of both sides of the aisle and continued to defer to his report.
I don't think anybody would walk away from today's hearing believing that he is a partisan. Or if they do, right, they all everyone believes he's a partisan for the other side.
And I spoke with a source close to Hur earlier today, and they said that's when you know you are good special counsel, when everybody is mad at you. And I don't think he did anything to change that today during this hearing.
This is what he showed up to do. They said a good special counsel sticks to the facts, doesn't draw outside the lines of the report, and that's exactly what he did today.
He said he would not entertain hypotheticals, even referred to footnotes in certain answers. I mean, he really understood what he needed to do today.
TAPPER: Evan Osnos, you are the unofficial Biden biographer. You've interviewed him many times.
In this 300-plus pages or whatever this is of a transcript of his interview, five hours' worth, is this the Joe Biden, you know? Is this like he forgot some details? But also can be avuncular and friendly, also can be annoyed
Is this him?
EVAN OSNOS, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Very much so. I was going to say, if you ever wonder what it's like to sit down and talk to Joe Biden, read this transcript.
(LAUGHTER)
OSNOS: He tells some stories, some of which go back 10, 15 years. He also hunts around for a date. At one moment, he says he was I vice president at that point?
And the reason he's doing it is because he's telling some story about the paper flow, the management of documents in his office.
One of the things that I think comes through is this was an exchange in which he answered every question and sometimes his answer was, I don't know, or it's sometimes a spicier version of that. He would say, I don't have any god damned idea.
Because they we're talking about things that, in his mind, were not the things that a vice president or former vice president should be thinking about. He was asked literally questions like, what color were the file
folders that we're used for these materials? Were they green, were they blue, were they yellow, and he's answering, well, I don't know.
So you know, the takeaway is some people say, well, maybe you should have been more engaged, more involved in these kinds of recordkeeping issues. But his counsel would say, if you don't know the answer, say you don't know.
[13:55:02]
So you get over and over again in the course of this interview, him saying, I don't know, I don't have any idea.
TAPPER: Gloria Borger, you've been covering Joe Biden for a long time in Washington, D.C. Is this him?
And what do you think of the congressmen that we just heard from Congressman Moran, Republican from Texas, suggesting that if -- that if Joe Biden does not have a complete grasp on all the information that he was asked in this transcript, then he perhaps doesn't have the capacity to be president.
GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, first of all, these were things that happened on the personal level. It is the Joe Biden I know.
These are things that happened a long time ago. Yes, he should have known when his vice presidency ended, et cetera, et cetera. But he doesn't know what color folders were and what went into boxes as compared to Donald Trump, who actually directed people to put things in boxes.
And I think the question that the Democrats we're raising today was about this issue of his memory and senility and whatever.
And Adam Schiff really when at Hur and said that this was a political choice and asked him why you chose a general pejorative description of Biden's --
(CROSSTALK)
TAPPER: Lets -- let's run that -- let's run that clip if we can. It's sought 20 and then well come back to on the other end of this, Gloria.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REP. ADAM SCHIFF (D-CA): You chose a general pejorative reference to the president. You understood when you made that decision, didn't you, Mr. Hur, that you would ignite a political firestorm with that language, didn't you?
HUR: Congressman, politics played no part whatsoever in my investigative steps --
(CROSSTALK) SCHIFF: But you understood nevertheless
(CROSSTALK)
SCHIFF: Mr. Hur, Mr. Hur, you cannot tell me you're so naive as to think your words wouldn't have created a political firestorm. You understood that, didn't you, when you wrote those words, when you decided to include those words, when you decided to go beyond specific references to documents?
You understood how they would be manipulated by -- by my colleagues here on the GOP side of the isle, by President Trump? You understood that, did you not?
HUR: Congressman, what I understood is the regulations that govern my conduct as special counsel --
(CROSSTALK)
SCHIFF: And those regulations --
(CROSSTALK)
SCHIFF: -- those regulations --
HUR: -- confidential report for the attorney general -
(CROSSTALK)
SCHIFF: Which you knew would not --
(CROSSTALK)
SCHIFF: -- confidential --
HUR: What I did, Congressman, is I followed the rules --
SCHIFF: You knew it would not be confidential.
(CROSSTALK)
SCHIFF: You knew it would not be confidential, didn't you?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
TAPPER: So there he is, Adam Schiff, who is running for Senate in California, and known for being a rather partisan Democrat, out there saying, you put this in there because you knew it would hurt Biden, right?
BORGER: Right. And I think you can hear the White House applauding as he said that.
Because, you know, the Democrats are making the point that there was no reason, particularly if you look at the transcript where he made mistakes, but also went back and corrected himself and asked for guidance. When was that, you know, I think I got that wrong.
And what Adam Schiff is saying is that this was done purposefully, that there we're other words he could have used rather than an elderly man with a poor memory. You know, you have this image so this poor guy sitting on a park bench feeding the birds. That's -- that's not who Joe Biden is.
And I think Hur -- and you would know this best, Paula -- is somebody who's so literal.
REID: Yes.
(LAUGHTER)
BORGER: Who -- who -- and it has this reputation of being so literal that what he wrote is by the book.
And he -- he had to know the political consequences of it.
TAPPER: Sure.
BORGER: But in his mind, he did what he had to do.
REID: And when Hur walked up to the line, he didn't quite say this, but he infers that had you have the transcript that's what you're looking at. But remember, I listened to it live in real time.
And again, a source close to him earlier today said, look, it's notable that the White House released the transcript today. Clearly, they were worried about more damaging information in this hearing.
But what no one is hearing is the tape and that is what Rob Hur used to draw these conclusions.
KAREN FINNEY, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: You know, it's interesting, I think the timing of this hearing matters greatly because it comes after Joe Biden just had a very successful effective State of the Union address.
So nobody who saw him on that night is going to think of him, as Gloria said, a kindly old man sitting on a park bench feeding the pigeons.
Additionally, it comes as our own CNN reporting has reveal new details about how recklessly President Trump, former President Trump handled the documents that we're at Mar-a-Lago.
And so I think you could see -- what was interesting to me was how many Republicans were trying to muddy the waters knowing that there's more damning evidence coming out about Trump, and probably more that will come throughout the course of this year as these cases move on.
DAVID URBIN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: So look, I think Special Counsel Hur did a good job today, right? He did what-- he did what he showed up to do, as Paula said, he called balls and strikes.
[13:59:55]
The people who said he was out to get a job in the next Trump administration, I think he clearly proved that that's not the case because he really wasn't carrying their water.
I think he was showing the work on the old man sitting on the bench, feeding the pigeons. He's like, this is why we did not move forward to prosecution.
