FACT CHECK: Biden Lied About Being Asked About His Son's Death By Special Counsel

On Wednesday, President Joe Biden's claims that special counsel Robert Hur asked him when his late son, Beau Biden, died have been reported to be lies. Last week, Biden told reporters in a surprise White House press conference after Hur's 345-page report was published, "How in the hell dare he raise that? Frankly, when I was asked the question, I thought to myself, it wasn't any of their damn business." According to a report, Hur never asked Biden that question. In reality, Biden voluntarily brought up his son's death after being asked about his Virginia rental home workflow from 2016 to 2018. Biden failed to answer the question and instead answered the incorrect year of when his son died.

"But Hur never asked that question, according to two people familiar with Hur's five-hour interview with the president over two days last October. It was the president, not Hur or his team, who first introduced Beau Biden's death, they said," NBC News reports. Hur's 345-page report declined to bring charges against Biden over his illegal handling of classified documents when he was a senator and vice president, describing him as an "elderly man" with "poor memory." "If Joe Biden is not mentally fit to stand trial, then he certainly isn't mentally fit to be President of the United States. It's time to do something about it," Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) wrote in a Facebook post.

"You know, look, if he's not going to be charged, that's up to them. But then I should not be charged. This is nothing more than selective persecution of Biden's political opponent: me," leading 2024 presidential candidate and 45th President Donald Trump said in a speech on Friday to a National Rifle Association crowd.

In June, Trump pleaded not guilty to all 37 fraudulent counts relating to him supposedly "mishandling" classified documents from Special Counsel Jack Smith. President Trump has turned Jack Smith's frivolous federal indictment of him on its head as he cites the Presidential Records Act as a defense. "Under the Presidential Records Act, which is civil, not criminal, I had every right to have these documents," Trump said after returning from Miami during a speech at his Trump National Golf Club in New Jersey. The Presidential Records Act is a 1978 law that allows presidents to decide what records to keep and take, regardless of what the National Archives and Records Administration thinks.

Trump is correct, as per usual, to use this act as a defense. Senior Attorney Michael Bekesha, a man who lost a case against former President Bill Clinton for taking White House audiotapes when he left office and kept them in his sock drawer, explains Clinton was safe because he was a president who saw it fit to take the documents before his term ended. "The same is true with Mr. Trump," Bekesha writes in an opinion piece for the Wall Street Journal. He adds, "Mr. Trump, like Mr. Clinton, took those boxes with him when he left office. As of noon on Jan. 20, 2021, whatever remained at the White House was presidential records. Whatever was taken by Mr. Trump wasn't. That was the position of the Justice Department in 2010 and the ruling by Judge Jackson in 2012."

"SO NOW THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS THAT THE PRESIDENTIAL RECORDS ACT, PLUS THE CLINTON SOCKS CASE, TOTALLY EXONERATED ME FROM THE CONTINUING WITCH HUNT BROUGHT ON BY CORRUPT JOE BIDEN, THE DOJ, DERANGED JACK SMITH, AND THEIR RADICAL LEFT, MARXIST THUGS, WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO DROP ALL CHARGES AGAINST ME, APOLOGIZE, AND RETURN EVERYTHING THAT WAS ILLEGALLY TAKEN (FOURTH AMENDMENT) FROM MY HOME?" Trump wrote in a post on his top-rated social media platform, Truth Social.

"THIS WAS NOTHING OTHER THAN ELECTION INTERFERENCE!" Trump added. In an op-ed on Substack by former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, he concludes that a "[c]riminal indictment of former president has no legitimate basis." "The bottom line is that if Mr. Trump or his lawyers allege — even without his testifying — that he declassified the documents, a criminal charge of unauthorized possession of classified documents will be difficult to prove. That doesn't mean that a prosecutor could not get a grand jury to indict this particular ham sandwich. It does mean that it's unlikely that a conviction against Mr. Trump would be sustainable," Dershowitz writes. "Based on what we know, we believe that there is no legitimate basis for a criminal indictment of Mr. Trump based on the material that was found at Mar-a-Lago."

You can follow Reed Cooper on Instagram @GodBlessDJT, Truth Social @ReedCooper, and Twitter/X @ReedMCooper.