White House Under Fire for Allegedly Falsifying Joe Biden’s Testimony Transcript

Recent shocking revelations have come to light, exposing the White House’s admission in federal court to tampering with the transcript of Joe Biden’s testimony with Special Counsel Robert Hur.

These egregious alterations were made to artificially bolster Biden’s competence during his extensive questioning about his mishandling of classified documents.

Earlier this year, Washington Post journalist Matt Viser disclosed that Special Counsel Robert Hur had determined that Joe Biden recklessly mishandled sensitive materials found at his home and former office.

Furthermore, the investigation uncovered that Biden had shared government secrets with his ghostwriter, underscoring his blatant disregard for national security.

Adding to this damning report, it was revealed that during interviews with the Special Counsel, Biden struggled to answer even fundamental questions, such as the years he served as Vice President or when his son Beau passed away from brain cancer.

However, despite these findings, the Department of Justice decided not to pursue charges against Biden due to concerns that a jury might consider him too mentally incompetent to stand trial.

The report highlighted Biden’s memory lapses and hazy recollection of significant events in his political career. It also noted his potential defense strategy of presenting himself as an elderly man with a poor memory.

The damning report reads, in part:

In his interview with our office, Mr. Biden’s memory was worse. He did not remember when he was vice president, forgetting on the first day of the interview when his term ended (“if it was 2013 – when did I stop being Vice President?”), and forgetting on the second day of the interview when his term began (“in 2009, am I still Vice President?”). He did not remember, even within several years, when his son Beau died.

And his memory appeared hazy when describing the Afghanistan debate that was once so important to him. Among other things, he mistakenly said he “had a real difference” of opinion with General Karl Eikenberry when, in fact, Eikenberry was an ally whom Mr. Biden cited approvingly in his Thanksgiving memo to Barack Obama.

We have also considered that, at trial, Mr. Biden would likely present himself to a jury, as he did during our interview of him, as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory.

It would be difficult to convince a jury that they should convict him — by then a former president well into his eighties — of a serious felony that requires a mental state of willfulness.”

The White House faced a critical decision regarding the release of the interview transcript. Biden’s legal team argued that Hur’s references to Biden’s memory issues during the interview were misleading and unfairly prejudicial.

In response, Joe Biden publicly criticized Robert Hur during an impromptu press conference after the report was released.

In a separate development, Republicans sought to hold U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt for refusing to release audio recordings of Joe Biden’s interview with Special Counsel Robert Hur.

The House Oversight Chairman expressed frustration over the Justice Department’s resistance and emphasized the importance of obtaining these recordings for their investigation into President Biden’s handling of classified documents and fitness for office.

This standoff led to a heated exchange between White House counsel Ed Siskel and House GOP members.

Siskel accused them of seeking the recordings for partisan political purposes while GOP representatives insisted on their lawful right to access crucial evidence, accusing them of only wanting the recordings “to chop them up” and use them for political reasons.

“The absence of a legitimate need for the audio recordings lays bare your likely goal — to chop them up, distort them, and use them for partisan political purposes,” Ed Siskel wrote.

He added, “Demanding such sensitive and constitutionally protected law enforcement materials from the Executive Branch because you want to manipulate them for potential political gain is inappropriate.”

Furthermore, new revelations emerged indicating that the White House admitted altering Joe Biden’s testimony transcript in an effort to portray him as less incompetent than depicted in initial reports.

This revelation surfaced following legal actions by organizations like the Heritage Foundation and Judicial Watch demanding transparency from the Department of Justice regarding original recordings of Biden’s testimony.

These efforts were met with opposition from allies within the Justice Department who aimed to delay or prevent disclosure until after an upcoming election, according to sources associated with oversight initiatives targeting the current administration.

Mike Howell, Executive Director of Heritage Oversight Project expressed disappointment at these delaying tactics and questioned why such crucial evidence was being withheld from public scrutiny.

He criticized what he perceived as unnecessary obstructionism on behalf of President Biden and drew parallels between this situation and past instances of political corruption.

Subsequently, following pressure from organizations like The Heritage Foundation and Judicial Watch through legal action, it came to light that alterations had been made in Joe Biden’s criminal transcript by officials within the White House itself.

The organization overseeing these efforts emphasized that this revelation marked a pivotal turning point in their pursuit of truth and accountability in governance.