Calls for the removal of Attorney General Merrick Garland, who serves under Democrat President Joe Biden, have been growing in number. The U.S. Department of Justice has raised questions about Biden’s handling of classified documents, although no legal action has been taken. The report from the special counsel has sparked a heated debate about Biden’s mental fitness and the impartiality of the DOJ. The investigation into Biden’s mishandling of classified documents began in January 2023 and was led by special counsel Robert Hur, appointed by AG Garland.
The discovery of classified documents from the Obama era at Biden’s Delaware home and the Penn Biden Center office prompted this inquiry, which took place between November 2022 and January 2023. After completing the investigation, Hur’s report, released on a Thursday, confirmed that Biden would not be prosecuted. This decision was influenced by Biden’s cooperation during the investigation and the lack of conclusive evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
While the decision not to prosecute may have been expected, the report’s commentary on Biden’s mental fitness came as a surprise. Describing the president as an “elderly man with a poor memory” who means well, the report’s observations have sparked significant controversy, especially regarding Garland’s decision to release the report in its entirety without any redactions. This unfiltered disclosure has faced sharp criticism from various sources.
Laurence Tribe, a professor emeritus of constitutional law at Harvard University and Biden’s former professor, expressed his disappointment on X. Tribe accused Garland of going to great lengths to appear neutral, particularly criticizing the unredacted comments on Biden’s mental fitness. Sara Spector and Robert Shrum also joined the chorus of disapproval, voicing their concerns about Garland.
The criticisms of Biden’s cognitive abilities were specifically targeted, raising doubts about the judgment of the Attorney General.
In a letter to Congress, Garland defended his decision to release the full report, stating that it was in line with public interest and complied with legal constraints and departmental policies. Despite his explanation, this statement failed to alleviate the increasing dissatisfaction among critics who viewed the report as a possible misuse of power.
Furthermore, the report has not only sparked debates about its contents and Garland’s decision-making, but it has also revived discussions about Biden’s age and mental competence, topics that have cast a shadow over his reelection campaign.
