It is important to get rounds on target, and it is important to aim at the right target. Both of these goals must be met, and in discussing the recent Hur report on the investigation of Biden’s mis-handling of classified documents, we are succeeding magnificently at one of these, but failing the other. That’s still zero points.
Hur did not say that Biden was incompetent.
These are the relevant passages:
“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.”
Suddenly the right-o-sphere is full of supposed quotes and interpretations that Hur said Biden was incompetent to stand trial. That is not what he said. He said that Biden’s old man appearance would likely render a jury incapable of assessing his criminal intent — that the jury would decide that the President was incompetent. He said that this likelihood made prosecution unreasonable because there was so little chance of conviction.
I don’t like it. I don’t have to like it. But that’s what the report says. When we make untrue claims about otherwise true facts, our whole argument is easily dismissed.
We all know that Biden in flamingly incompetent, that he’s not in charge, that this has been true since before 2020, and that the whole Marxist apparatus knows this, and that it is in fact the goal, not just some kooky bunch of facts. Evidence lies around everywhere. No need to puff this report into something it is not, at the expense of the rest of the argument.