President Biden’s assertion of executive privilege over audio recordings of his interviews with Special Counsel Robert Hur has raised concerns among some legal experts. The White House claims that the move was made at the request of Attorney General Merrick Garland to protect law enforcement files. However, experts argue that the use of executive privilege in this case is “extremely problematic” and “strictly a political decision.”
Biden’s assertion of executive privilege is based on the principle that a president can engage in candid conversations with top advisers without fear of public disclosure. However, experts point out that the transcript of the interview has already been released, eliminating any national security or deliberative process concerns. They argue that the only conceivable reason for withholding the recordings is to protect Biden from potential embarrassment.
The House Judiciary and Oversight Committees have subpoenaed the recordings, but the Justice Department has refused to turn them over, citing executive privilege. The House may still vote to hold Garland in contempt for refusing to comply with the subpoena.
Former federal prosecutor John Malcolm argues that executive privilege is not designed to hide information that may be embarrassing to a president and that Biden has no legitimate reason for withholding the recordings. Former senior official John Shu believes that the Biden administration is using Garland as a public face to avoid answering questions about the privilege claim.
Andy McCarthy, another former federal prosecutor, calls Biden’s privilege assertion “crude politics” and believes that it is an attempt to manufacture a legal cover for a political decision. He argues that the tape would be embarrassing for Biden and that he is stonewalling to avoid the political damage.
The Justice Department has not commented on the matter, and Fox News Digital’s request for comment from the White House remains unanswered.
