Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Special Counsel Testifies on Biden Documents Probe. Aired 11- 11:30a ET

Aired March 12, 2024 - 11:00   ET



REP. ZOE LOFGREN (D-CA): And based on the Department of Justice public statements during the Reagan administration, it is understandable that a person could believe that their personal diaries that they produced were not to be turned over, just as President Reagan did not turn them over.

So I appreciate your report. I appreciate your being here, Mr. Hur.

And I would also like to ask Mr. Chairman a unanimous request to include in the record a September 11 letter from the special counsel to the president to special counsel Hur and also a letter to Merrick Garland.

REP. JIM JORDAN (R-OH): Without objection.

LOFGREN: And, with that, Mr. Chairman, I see my time has expired and I yield back.

JORDAN: Gentlelady yields back. The chair is recognized.

Mr. Hur, why did you do it? Why did Joe Biden, in your words, willfully retain and disclose classified materials? I mean, he knew the law, been in office like 50 years, five decades in the United States Senate, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, eight years as vice president.

He got briefed every day as vice president. He's been in the Situation Room. In fact, you know he knew the rules because you said so on page 226. "President Biden was deeply familiar with the measures taken to safeguard classified documents."

And Joe Biden told us he knew the rules. Mr. Armstrong said this earlier. Joe Biden was deeply familiar with it. You're exactly right, because he told us, when Jack Smith goes after President Trump, Joe Biden says, how could this happen? What data was in those documents that could compromise sources and methods? It's irresponsible. So

Joe Biden knew the rules. He knew the rules. And Joe Biden told us he knew the rules. So, Mr. Hur, why did he break the rules?

ROBERT HUR, FORMER DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE SPECIAL COUNSEL: Congressman, the conclusion as to exactly why the president did what he did is not one that we explicitly address in the report.

The report explains my decision to the attorney general that no criminal charges were warranted in this manner.

JORDAN: I think you did tell us. I think you told us, Mr. Hur. Page 231, you said this: "President Biden had strong motivations." That's a key word. We're getting to motive now.

"President Biden had strong motivations to ignore the proper procedures for safeguarding the classified information in his notebooks." Why did he have strong motivations? "Because, next word, because he decided months before leaving office to write a book." To write a book. That was his motive. He knew the rules. He broke him because he was writing a book.

And you further say, "And he began meeting with the ghostwriter while he was still vice president." There's the motive.

Mr. Hur, how much did President Biden get paid for his book?

HUR: Off the top of my head, I'm not sure if that information appears in the report.

JORDAN: Sure does. There's a dollar amount in there. You remember?

HUR: I don't. It may be $8 million...


JORDAN: Eight million dollars. Joe Biden had eight million reasons to break the rules, took classified information and shared it with the guy who was writing the book. That's why he did it. He knew the rules, but he broke them for $8 million in a book advance.

But you know what? It wasn't just the money. Joe Biden -- here's -- this is page 231, very next page. Joe Biden -- in your report: "Joe Biden viewed his notebooks as an irreplaceable, contemporaneous record of the most important moments of his vice presidency."

He'd written this all down for the book, for the $8 million. And the next thing you say in your report is -- quote -- "Such a record would buttress his legacy as a world leader."

You know what this is? It wasn't just the money. It wasn't just $8 million. It was also his ego. Pride and money is why he knowingly violated the rules, the oldest motives in the book, pride and money. You agree with that, Mr. Hur? You wrote it in your report.

HUR: That language and -- it does appear in the report, and we did identify evidence supporting those assessments.

JORDAN: You also had another interesting statement in your report. You said, Joe Biden -- I want to make sure I get this right -- "viewed himself as a man of presidential timber."

Remember that statement, Mr. Hur? HUR: I believe that does appear in the report, at least in the

executive summary.

JORDAN: I think this is interesting, because here's the scary part.

Page 200 -- I said this earlier in my opening statement. Page 200, Joe Biden -- this is a quote -- "Joe Biden risked serious damage to America's national security when he shared information with his ghostwriter," shared it with his ghostwriter, the guy who was helping Joe Biden get $8 million.


And, oh, by the way, Mr. Hur, what did that ghostwriter do with the information Joe Biden shared with him on his laptop? What did he do after you were named special counsel?

HUR: Chairman, if you're referring to the audio recordings that Mr. Zwonitzer created of his conversations with...


JORDAN: That's exactly what I'm referring to.

HUR: He slid -- if I remember correctly, he slid those files into his recycle bin on his computer.

JORDAN: Tried to destroy the evidence, didn't he?

HUR: Correct.

JORDAN: The very guy who was helping Joe Biden get the $8 million, $8 million Joe Biden had used, the motive for Joe Biden to disclose classified information, to retain classified information, which he definitely knew was against the law.

When you get named special counsel, what's that guy do? He destroys the evidence. That's the key takeaway in my mind. That's the key takeaway. I yield back.

Is it Mr. Raskin? The gentleman from Maryland for five minutes.

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Hur, your report starts with the line: "We conclude that no criminal charges are warranted in this matter." Have you had any reason to change your opinion about that?

HUR: No, Congressman. No, Ranking Member.

RASKIN: You highlight the independence and support you got from the attorney general and DOJ. Have you changed your mind about that?

HUR: I have not.

RASKIN: The report describes President Biden's cooperation in your requests. He allowed his homes to be searched. He answered questions for hours in the midst of a global crisis. Have you had any reason to change your mind about that?

HUR: No, Ranking Member.

RASKIN: All right.

You also repeatedly contrast Biden's cooperation with the conduct of Donald Trump. You say -- quote -- "Most notably, after being given multiple chances to return classified documents and avoid prosecution, Mr. Trump allegedly did the opposite. According to the indictment, he not only refused to return the documents for many months, but he also obstructed justice by enlisting others to destroy evidence and then to lie about it."

Have you had any reason to change your judgment about the differences between President Biden's cooperation and the former president's noncooperation?

HUR: No, I continue to stand by those words in my report.

RASKIN: With such a striking contrast, our colleagues have switched over from being impeachment investigators for constitutional high crimes and misdemeanors, which is how this whole thing started, to being amateur memory specialists, giving us their drive-by diagnoses of the president of the United States, whose soaring oratory, powerful historical analysis and devastating extemporaneous repartee with even the most skilled ninja hecklers of the Freedom Caucus were on full display at the State of the Union address last week for the whole country to see.

The desperate quest to invent an issue is a distraction from the 91 federal and state -- federal charges that Donald Trump faces now, his staggering civil court losses in New York now totaling more than a half-a-billion dollars, and his full-blown embrace and romance with authoritarian dictators and communist tyrants all over the world, from Viktor Orban in Hungary, to Vladimir Putin in Russia, the former head of the KGB, to the communist dictator of North Korea.

It's not -- this -- my friends, this is a memory test. But it's not a memory test for President Biden. It's a memory test for all of America. Do we remember fascism? Do we remember Nazism? Do we remember communism and totalitarianism?

Have we completely forgotten the sacrifices of our parents and grandparents in prior generations? While we play pin the tail on the donkey in this wild goose chase, all of these silly games, Donald Trump entertains authoritarian hustler Viktor Orban at Mar-a-Lago for the weekend, and Orban comes out to declare that, if we indeed sleepwalk into another Trump presidency, Trump will -- quote -- "not give a simple penny -- a single penny to Ukraine."

That's what all of this is about. It's about trying to pull the wool over the eyes of America, because the tyrants and dictators of the world are on the march today. So who wins with this ludicrous, embarrassing spectacle? Orban wins. Putin wins. Xi wins. The tyrants of the world win.

They have one more reason to celebrate Donald Trump and his cult followers, who've completely lost their way. They're looking for high crimes and misdemeanors. Now they appoint themselves amateur memory specialists, and that's what they pounce on the president of the United States about.

America faces a choice between democracy and tyranny, and the president laid it out at Valley Forge, and he laid it out in the State of the Union. Will America stand on the side of people struggling against fascist aggression? Will we stand with the people of Ukraine against Vladimir Putin, whose filthy war has meant the kidnapping of thousands of Ukrainian children, the murder, the slaughter of thousands of Ukrainian civilians, and the attack on an independent sovereign democracy?


But we're not working on that today. We're not standing up for democracy and human rights and international law around the world. No, we're trying to play memory detectives to parse the language of a president who the whole world got to see at the State of the Union address directly address the real questions of our time.

And it is democracy versus dictatorship. And all of the autocrats and the theocrats, all of the kleptocrats of the world are together in league against American democracy. And we have to stand up for American democracy against these stupid games.

I yield back, Mr. Chairman.

JORDAN: Gentleman yields back.

The chairman of the Oversight Committee, Mr. Comer, is recognized for five minutes.

REP. JAMES COMER (R-KY): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

During the Oversight Committee interviews, we have identified a number of White House employees who were involved in the mishandling of classified documents under the leadership of President Biden. Special counsel Hur, can you please tell us approximately how many current and former White House employees you interviewed related to your investigation?

HUR: Chairman Comer, I don't have that figure immediately at hand. Of course, it was a subset of the 173 interviews that we conducted during our investigation.

COMER: Your report indicates that one of those former White House employees who you interviewed was Dana Remus. Is that correct?

HUR: We did interview Ms. Remus.

COMER: Ms. Remus was President Biden's former White House counsel, correct? HUR: She was President Obama's former White House counsel.

COMER: I'm sorry, President Obama's White House counsel.

Related to Ms. Remus, in your report on page 257, you wrote: "In May 2022, White House counsel Dana Remus undertook an effort to retrieve Mr. Biden's files from the Penn Biden Center. Remus described the original purpose of that effort as gathering materials to prepare for potential congressional inquiries about the Biden family's activities during the period from 2017 to 2019."

Now, it seems odd to me that Dana Remus and Joe Biden's personal lawyers were obtaining documents related to potential congressional inquiries about the Biden family activities when Joe Biden has publicly claimed he had no involvement with his family's business dealings.

Can you provide more information about why Dana Remus, a government employee, was retrieving Joe Biden's documents from the Penn Biden Center?

HUR: Chairman, I am able to tell you and clarify information that appears in the report about relevant, significant sources of information, but I am not in a position to be able to go beyond that.

COMER: When you interviewed President Biden, did you ask him what documents he possessed at Penn Biden Center that could be related to a potential congressional inquiry about his family's activities?

HUR: We asked President Biden a wealth of questions about all of the different sets of classified materials that were recovered during the course of our investigation.

COMER: Did anything pertain specifically to our congressional inquiry of President Biden that you recall?

HUR: If there are more specific aspects of it that you have in mind, Chairman, that would be helpful to me.

COMER: Interest pertaining to his family's influence peddling activities?

HUR: If it's helpful, Chairman, appendix A does list in table chart form a brief description of all of the marked classified documents that were recovered in our investigation.

COMER: We intend to interview Ms. Remus, and the recording or transcript of your interview would be highly relevant to our future questioning of her. Can you confirm that you did in fact record her in your interview?

HUR: It was our practice to record the interviews that we conducted, Chairman Comer.

COMER: Additionally, in the course of the investigation, the Oversight Committee learned from a Penn Center Biden that Annie Tomasini, a White House employee, visited the Penn Biden Center in 2021.

Did you interview Annie Tomasini in the course of your investigation?

HUR: Chairman, we do not -- the report does not reflect that specific name.


HUR: But what I can tell you is that the report does reflect that we interviewed the director of Oval Office operations, and one of the places that's reflected is footnote 973.


The Oversight Committee interviewed Kathy Chung, a Department of Defense employee and former assistant to Biden -- to Vice President Biden, and learned that Ms. Chung visited the Biden Penn Center in June 2022 after being contacted by White House counsel in May 2022.

This was months before classified documents were allegedly found in November 2022. Did you interview Kathy Chung in the course of your investigation?

HUR: Chairman, I believe that the substance relating to the subject that you're asking about appears on page 259 of the report. And while the name Kathy Chung does not appear in the text of the report, there are references to interviews of an executive assistant, including at footnote 988.


COMER: The Oversight Committee also learned from its interviews with Penn Biden Center employees and Kathy Chung that Dana Remus, Anthony Bernal, and Ashley Williams, all at the time White House employees, then visited the Penn Biden Center on different occasions before the alleged discovery of classified materials in November 2022.

Did you interview these individuals during your investigation?

HUR: We interviewed many individuals. And we -- I can assure you, Chairman, that we -- it was a priority of ours to interview all the relevant sources of information about these documents, how they got there, who knew about them, and who accessed them.

COMER: Can you -- so, again, they were all recorded, is that correct? So there would be recordings of those interviews?

HUR: These -- it was our practice to interview recordings, yes, sir.

COMER: How many White House employees visited the Penn Biden Center before classified materials were reportedly discovered there in November 2022?

HUR: I don't have...

COMER: ... according to the White House? HUR: Sir, I don't have an exact count of...

COMER: How many visits to the Penn Biden Center were made by either White House employees or President Biden's personal attorneys before the official discovery of documents in November 2022?

HUR: I don't know that figure at hand, but that should be detailed in chapter 14 of the report, sir.

COMER: Yield back.

JORDAN: The gentleman yields back.

The gentlelady from Texas to recognized for five minutes.

Before -- Mr. Hur, any time you need a break, just if you need a break, let us know, because we're going to go a while, as you well know.

HUR: Thank you, sir.


JORDAN: Ms. Jackson Lee is recognized.

REP. SHEILA JACKSON LEE (D-TX): Sir, good morning.

HUR: Good morning.

JACKSON LEE: The Republicans here asked for a lot of transcripts, but chair Jordan has yet to release 90-plus transcripts from our interviews when. With those, if they are to be released to the American people is a question.

My question to you is, you decided, based on the facts, not to prosecute or indict or bring forward charges against the president of the United States, the sitting president, Joseph Biden. Is that correct?

HUR: That was my judgment.

JACKSON LEE: This investigation was independent and thorough. Is that correct?

HUR: Yes.

JACKSON LEE: We have heard from our Republican colleagues who are grasping at straws allegations that President Biden was treated lightly in this investigation. But just a plain reading of this report completely refutes that argument.

There was no two-tiered system of justice. There was only a lack of evidence against President Biden.

Mr. Hur, your office and the FBI undertook an extensive investigation into Mr. Biden's handling of classified information and of the classified documents the FBI seized, correct?

HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: In your investigation, you conducted 173 interviews of 147 witnesses, correct?

HUR: That is correct.

JACKSON LEE: And President Biden himself were one of those witnesses, correct?

HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: For at least five hours or more?

HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: And President Biden engaged in this interview voluntarily?

HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: And the interview with President Biden lasted more than five hours. I have said that. That's correct?

HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: And the interview, and it occurred the day, which all should know, after the horrific attack, October 7, 2023, Hamas attack in Israel, according to a letter from the White House counsel. Is that correct?

HUR: The interview spans two days, October 8 and October 9.

JACKSON LEE: With the president having to be in and out to deal with an international crisis, and after the interview he provided handwritten answers to additional questions, correct?

HUR: Congresswoman, I don't recall the president being in and out during our interview to handle the international questions.

JACKSON LEE: Let me go on.

And President Biden allowed investigators to search his private houses. Is that correct?

HUR: He did consent to the search of his residence.

JACKSON LEE: And your investigation collected seven million documents for review in your investigation. Is that correct?

HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: And this included e-mails, text messages, photographs, videos, toll records and other materials from both classified and unclassified sources? HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: And you referred or reviewed President Biden's handwritten notes as well, correct?

HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: And you coordinated with the multiple government agencies to organize and complete your investigation, correct?

HUR: We consulted with numerous agencies to conduct...

JACKSON LEE: And that included...

HUR: ... declassification reviews of evidence that was seized during the investigation.

JACKSON LEE: All right. And that included working with national security experts in the intelligence community to carefully analyze each classified document that was obtained?


HUR: With respect to marked classified documents, that's correct. We submitted excerpts from the vice president's -- former vice president's notebooks for classification review.

JACKSON LEE: And if agencies reviewed classified material and gave it different levels of classification, you classified it as the higher level for the purposes of your investigation, to be thorough, correct?

HUR: That is reflected in appendix -- appendices A and B.

JACKSON LEE: Thank you.

The FBI requested classification review from each identified agency accordingly for documents where multiple agencies had equities. The special counsel's office used the highest level of classification identified by an agency as the current classification of the document.

Let me go on. Attorney General Garland appointed you as special counsel over the matter on January 12, 2023, correct?

HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: He authorized you to investigate Mr. Biden's possession of the classified documents, including possible unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or other records...

HUR: Correct.

JACKSON LEE: ... at the Penn Center, Penn Biden Center, President Biden's home, Delaware, as well as many -- any matters that rose from the initial investigation or may arise directly from the special counsel. Is that correct?

HUR: I believe that accurately reflects the language of the appointment order.

JACKSON LEE: So you operated an independent investigation for about a year, which you just stated that you had adequate resources to complete, in which you conducted 173 interviews, including with President Biden himself.

You reviewed seven million documents, including President Biden's personal records, and searched his home thoroughly. And in this thorough, lengthy investigation, you did not uncover enough evidence to recommend prosecution against the president. Is that correct?

HUR: That's my judgment.

JACKSON LEE: And if you had found enough evidence to warrant prosecution, did you feel free, unrestrained, unrestrained by the attorney general appointed by President Biden to make such a recommendation to the attorney general?

HUR: I was aware of the Office of Legal Counsel policy right now prohibiting sitting presidents from being charged with federal crimes. But apart from that, what I can tell you, Congresswoman, is that the investigative steps that we took were my own. The judgment was my own. And the words and the report are my own.

JACKSON LEE: And you would have done so...

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Regular order, Mr. Chairman.

JORDAN: The time the gentlelady has expired.

JACKSON LEE: You would have done so.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to put into the record, "The Real Robert Hur Report," by unanimous consent.

JORDAN: Without objection. Without objection.

The chair now recognizes the gentleman from Florida. Five minutes.

REP. MATT GAETZ (R-FL): February 8, the White House, question: "Mr. President, why did you share classified information with your ghostwriter?"

The president: "I did not share classified information. I did not share it. I guarantee I did not."

That's not true, is it, Mr. Hur?

HUR: That is inconsistent with the findings based on the evidence in my report.

GAETZ: Yes, it's a lie, is just what regular people would say, right?

Yes, all right. So, the next one. "And all the stuff that was in my home was in filing cabinets that were either locked or able to be locked." That wasn't true either, was it?

HUR: That was inconsistent with the findings of our investigation.

GAETZ: Another lie, people might say, right? Because what you put in your report was: "Among the places Mr. Biden's lawyers found classified documents in the garage was a damaged open box."

So here's what I'm understanding, right? As Mr. Armstrong laid out, you find in your report that the elements of a federal criminal violation are met, but then you apply this senile cooperator theory, that, because Joe Biden cooperated and the elevator didn't go to the top floor, you don't think you would get a conviction.

And I actually think you get to the right answer in that. I don't think Biden should have been charged. Don't think Trump should have been charged. But under, like, the senile cooperator theory, isn't it frustrating that Biden continues to go out and lie about the basic facts of the report that lay out a federal criminal violation?

HUR: Congressman, I need to disagree with at least one thing that you said, which is that I found that all of the elements were met.

One of the elements of the relevant mishandling statute is the intent element. And what my report reflects is my judgment that, based on the evidence, I would not be able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury that that intent element had been met.

GAETZ: Right. But the reason you have that doubt is the senile cooperator theory, the fact that Joe Biden is so inept in responding that you can't prove the intent, which, again, I don't quibble with that conclusion, but it's frustrating to be like, oh, well, this guy's not getting treated the same way as Trump because the elevator's not going to the top floor, so we can't prove intent, while, at the same time, Biden goes out there at the White House and says, well, you know, he just -- he just blatantly lies.

And what I'm trying to figure out is whether or not Biden's lying because he's still so senile, he hasn't read your report, or whether it's a little craftier and a little more devious and perhaps a little more intentional than we might otherwise think.

So I also want to go to this Biden Penn Center. Like, did you -- did it give concern to you that the Biden Penn Center, where all this classified stuff was being mishandled, was being floated by foreign governments?

HUR: Congressman, we were concerned with getting the bottom of all of the classified documents that were recovered during the course of our...


[11:25:03] GAETZ: Yes, but the -- like, what bothers me is that the money that was paying for the place where the documents were being inappropriately held, it was the Chinese and it was other foreign countries.

Did that play into your analysis? Did you look into the billion dollars in foreign funding sources at the Biden Center at UPenn, for example?

HUR: Congressman, we conducted a thorough, impartial, and fair investigation, and we were very, very concerned with getting to the bottom of all the relevant questions relating to the recovered documents.

GAETZ: Sir, did you look into the fact that the Chinese were floating the place where this guy was keeping the documents unsecure, yes or no?

HUR: Congressman, to the extent that we identified evidence that was relevant and significant to our investigation, we put it in our report.

GAETZ: OK. Well, it seemed relevant to me, maybe not to you.

Another thing that seemed relevant to me is this ghostwriter, right? So the ghostwriter purposefully deletes this evidence that seems to be -- like, show culpability of Biden's crimes and you don't charge him. Why did you not charge the ghostwriter with obstructing justice and deleting evidence?

HUR: Well, for a number of reasons that are laid out in the report, but, in brief, Congressman, yes, when we interviewed the ghostwriter, he did tell us -- and I'm trying to get the exact language -- that one of the things on his mind, one of the things he was aware of was that I had been appointed special counsel and was conducting an investigation.

GAETZ: So he didn't -- just so everybody knows, the ghostwriter didn't delete the recordings just as a matter of happenstance. Ghostwriter has recordings of Biden making admissions of crimes. He then learns that you have been appointed.

He then deletes the information that is the evidence, and you don't charge him.

HUR: That is reflected in the report, and one of the reasons...

GAETZ: Like, what does somebody have to do to get charged with obstruction of justice by you? If, like, deleting the evidence of crimes doesn't count, what would meet the standard?

HUR: So, Congressman, as we state in the relevant chapter of the report, one of the things that Mr. Zwonitzer did not delete was transcripts of the recordings that he had created that included inculpatory evidence relating to Mr. Biden.

GAETZ: Oh, so if you destroy some evidence, but not other evidence, that somehow absolves you of the evidence you destroy?

Like, here's what I see. Zwonitzer should have been charged, wasn't. Biden and Trump should have been treated equally. They weren't. And that is the double standard that I think a lot of Americans are concerned about.

I see my time's expired. I yield back.

JORDAN: Gentleman yields back.

The gentleman from Tennessee is recognized for five minutes.

REP. STEVE COHEN (D-TN): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Hur, thank you for being here.

I'm a little confused about this hearing. Mr. Raskin laid out the big picture we should be concerned about, but in the more limited picture, Director Mueller had an investigation. He's our most famous recent special prosecutor. And he found sufficient evidence to say there was a connection between Russia and the Trump campaign.

But -- and it did not support -- and it supported a criminal prosecution if he were not president. You found there was no evidence to support a criminal prosecution. And the story here is simple. President Biden identified classified documents in his home and other places and told Archives about them.

The independent Department of Justice under Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed you, a former Trump political appointee, as special counsel to fully investigate these circumstances and authorized you to prosecute criminal misconduct. You declined to prosecute because you found insufficient evidence of a crime. Case closed.

It makes really the perfect case, where you did your job, Mr. Garland did his job. And unlike Mr. Barr, he didn't interfere. Did Mr. Garland ask you to change your report at all?

HUR: He did not, sir.

COHEN: Didn't redact a thing?

HUR: No, sir.

COHEN: Like Mr. Barr did. He redacted everything and made the Mueller report look like 180 degrees different than what it was.

Mr. Garland did right, and you did right. And I commend each of you.

The Department of Justice is independent and allows the special counsels to investigate and prosecute the facts if it's supported. Joe Biden's actions in handling of classified materials is similar to most other former presidents and vice presidents. The exception is Donald Trump.

So let's start with some yes-or-no questions. Did you receive any pressure from Mr. Garland or his staff to make any

specific factual finding or legal conclusion?

HUR: No.

COHEN: Did you receive the resources necessary to carry out your duties?

HUR: Yes.

COHEN: Do you have any reason to believe that you were treated differently with regard to independence or resources than other DOJ special prosecutors?

HUR: No.

COHEN: Based on your experience as special counsel, do you have any reason to believe the attorney general was improperly directing, pressuring, or interfering with Jack Smith or his work?

HUR: I have really -- I do not have the basis to answer that question.

COHEN: But your declination, which we treat as thoughtful and apolitical, we should treat prosecutorial decisions by Jack Smith the same way, to the best of your knowledge?

HUR: Again, I really do not have the sufficient information with respect to Jack Smith's investigation to provide any comment on it.

COHEN: Let me ask you this.

If President Biden in his testimony to you knew the exact date, January 20, whatever it was, 2009, when he became vice president, and the day when he left being vice president, January the 20th -- I guess the first would have been.