The ghostwriter of President Joe Biden's memoir faced intense scrutiny after allegedly deleting critical audio recordings.
According to Daily Wire, Mark Zwonitzer’s action came to light amid a Department of Justice investigation concerning President Biden's handling of classified information.
Recent reports by Axios and the Wall Street Journal have brought attention to the matter, pointing towards a complex scenario intertwining legal and ethical questions. According to these reports, the ghostwriter deleted the recordings following the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Hur, who was tasked to probe into Biden’s handling of classified info. This action raised suspicions about potential intentions to protect Biden from legal scrutiny.
Zwonitzer claimed that he regularly deletes such recordings as a standard precaution against hacking. He expressed his fears explicitly during his interview with federal investigators, saying, “I was very concerned about the possibility of being hacked, I was very concerned about the possibility of this audio spread all over the place.”
Investigators questioned the ghostwriter's motives, suggesting that his actions could appear protective of President Biden.
Zwonitzer acknowledged awareness of the investigation but refrained from specifying how much it influenced his decision to delete the recordings.
Although the act of deleting the recordings was questionable, Special Counsel Robert Hur decided against prosecuting Zwonitzer.
Hur justified his decision by citing Zwonitzer’s "plausible, innocent reasons" alongside his cooperative attitude during the investigation. Hur noted, “Zwonitzer willingly provided significant cooperation to the investigation without seeking or receiving any protections or assurances. He was forthright in describing his conduct and working with investigators to obtain all relevant evidence in his possession.”
Regarding the investigation into President Biden himself, Special Counsel Hur highlighted significant challenges. These included Biden’s “limited” memory and the difficulty in proving a “mental state of willfulness,” which is essential for such a felony charge.
Part of the investigation's conclusions involved foreseeing the potential public sympathy towards Biden, which might influence juror decisions adversely for the prosecution. This notion was contained in the executive summary of the report which described Biden as a "sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory."
The report doubted the viability of securing a conviction given Biden's mental state and public image which might lead jurors to “want to identify reasonable doubt.” Hence, prosecutors believed that 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 requiring a mental state of willfulness.”
The legal and public narrative surrounding President Joe Biden’s handling of classified information through his ghostwriter presents a multifaceted scenario. While Zwonitzer's deletion of the recordings was underlined by his security concerns, it also cast shadows of doubt regarding his motives. Despite the legal complexities, the decision not to prosecute Biden highlights challenges in proving intent and managing public perceptions, especially given his advanced age and cognitive challenges. This case underscores the intricate balance between legal standards and real-world application in high-profile political inquiries.
