By Tony Bruce | Tuesday, July 09, 2024 | 5 min read
In the aftermath of the first presidential debate of 2024, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was questioned on Tuesday about the possibility of releasing more of President Joe Biden’s medical records. This request comes amidst comparisons to the 2017 raid on former President Donald Trump’s doctor’s office, an incident that remains a point of contention regarding presidential transparency and the handling of personal health information.
The first debate of the 2024 presidential election cycle has reignited scrutiny of President Biden’s health and cognitive abilities. Critics and political opponents are calling for greater transparency regarding his medical condition.
When asked about the release of additional medical records, Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre emphasized that President Biden has already disclosed substantial medical information and that he remains fit to serve. She reiterated that the president’s medical team regularly monitors his health.
Given President Biden’s age and previous health history, there is a heightened public interest in understanding his current medical status
Comparisons to Trump’s Doctor’s Office Raid
In 2018, Trump’s personal physician, Dr. Harold Bornstein, reported that Trump’s bodyguard, lawyer, and another individual conducted a raid on his office, seizing the then-president’s medical records without prior notice or consent.
The incident involving Trump’s medical records was never fully investigated or resolved, leading to ongoing debates about the legality and ethics of the actions taken.
The situation involving President Trump’s former personal doctor and the alleged seizure of his medical records in February 2017 raises several significant issues:
The doctor’s claim suggests that three individuals, including a bodyguard and a lawyer from the Trump Organization, forcibly took medical records from his office. This event, if true, would be highly unusual and potentially illegal, given the strict regulations governing the handling of medical records under laws such as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA).
Understanding why this seizure occurred is also crucial. Was it to protect sensitive information, to manage public relations, or for some other reason? The motivation behind this action can affect its interpretation and the subsequent fallout.
The additional details provided by Harold Bornstein about the seizure of President Trump’s medical records add further complexity and gravity to the situation. Here are the key points and their implications:
Dr. Bornstein’s description of feeling “raped, frightened, and sad” underscores the severity of the event from his perspective. This strong emotional reaction indicates that the seizure was highly intrusive and distressing, which adds a human element to the legal and ethical considerations.
The incident occurred two days after Dr. Bornstein revealed to a news publication that he had been prescribing a hair growth treatment to President Trump for years. This timing suggests that the seizure might have been a response to the disclosure of private medical information, indicating a possible motive related to damage control or privacy concerns from the Trump administration.
At the time of the seizure, Keith Schiller was on the White House payroll, suggesting official involvement. Schiller’s role as a bodyguard and his presence during the removal of the records add a layer of official sanction to the action, raising questions about the extent of White House involvement and authorization.
Dr. Bornstein stated that the men took the records without a HIPAA release form, which is a crucial element in this scenario. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) mandates that patients must authorize the release of their medical records through a formal process. The absence of such authorization suggests a clear violation of HIPAA regulations, which are designed to protect patient privacy and ensure that medical records are handled appropriately.
The lack of proper authorization and the manner of the records’ seizure could lead to significant legal ramifications. Violations of HIPAA can result in fines and criminal charges, depending on the severity and intent of the breach. This situation potentially places those involved, including Schiller and any other participants, at risk of legal action.
Trump’s White House description of the incident as “standard procedure” conflicts with Dr. Bornstein’s account and established legal protocols. This discrepancy calls for a thorough investigation to establish the facts, ensure accountability, and prevent future occurrences and the incident’s timing, lack of authorization, and the involvement of a White House staff member make it a significant matter that warrants careful scrutiny and potential legal action.
Critics argue that, in the interest of transparency, President Biden should release more comprehensive medical records, particularly given the importance of health in assessing a candidate’s fitness for office. Supporters of Biden suggest that these demands are politically motivated and are being used to undermine his credibility and campaign. The focus on Biden’s medical records, juxtaposed with the relatively muted response to the Trump raid, underscores potential political biases in the treatment of these issues.
Comparisons to the Trump raid highlight perceived double standards in how presidential health information is handled. Critics argue that both situations should be subject to equal scrutiny to ensure fairness and consistency.
The questions raised about President Biden’s medical records, especially in the wake of the 2024 presidential debate, and the controversy surrounding the 2017 raid on Trump’s doctor’s office, highlight significant issues of transparency, consistency, and political bias in the handling of presidential health information. As the White House and Congress address these concerns, establishing clear, fair, and consistent standards for the disclosure and protection of presidential medical records is crucial for maintaining public trust and accountability in the democratic process.
