Investigations into former President Joe Biden’s cognitive decline, political weaponization, and corruption are continuing, with President Donald Trump delivering a cache of White House records to congressional investigators. Biden had previously asserted executive privilege to shield documents related to his health and mental fitness, political prosecutions against Trump, and the Biden family’s finances from multiple congressional committees, but the Trump White House rejected the executive privilege bid on Monday, according to a Fox News report.

White House counsel David Warrington, a longtime Trump ally, ordered the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) to disregard Biden’s executive privilege claim, which Warrington said “is not justified.” He wrote, “President Trump instructs you to provide to these congressional committees the pages identified as privileged by the former President.”

Kyle Brosnan, vice president of Legal at the Oversight Project, told The Washington Stand, “President Trump is entirely correct to reject President Biden’s assertions of Executive Privilege over the Biden Administration’s cover-up of his cognitive decline.” Brosnan continued, “Executive Privilege exists to protect frank communications and advice to the president in the execution of his office. It doesn’t exist to cover up the coup d’état from the Biden White House staff. We’re pleased to see these records will soon become public.”

One set of documents, requested by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, center on what Warrington characterized as “cover-up of former President Biden’s health and cognitive decline.” The documents include medical records related to Biden’s cognitive state and health while president. Republicans have repeatedly argued that Biden exhibited symptoms of mental deterioration during his tenure in the White House and that his advisors and staff likely illegally usurped his executive authority via use of the autopen, replicating the then-president’s signature to issue orders and approve actions of which Biden had no knowledge. Warrington wrote, “The abuse of the autopen that took place during the Biden Presidency, and the extraordinary efforts to shield President Biden’s diminished faculties from the public, must be subject to a full accounting to ensure nothing similar ever happens again.”

Another set of documents pertains to the Biden administration’s involvement in targeting Trump, his campaign, and his allies for retaliation and political persecution between 2021 and the end of 2024. The investigations, led by the Senate Judiciary Committee, largely target the “Arctic Frost” operation, begun in 2022, which formed the basis for Department of Justice (DOJ) Special Counsel Jack Smith’s years-long prosecution of Trump and his allies at the federal level. Ultimately, Smith’s campaign was curtailed and de facto ended by the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling on presidential immunity, which stripped Smith’s prosecution of much of its material. Republicans have also alleged that the Biden administration was covertly directing multiple state-level prosecutions against Trump, including a Manhattan-based trial that resulted in a felony conviction and a Georgia-based prosecution centered on the 2020 presidential election. Warrington wrote that “the constitutional protections of executive privilege should not be used to shield from Congress evidence of a President’s efforts to imprison his opponent.”

Another set of requested documents deals with the “Biden family’s financial dealings and potential conflicts of interest,” according to Warrington. The documents largely center on Biden’s use of private email accounts and servers and the relationship he and his son, Hunter Biden, had with Ukraine while Biden was vice president and Hunter was involved in a Ukraine-based energy company under investigation for corruption. Warrington noted that the president’s exercise of his core constitutional duties and most of his official presidential actions were largely shielded by the Supreme Court’s presidential immunity ruling but added that he is “unaware of a Supreme Court ruling or constitutional text that extends those protections to former President Biden’s efforts to assist his son’s shady business deals.”

While the Trump White House is aiding Congress in its Biden investigations, reports suggest that the DOJ has quietly closed its own investigation into the Biden White House’s autopen scandal. The DOJ probe was initially launched by then-interim U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Ed Martin, who is now the U.S. Pardon Attorney. The New York Times cited three unnamed sources last week who claimed that the Trump DOJ was simply taking too long to build a compelling autopen abuse case. Incumbent U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro was reportedly disheartened by her office’s failure to secure an indictment against six Democratic legislators who called on U.S. soldiers to disobey presidential orders and shelved the autopen investigation due to supposed difficulty amassing evidence.

In response to the NYT report, Pirro and senior DOJ officials rebutted that the case is not closed but is simply “tough” to investigate. An unnamed DOJ official cited by the New York Post said, “There are statutes that apply in this case,” but noted that it is difficult to determine what protections do and do not apply when investigating and prosecuting what may be the exercise of one of the president’s core constitutional powers.

The Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations and the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform are both continuing their investigations. In testimony before the House Oversight Committee, longtime Biden physician Kevin O’Connor repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment rights when questioned on the then-president’s mental and cognitive health, while former Biden advisor and staff secretary Neera Tanden admitted that she did not know whether Biden actually approved orders signed by autopen: she testified that she would submit a request to use the autopen to a circle of Biden advisors who would, later in the day, tell her whether or not to replicate the then-president’s signature.