A recent exchange between late-night host Jimmy Kimmel and former Vice President Kamala Harris once again put the spotlight on one of the major contradictions of Joe Biden’s previous administration: selective opacity and the political use of federal institutions. When asked directly why the White House did not release certain files during its term—especially while running electorally against Donald Trump—Harris offered an answer that, rather than dispelling doubts, deepened public skepticism.
According to Harris, the decision was based on an alleged “absolute separation” between the wishes of the Biden administration and the actions of the Department of Justice. “Perhaps to our detriment, but firmly and correctly,” she said, insisting that the DOJ acted with complete independence, free from political vendettas or electoral concerns. That narrative, repeated time and again by the Democratic establishment during the previous government, clashes head-on with public perception and with the accumulated facts of those years.
Harris’s explanation is difficult to sustain in a context in which the Department of Justice under the Biden administration was repeatedly accused of operating with a double standard: lenient toward political allies in power and extremely aggressive toward opponents—particularly Donald Trump. Speaking of “absolute independence” while the leading political rival of the administration was being relentlessly pursued through the courts is not only naïve, but offensive to millions of Americans who watched the law applied unevenly.
Even more revealing is the implicit admission that releasing those files “could have hurt them” electorally. That acknowledgment exposes the true core of the issue. This was not an act of institutional prudence, but a political calculation by the previous administration. The information was not withheld out of respect for justice, but because it did not fit the narrative the Biden government needed to maintain during the electoral cycle.
This episode confirms a central concern: when progressive power speaks of “independent institutions,” it often means institutions aligned with its agenda. Transparency becomes a selective tool, and justice ceases to be a neutral pillar, turning instead into a political instrument.
President Donald Trump has been clear on this point: the problem is not the law itself, but its use as a weapon. A system in which the government decides when to release information and when to withhold it—depending on whether it benefits politically—is a system that loses credibility. Public trust is not rebuilt with television appearances, but with actions, consistency, and the equal application of the law.
The exchange between Kimmel and Harris was not merely a television moment. It was a window into the internal logic of the Biden administration: narrative control, political protection, and institutional rhetoric that ultimately failed to convince a public exhausted by double standards. In a healthy republic, justice is not administered according to the electoral calendar. And when it is, the problem is not public curiosity, but the lack of honesty from those in power.
