Hunter Biden Would Comply With New Subpoena Under the ‘Duly Authorized Impeachment Inquiry’
How much would you bet that Hunter and his lawyers would find something wrong with a new subpoena?
Oh, NOW Hunter Biden will comply with a subpoena after causing a scene at a hearing for a resolution to hold him in contempt of Congress.
Hunter fled after 30 minutes. He baited the Republicans, they bit, and chaos ensued. He got the airtime he desperately craved.
I swear that is the only reason why he ever demanded an open hearing.
But only a new subpoena that’s issued under the impeachment inquiry against his daddy, President Joe Biden.
Hunter’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, lectured the House Oversight Committee about why its previous subpoenas weren’t supposedly valid since it issued them before the impeachment inquiry and blah blah blah.
But, um, if they considered the subpoenas invalid, then why propose a public hearing?
However, if Chairman James Comer issues “a new proper subpoena, now that there is a duly authorized impeachment inquiry, Mr. Biden will comply for a hearing or deposition.”
Isn’t that nice?
Hunter also showed up at Capitol Hill on the day of his scheduled deposition on December 13. He sought out the cameras because, of course, he whined and cried and left.
Comer shot down Hunter’s request for an open hearing:
“Hunter Biden is trying to play by his own rules instead of following the rules required of everyone else. That won’t stand with House Republicans.
“Our lawfully issued subpoena to Hunter Biden requires him to appear for a deposition on December 13.
“We expect full cooperation with our subpoena for a deposition but also agree that Hunter Biden should have the opportunity to testify in a public setting at a future date.”
On Thursday, Hunter pleaded not guilty to nine tax-related charges in California.
“The Defendant engaged in a four-year scheme to not pay at least $1.4 million in self-assessed federal taxes he owed for tax years 2016 through 2019, from in or about January 2017 through in or about October 15, 2020, and to evade the assessment of taxes for tax year 2018 when he filed false returns in or about February 2020,” according to the indictment from Special Counsel David Weiss.
The charges include failure to file and pay taxes, evasion of assessment, and filing a fraudulent form.
“Between 2016 and October 15, 2020, the Defendant spent this money on drugs, escorts and girlfriends, luxury hotels and rental properties, exotic cars, clothing, and other items of a personal nature, in short, everything but his taxes,” wrote Weiss.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
“However, if Chairman James Comer issues “a new proper subpoena, now that there is a duly authorized impeachment inquiry, Mr. Biden will comply for a hearing or deposition.”
In our Brave New USSA, the perp gets to set the conditions of how he is and isn’t to be investigated.
The classic Congressional Rope-a-Dope technique
Too little, too late.
If Hunter Biden was serious, he wouldn’t have pulled the stunt the other day. That stunt proved he doesn’t take the process seriously. He is making this offer now to head off the contempt vote he’s facing. Once that is shelved, he will spend the next two or three months dithering with his lawyers over the terms of his testimony. He’s looking for a delay and a reset of the process.
He had his chances; he made his decision. Time to move forward and have him face the consequences of his actions. And finally, one last note, Hunter Biden doesn’t get to dictate terms to Congress.
Abbe Lowell knows the position they will be putting Joe Biden and his DOJ in after the Democrats enforced contempt on Trump’s people and Republicans, they know it’s a reputation hit for Joe once Hunter is held in contempt, especially if Merrick Garland and the DOJ don’t enforce it.
All Hunter will do is plead the fifth or say he can’t recall or doesn’t remember during the deposition now, waste of time. They have him for contempt now, next move is to let the highly partisan DOJ take the hit for not enforcing the president’s son’s contempt of Congress charge.
It lick Charlie Brown kicking the football.
Find him guilty of contempt of congress, you can vacate later if he does comply.
Otherwise “Oh Good Grief”.
Ultimately, this is an exercise in futility. Even if he sits, he’s simply going to invoke…for every question. The best the House investigators can do is inconvenience him for the day. House Republicans aren’t going to get anything substantive from interviews with Hunter. They would be better off focusing all their energy at subpoenaing banking and communications records. IIRC, I believe the J6 committee was even able to get their hands on privileged communications between Trump and his lawyers, a tactic that should be used against Hunter.
I presume you mean he will invoke the 5th Amendment.
Correct. Congress has no power to compel someone to answer questions absent a grant of immunity. All they can do is compel someone to sit there and answer every question with, “On the advice of counsel, I invoke my fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination and respectfully decline to answer your question.” As I said, the best they can hope for is to inconvenience him for the day.
Considering that the real target of all this is Brandon, it might well be worth it to give Hunter immunity. Then send him up for perjury later (meaning, after we have a real attorney general again, I suppose).
I guarantee Comer et al already know the answers to all the questions they plan on asking him. That’s why you bring in the big fish last.
The Biden Syndicate looks like they committed treason, when will they finally open that can of worms?
Other people get arrested for this stuff
The reason Hunter’s lawyer objects to a private interview instead of public is in private, the questions can go on for hours without interruption (see Don Jr. and his interview) In a public hearing, each member gets five minutes and done. Next member. No legitimate inquiry can take place fragmented into five minute filibustered questions, followed by five minutes of uninterrupted praise of St. Hunter the Great, then another five minutes of questions dragged out, then five minutes of praise…
I honestly find myself surprised that Hunter hasn’t suffered a lethal drug overdose yet. Junk cut with bad stuff, the measure incorrect and it’s a bit too potent, whatever else happens in that world. It happens all the time and the guy is getting to be a real liability to a lot of folks, not just his pedo father.
That, or, a suicide.with remorse so bad he fires the gun twice and falls out a window onto a busy railway line.
If The Big Guy dies without pardoning his spawn, I’ll bet Hunter ODs shortly afterward.
As much as I hate to admit it, this is kinda smart on Team Biden’s side. Hunter ignoring the subpoena forces the Republicans to either ignore it – thereby looking weak – or enforce it, opening them up to charges of interfering with the 2024 elections. Hunter showing up unannounced to taunt the Republicans is him trying to bait them into enforcing the subpoena.
In other words, if he can make a real sideshow of the proceedings by lying and refusing to answer questions by invoking the Fifth Amendment on every question due to his own impending criminal prosecutions, he’ll distract from his daddy’s problems. He really is the turd that didn’t fall far from the……
These Republicans are making the Keystone Cops appear competent!
What else is new??
Okay it’s been several days since the filing in Georgia came out about the special prosecutor in the da and nobody here has written an article on it. Something’s going on here. Are the authors afraid of having taken seriously legal issues put forward by these hacks and don’t want to look bad by having written serious articles about the nature of the charges when it’s all buffoonery?
Yeah, more flexing.
“You can subpoena us when we say it’s legit.”
And The Worst Insurrection Ever was an insurrection, because we say so. And Trump is guilty of being all insurrection-y, says the Colorado Supremes’ flex attempt, despite no conviction, and now that video of Q-Anon Shamen *reading Trump messages telling the crowd to stand down.*
And Mar A Lagoon is worth what we say it’s worth.
Flex, flex, flex. Get the picture, proles?
Source for that video, please?
Clip of a couple minutes’, broadcast by Tucker Carlson last week-ish, taken from the eighty-kabillion hours of Capitol J6 video.
Not my favorite sourcing. I don’t much follow TC — some news aggregator linked to it. Interesting, finding a link to that clip being non-trivial right now.
Quick search-engine search finds 3 ABC articles talking *about* Carlson’s bit, without quoting or linking it. Two Newsweek, talking about what *else* the stoned guy in the horns did, and a bunch of everything else that went on that day. None of that stuff actually links to the clip.
Quick search on YouTube finds a lot of yakking about TC. TC plus Q-Anon Shaman finds a bunch more third-party yakking, plus one of Shaman-Guy’s lawyer from two-ish years ago, commenting on video evidence that was withheld from trial. Rising yaks about it some — 30 seconds on the actual clip then pivot to 10 minutes of the well-worn talking points.
Ya just made me go look up Zotero, dammit — OpenSource citation manager w/ browser plug-in — and I admit it: gonna install it again. We’ll see if I can make logging web wandering into a habit I just do as I go.
So much spin-doctoring, retcon, and straight up throwing stuff in the memory hole. You gotta be able to find the thing as it was.
I think Peggy Noonan needs to write an article explaining that this whole affair is about how complicated the love between a father and son can be. Nothing exemplifies the decline of the WSJ so much as giving this duck-faced, old sob sister a soapbox.
Mary Chastain: Hunter’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, lectured the House Oversight Committee about why its previous subpoenas weren’t supposedly valid since it issued them before the impeachment inquiry and blah blah blah.
Well, it’s hardly “blah blah blah”. Rather, the Judiciary Committee had not yet been authorized by a vote of the House to conduct an impeachment investigation, so the Committee’s power of subpoena is limited to issues “within the jurisdiction of the Committee” as granted by the full House upon its formation.
Mary Chastain: But, um, if they considered the subpoenas invalid, then why propose a public hearing?
Because Hunter Biden is apparently willing to voluntarily testify, if the testimony is public.
—
{We may not reply to responses to this comment, as our posts are often held in moderation for extended periods.}
Zachriael the Moderated “…”within the jurisdiction of the Committee” as granted by the full House upon its formation.”
Did Hunter’s Mouthpiece also claim that the subpoena’s already issued were *not” “…”within the jurisdiction of the Committee” as granted by the full House upon its formation?”
— I wouldn’t put it past The Feckless R’s to over-reach, but that doesn’t mean they did.
— I wouldn’t put it past Hunter’s defense to make an incomplete legal argument, since they’re conducting this as a media op.
They could argue that this must not be a real committee: their dais is too low, and where’s the Jumbotron? Nobody has to respond to them.
Mary Chastain: “But, um, if they considered the subpoenas invalid, then why propose a public hearing?”
Zachriael the Moderated: “Because Hunter Biden is apparently willing to voluntarily testify, if the testimony is public.”
Or because the public circus would feed into their PR op, just as the other chamber “appearance”, and surprise visit to this committee did. Circus and flex seems to be their strategy.
BierceAmbrose: Did Hunter’s Mouthpiece also claim that the subpoena’s already issued were *not” “…”within the jurisdiction of the Committee”
Yes.
BierceAmbrose: — I wouldn’t put it past The Feckless R’s to over-reach, but that doesn’t mean they did.
“Subpoena first, impeachment inquiry resolution second” was ruled improper by Trump’s Office of Legal Counsel.
Now that second part is interesting.
My google-fu kinda sucks lately: got a case reference, docket number, or link handy?
I’m lookin at whether the point ruled is general, or specific. Was this:
Subpoena about impeachment stuff first based on an impeachment not yet resolved ruled improper?
or more like
No subpoenas of any kind but for supporting impeachment resolutions in place.
Said “ruling” above, but AIR a president’s Office of Legal Council isn’t part of the judiciary, making rulings in that sense. More like a finding, whatever they call it.
BierceAmbrose: got a case reference, docket number
It was linked in the original post above.
BierceAmbrose: No subpoenas of any kind but for supporting impeachment resolutions in place.
The House has broad authority to issue subpoenas. Anything that has a legislative purpose can be investigated by the House. The power comes from a majority of the House, which is delegated by the majority to committees according to their jurisdiction. However, while the authority of the whole House is broad, it is not unlimited. Generally, investigations of private individuals are outside the purview of the House—except in cases of impeachment investigations. The subpoena of Hunter Biden was specifically issued as part of a preliminary impeachment investigation that lacked an impeachment resolution of the majority.
BierceAmbrose: Said “ruling” above, but AIR a president’s Office of Legal Council isn’t part of the judiciary, making rulings in that sense.
It means it would not be enforced by the executive.
—
Again, we are not intending to ignore your questions. We apologize if our comments are delayed or do not appear.
Hunter “Bagman” Biden should be charged with contempt. (Good luck with that since it takes the cooperation of the regimes Reich’s Prosecutor—formerly DOJ.). But even if Bagman shows up I’m certain he knows two important rules: (1) Clam up, lawyer up, but never fess up, and (2) In a pickle, take the nickel.