Last Friday, Hunter Biden's attorney Abbe Lowell revealed that his client would be willing to honor congressional subpoenas if they were reissued by Congress. Lowell did so through a strongly worded letter addressed to House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-KY) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH). The back-and-forth continues, with the chairmen responding to Lowell's letter with one of their own from Sunday. While the letter's closing makes clear that the chairmen will be reissuing a subpoena for Hunter to comply with, that's not to grant credibility to the claims made in Lowell's letter.
"Although the Committee’s subpoenas are lawful and remain legally enforceable, as an accommodation to Mr. Biden and at your request, we are prepared to issue subpoenas compelling Mr. Biden’s appearance at a deposition on a new date in the coming weeks," the letter concludes with. "To be clear, the issuance of these subpoenas does not in any way suggest or imply that the Committees believe the assertions in your January 12 letter to have any merit. Our willingness to issue these subpoenas is rooted entirely in our interest in obtaining Mr. Biden’s testimony as expeditiously as possible."
Such is a point that Comer and Jordan already looked to make clear throughout their letter, nearly 5 pages long.
As this Sunday letter recaps, Hunter Biden received lawful Congressional subpoenas compelling him to appear for a closed-door deposition on December 13. Hunter offered to appear for public testimony, but Comer announced that same day that the first son was not going to be calling the shots. Any public hearings to come would take place after closed-door depositions. At subsequent committee markups for holding Hunter in contempt, many Republican members reminded that Hunter is not the one who gets to make the rules.
Although Comer and Jordan made clear that there would be consequences if Hunter did not show up, including being held in contempt of Congress, Hunter did not show up for his deposition that day. He instead gave prepared remarks on the Senate side of the Capitol in a spot reserved by Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), and left without taking questions from the media. This letter refers to Hunter's defiance here as "particularly brazen," especially since the first son also briefly appeared at the Oversight Committee markup last Wednesday.
The chairmen's letter also lays out and responds to Lowell's claims, including to point out that the subpoenas were in fact valid. "To be clear, contrary to the assertions in your letter and for the reasons explained below, the subpoenas issued to Mr. Biden on November 8 and November 9, respectively, are lawful and legally enforceable. Mr.Biden has asserted no valid constitutional or legal privilege excusing him from complying with these subpoenas. The Committees will not afford Mr. Biden special treatment," the letter reminded.
Not only is the claim wrong, it's also a new excuse from Hunter and his attorneys.
"At no time in either setting did you or Mr. Biden indicate that the Committees’ subpoenas were invalid; rather, you argued that Mr. Biden had “chosen” to testify only in public hearing—a “choice” the subpoena did not provide," the letter notes.
"Your January 12 letter is the first instance in which you have asserted that the Committees’ subpoenas are somehow legally invalid. This assertion is inaccurate and unpersuasive for several reasons," the chairmen continue.
The letter first addresses Lowell's claims that the subpoenas were not valid since an impeachment inquiry was not yet formally authorized--it was formalized on December 13--in that this excuse is at odds with federal court opinions as well as historical precedence.
"Your only authority for this erroneous assertion is an opinion issued by the Department of Justice’s Office of LegalCounsel (OLC) in 2020," the chairmen write to Lowell, which they also remind is "non-binding on the Legislative Branch" as well as at odds with the courts. The memo would be mentioned throughout the letter.
By authorizing the inquiry on December 13, the chairmen also remind that "the full House of Representatives has made clear that the subpoenas issued by the Committees to Mr. Biden were within their authority and that, contrary to your letter, no additional delegation from the House was needed."
The chairmen spend several paragraphs continuing to put Hunter Biden in his place, as they write:
For all these reasons, there is no legal basis on which Mr. Biden could lawfully disregard the Committees’ deposition subpoenas. His conduct toward the House has been contemptuous. His defiance of the subpoenas has been willful and flagrant. His demands to testify only in a public setting are, as we have explained, inconsistent with the practice of these Committees in this matter as well as the practice of congressional Committees in recent Congresses. While we welcome Mr. Biden’s public testimony at the appropriate time, he must appear for a deposition that conforms to the House Rules and the rules and practices of the Committees, just like every other witness before the Committees.
The Committees welcome Mr. Biden’s newfound willingness to testify in a deposition setting under subpoena. Although the Committee’s subpoenas are lawful and remain legally enforceable, as an accommodation to Mr. Biden and at your request, we are prepared to issue subpoenas compelling Mr. Biden’s appearance at a deposition on a new date in the coming weeks. To be clear, the issuance of these subpoenas does not in any way suggest or imply that the Committees believe the assertions in your January 12 letter to have any merit. Our willingness to issue these subpoenas is rooted entirely in our interest in obtaining Mr. Biden’s testimony as expeditiously as possible.
It certainly looks like the Hunter Biden drama continues to be ongoing, especially when it comes to what moves the first son might next try to play against the Republican chairmen.
Read the full letter here: https://t.co/R7TNfAUrZw
— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) January 14, 2024
Chairman Comer also spoke to CNN's Manu Raju about how if Hunter ends up not showing up, "I guess we'll just have to wrap it up without him and assume that these were bribes from foreign countries, assume that what the bank said was true. He was money laundering. He was involved in a human trafficking ring."
If Hunter Biden won’t testify behind closed doors, “Well, I mean, if he doesn’t show up, then I guess we’ll just have to wrap it up without him and assume that these were bribes from foreign countries,” James Comer says https://t.co/IzIr8OBfx3 https://t.co/L8Onv3LDAn
— Manu Raju (@mkraju) January 14, 2024
Join the conversation as a VIP Member