President Joe Biden’s son on Jan. 12 said he'll testify behind closed doors to lawmakers, backtracking on his earlier resistance as the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to hold him in contempt of Congress.
Hunter Biden, 53, said through a lawyer in a letter to Reps. James Comer (R-Ky.) and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) that he would comply with a subpoena to appear, but only if a new subpoena is issued.
Mr. Comer and Mr. Jordan, in 2023 subpoenas, ordered Mr. Biden to testify in private in December. But those subpoenas were “legally invalid” because they came before the House approved an impeachment inquiry into President Biden, Abbe Lowell, Mr. Biden’s lawyer claimed.
“Despite your complaints and the Republicans’ obtaining a definitive legal opinion in 2020, you seemed to forget what occurred just four years ago and followed the same course that Republican leadership at the time and the OLC opined to be improper,” Mr. Lowell wrote.
“If you issue a new proper subpoena, now that there is a duly authorized impeachment inquiry, Mr. Biden will comply for a hearing or deposition,” Mr. Lowell added.
Mr. Comer and Mr. Jordan said in a joint statement that they were “heartened that Hunter Biden now says he will comply with a subpoena,” but that he “already defied two valid, lawful subpoenas.”
Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said that Republicans should “finally take yes for an answer” because Mr. Biden “is giving Republicans exactly what they have been demanding.”
The two House panels this week voted to send reports and resolutions recommending Mr. Biden be held in contempt to the full House.
The resolutions say that Mr. Biden “shall be found to be in contempt of Congress for failure to comply with a congressional subpoena.”
Mr. Comer has said that when the House votes on the matter, there are enough members in support to hold Mr. Biden in contempt.
If a simple majority does vote in favor, then the House would send a prosecution referral to federal prosecutors. Contempt carries a prison sentence of up to one year in prison.
Republicans said in a letter attached to one of the subpoenas that records they’ve reviewed show Mr. Biden and other family members hauled in millions of dollars while President Biden was vice president in part by “leveraging the Biden brand and the positions of trust held by his father.”
They also said some evidence shows President Biden “was at least aware of some of his family’s business ventures and sought to influence potential business deals that financially benefited his family,” citing how Mr. Biden’s former business partner testified that President Biden was on the phone with his son during some of the latter’s business meetings.
“The committees require your client’s testimony to provide evidence that is relevant to the impeachment inquiry,” Republicans told Mr. Lowell at the time. “In particular, your client has personal knowledge of whether and how President Biden has been involved in his family’s business dealings.”
In addition to helping assist the inquiry, Mr. Biden’s testimony could help craft future ethics and financial disclosure laws, according to the Republicans.
They pointed in the recent reports to authority bestowed by the Constitution that enables the House to impeach presidents and conduct legislative oversight.
Mr. Lowell said in the new missive that the subpoenas were clearly aimed at eliciting information for the inquiry, despite the fact no such inquiry had been approved by the House.
With regards to the other stated purposes, he highlighted how the OLC covered that in its opinion, which said that “assertion of dual authorities presented the question whether the committees could leverage their oversight jurisdiction to require the production of documents and testimony that the committees avowedly intended to use for an unauthorized impeachment inquiry” and “we advised that, under the circumstances of these subpoenas, the committees could not do so.”
That’s when he said Mr. Biden would comply with any new subpoenas that are issued since they would come after the impeachment inquiry vote.
