Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Hunter Biden Hearing Ends With Plea Deal On Hold; Rep. Robert Garcia (D-CA) Discusses Hunter Biden Plea Deal Put On Hold. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired July 26, 2023 - 13:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[13:30:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Let's take a step back, Kara, and walk through the issues that the judge had earlier in the day with the plea deal.

Because she brought up a question to prosecutors and the defense team as to whether there was agreement about the scope of potential future cases coming up against Hunter Biden.

Raising the possibility he may be charged with acting on behalf of a foreign government without registering, essentially a FARA charge.

That's kind of where things started to unravel the first time, right?

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, that's exactly right, Boris. That is where things started to come undone because the judge, you know, trying to get to the issue of what is covered in this plea agreement.

She thought it was broadly written and didn't spell out what possible offenses existed. So she was asking prosecutors, is this investigation ongoing? And the prosecutor said that it was.

So she was pressing him on exactly what does this cover, what is Hunter Biden pleading to, what are you agreeing to not to prosecute?

He said he couldn't say what potential charges were on the table, but he said that what they would not prosecute under this agreement was tax offenses, gun offenses or drug offenses.

And then the judge said, well, what was about a FARA offense. And it was at that point that the prosecution said that was not included in this agreement.

She then asked Hunter Biden's attorney, there seems to be a meeting of the minds here. He said, no we don't. The judge said, well, what does that mean? And then the prosecution said that means the deal is off the table if they're not agreeing to this.

Then Hunter Biden's team said, yes, if that's the case, then it's null and void.

But then Hunter Biden's attorney said, Judge, can we have 10 minutes to try to work it out? They took a break, longer than 10 minutes.

And when they came back, Hunter Biden's team said, OK, we will agree to what the prosecution is now saying the deal encompasses, which is protection from other tax charges, gun charges or drug charges, but not an open-ended immunity.

So it seemed that the plea was then back on track. The judge started to go through the normal motions of asking Hunter Biden the regular questions. Did anyone make any promises to him? And things were moving along.

But then they moved onto this gun diversion agreement. That's, again, where the judge had some issues. She said, why did you plop me in the middle of this agreement?

You are giving me a role here when you have made very clear today that this is an agreement between you two. This is not necessarily something a judge sees. And this is a purview of the executive branch, the decision of whether to bring criminal charges.

So she questioned why, if there was a dispute over whether Hunter Biden had breached this diversion agreement, why would it land back in her court. She said she wasn't sure if that was constitutional. So that is another issue that she said.

So ultimately, combining the two, she said I'm not in a position today to accept this plea agreement. She said to Hunter Biden, I'm sorry, I know you wanted to get this resolved.

But she was saying she wanted to make sure that he understood what he was pleading guilty to and what he was protected from, other possible charges. And to make sure he had a clear understanding of that. And also to ensure that this gun diversion agreement was constitutionally sound.

So that made everything fall apart after about four hours into this hearing, which everyone came in today expecting would be pretty perfunctory. But it certainly did not turn out to be the case.

SANCHEZ: Yes. Kara Scannell, please stand by as we track this breaking news.

Again, Hunter Biden pleading not guilty for the time being. The judge asking both sides to file additional briefs as the plea deal's legal structuring remains under scrutiny.

And, Jim, this case was already heating up rhetoric on Capitol Hill. You can imagine lawmakers have a lot more to say after this back and forth we watched in court today.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN HOST: And often that rhetoric not necessarily based in fact, a lot of allegations.

Manu Raju is on the Hill getting Republican congressional reaction to the ongoing negotiations over the plea deal.

And I'm wondering what you're hearing, Manu.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Republicans reacting swiftly, as they have been very critical about this plea agreement before today's collapse of that agreement.

Saying this is, in their view, a sweetheart deal, something that Joe Biden's son got because he's Joe Biden's son, arguing it should have been much stiffer. They're saying this essentially confirmed their point.

I talked to a number of those members, some of them who are on the House Judiciary Committee, who are planning to investigate this deal and plan to potentially open up an impeachment inquiry into all of this as well.

A number of them said that this essentially bolsters their investigation.

One member, who is not on the House Judiciary Committee, but who is also influential on the far right, Ralph Norman, told me that essentially this deal was an effort, in his view, this deal, was to protect Joe Biden.

And they believe that now this has essentially unraveled, it allowed them to go forward and investigate potentially Joe Biden's culpability in all of this.

Of course, that's not been proven. There's not been in the link to Joe Biden in this Hunter Biden plea deal or Joe Biden and some of these business deals that Republicans are trying to tie Joe Biden to.

[13:35:02]

But that is going to be the emphasis of this investigation going forward. So you can only imagine how Republicans are reacting here, Jim --

SCIUTTO: Sure.

RAJU: -- in talking to a number of them. They said it will just bolster their push to look into all of this here and believe it will potentially lead to an impeachment inquiry in the fall.

SCIUTTO: Let me test that for a moment, Manu. Because, one, we have talked to lawyers about what the typical penalties for the crimes he's pleading guilty to. It seems to be within line. I get Elliot Williams' point of view and others.

But the other piece here coming out of today's hearing is that this plea agreement does not inoculate Hunter Biden from other ongoing investigations.

What do Republicans say to that? Because it is not a closed deal, as it were. He might very well be prosecuted for other crimes if there is evidence of other crimes.

RAJU: Yes. That still has to play out, Jim. That's going to be a major question in the weeks ahead.

Because, typically, when these investigations are ongoing, it's much harder for Congress to investigate, to get records from the Justice Department.

There's been an effort by Jim Jordan, the chairman of this committee, to ask for information from the Justice Department from this U.S. attorney investigation about everything that's going on here.

But if this investigation is ongoing, as the Justice Department is indicating, that makes it much more difficult. And it only makes things much more contentious.

And potentially, Republicans believe that could actually escalate things and lead to an impeachment probe if they believe that they are being obstructed in their investigation, much like Donald Trump was a subject, in part, for obstruction of Congress in his first impeachment.

So that is all going to be part of the discussion and the debate on Capitol Hill for Republicans in the weeks and months ahead.

Now, David Weiss, the U.S. attorney, has agreed before this today, to come to Capitol Hill. The House Judiciary Republicans have not yet agreed to a date for David Weiss to come and testify, the U.S. attorney who was appointed by Donald Trump and held over in the Biden administration.

Jim Jordan told me that he wants to interview a number of witnesses before bringing Weiss forward.

But Democrats believe it's all an effort to not allow Weiss to set the record straight. The Justice Department, of course, has said that they had not had any involvement in Weiss's decisions here. And Weiss saying that no, Merrick Garland did not interfere as well.

So the Democrats believe that he is being prevented from publicly testifying to Republican allegations. But again, this all will play out, Jim, here in the weeks ahead.

SCIUTTO: Just as you note that Weiss, the prosecutor involved in this, was appointed by the previous president, a Republican.

Manu Raju, on the Hill, thanks so much.

We'll continue to follow this news, particularly, the long-going negotiations in the courtroom over Hunter Biden's plea deal. Please do stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:42:34]

SANCHEZ: If you're following the breaking news, a historic plea deal put on pause. Hunter Biden set to plead guilty to several charges before a judge ultimately put the brakes on that effort. Let's go CNN White House reporter, Kevin Liptak, who joins us now.

Kevin, you're getting reaction from the White House

KEVIN LIPTAK, CNN WHITE HOUSE REPORTER: Yes.

SANCHEZ: -- which is basically taking a step back.

LIPTAK: Yes, the press secretary's briefing right now, and she did say that Hunter Biden was a private citizen and she emphasized this was a personal matter. But that the president and first lady do stand by their son.

And this is the stance they have taken throughout these entire proceedings, including when news of this plea deal first came out a few months ago.

It's important, because the Bidens really do view this as a family matter. Of course, we have seen Hunter Biden, a very visible presence in his father's life.

We saw him at the lavish state dinner in India a few months ago. We saw him on the South Lawn for the Fourth of July celebration.

He hasn't necessarily shied away from standing next to his father despite all of this.

Despite the Republican backlash that hasn't always sat well with some Democrats, who do privately say this could be a distraction for the president and for the White House, as he tries to accomplish his agenda. But certainly, President Biden is not backing away.

And you know, when you talk to people close to the Bidens, they do view these charges as an example of a very dark period in Hunter Biden's life.

He was obviously rattled by addiction, which is a problem that so many American families are dealing with. They really did view today's proceedings and today's plea as a way to close the chapter on what had been a very dark period in Hunter's life.

So the White House is saying today that they do stand by him, but as they have throughout these proceedings, are resisting commenting too much beyond that.

SANCHEZ: It seems like they're going to get quite a few more questions about this now that the case is not closed on Hunter Biden.

Kevin Liptak, please stand by as we get more breaking news.

We want to bring in Elliott Williams. He's been following all of this for us all morning.

Elliot, quite the back and forth, the on again/off again/on again/off again plea deal for Hunter Biden. The backdrop of all of this is the DOJ has its hands full. Right?

Right now, Jack Smith is potentially awaiting word from a grand jury on whether or not Donald Trump will be indicted for a third time. This, over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election.

[13:45:11]

And the DOJ is trying to appear impartial. In a perfect world, one case does not impact the other.

But in a P.R. sense, when they're being attacked, especially by Republicans, over this alleged sweetheart deal with Hunter Biden, how much does Trump's -- how much do Trump's legal woes play into the messaging behind the Hunter Biden case?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: That's an important point, Boris. They are independent cases. The Justice Department has been very careful to make clear how independently they are run.

David Weiss is overseeing the Hunter Biden matter, was a Trump appointee, kept on to maintain that continuity from the person who sort of was overseeing the investigation earlier.

Jack Smith, who is overseeing the Donald Trump investigation, was put in place as special counsel to remove the question of influence or politics coming from the White House and the attorney general's office. So they are fully independent.

And in any other Justice Department, the mere fact there's two high- profile cases happening at the same time would mean -- it wouldn't mean they're handled together in the same way.

Now, look, like you said, you used the term P.R. It's still a matter that the Justice Department has to confront, the mere fact that looming out there is the prospect of charges for the president.

What if President Trump were charged with a crime today? That would just look bad as a functional matter.

And frankly, the grand jury is scheduled, I believe, to come back into session tomorrow. So these probably are factors the Justice Department has to consider.

But at its core, Boris, they've been very, very careful in making clear these are two very different investigations run by two people, who the attorney general have said close to full autonomy if not full autonomy to make decisions on how they want to proceed.

SANCHEZ: I'm curious how you perceive the accusations coming from House Republicans when this is a Trump-appointed judge and a Trump- appointed attorney that are overseeing and prosecuting this case with IRS whistleblowers that are making all sorts of accusations pointing to the president, Joe Biden.

But not presenting actual evidence that his son's dealings, which he wasn't charged at least to this point, about his dealings with Burisma in Ukraine and with his dealings allegedly in China.

How are they connecting the two, when there is no clear evidence?

WILLIAMS: Well, they can connect the two, because they are Congress and they have a very large platform and can do so.

To be clear, Congress -- this is all fair game for Congress to ask the questions and investigate if they so choose. Congress has broad oversight authority over the functions of the Justice Department.

They can call up members of the Justice Department to testify or answer questions if they truly have concerns.

Now the question is, where does it go from there? David Weiss, the U.S. attorney in Delaware, or was, has full -- he will be coming up to talk to Congress in the coming weeks or months. And they can ask questions.

Now he is not likely to provide some specifics as to the specific decisions he made along the way, investigative steps and so on, but Congress can still ask.

But, again, sometimes it's whoever has got the loudest microphone can make the loudest statement about how the criminal justice system works, even if some of the things that those folks say are simply not based in reality, either legally or ethically.

SANCHEZ: Elliott Williams, please stand by.

Speaking of lawmakers, let's actually discuss today's developments with Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia.

Congressman, thank you for being with us. Originally, you were scheduled to talk about UAPs but, obviously, we have to ask about the latest developments in court.

What do you make of this judge pumping the brakes on this plea deal that Hunter Biden had agreed to?

REP. ROBERT GARCIA (D-CA): Look, I think the most important thing to remember is Hunter Biden is a private citizen. And anyone in this space has a right to have their day in court.

The judge has a right to make changes to the deal. So we have to let the process play out. A lot of information is still coming out.

I think all of us in Congress, on the Democratic side, we have said that Hunter Biden should go through the process and the legal process.

I think that what is most important is that Republicans not try to politicize this issue. Hunter Biden should be treated fairly within the criminal justice system.

If he's committed wrongdoing, he should be held accountable for that. And I think all of us agree on that point. And a broader important point here is that Hunter Biden is not Joe Biden. He's not the president. So the focus needs to stay on Hunter Biden. And I expect we'll hear more from the judge in the development of the field.

SANCHEZ: Congressman, what do you make of the allegations from the IRS whistleblowers that the U.S. attorney in this case, David Weiss, made comments in private that he ultimately didn't have the power to decide if Hunter Biden was going to face specific charges?

[13:50:12]

How do you interpret their testimony?

GARCIA: Well, look, I obviously heard the IRS whistleblower testimony as well. I mean, much of that hearing, unfortunately, was a whistleblower circus.

I think what we ought to keep in mind is, on the oversight side, much of the witnesses have been brought forward by Representative Comer, by the chairman of the committee, by some of these hearings topping out on the judiciary side as well, have been a big circus. And we have not really had credible testimony.

As far as what David Weiss may have said or not said, I think it's obviously a question that will be answered in the weeks and months ahead. We want to get to the truth.

All members of Congress, including Democrats want to make sure that Hunter Biden, who is a private citizen, who does not work for the White House and is not Joe Biden, is held accountable.

And I think he's obviously taking steps to try to do that. Some of that is obviously changing as we speak, with the kind of the unravel of this current case that's in front of us. And we'll find out in the days ahead where this will all end.

SANCHEZ: Congressman, we hear your point about Hunter Biden being a private citizen. Obviously, there are questions as to whether behavior that he's alleged to have committed is actually criminal or simply unethical.

But does it concern you that the son of a former vice president, and current president, was allegedly on the phone with, for example, a Chinese businessman, or sending text messages, I should say, to a Chinese businessman, saying he's sitting next to his father.

That if he doesn't get what he's looking for in terms of a deal the reverberations are going to be felt? Does that seem ethical to you?

GARCIA: Well, first, I think Hunter Biden has admitted to some wrongdoing, as part of that original deal. So Hunter Biden is a private citizen and we should is not judge his father these actions, and clearly, in this case, some serious actions that's he took and he needs to be held accountable for. As it related to what exactly happened or has happened, I think the White House has been very clear as well with what they're putting out. And they want to ensure that the process runs fairly and that justice is served in the appropriate way.

We cannot be judging the president or a father based on action that's a son is doing. A lot of us have family and, oftentimes, our family does things that we may not agree with.

Hunter Biden certainly needs to certainly be held accountable for any crimes he may have committed.

And I think the questions and getting the facts on what happened and the answers to what you discussed and others are fair. And I think that's being discussed. And certainly the media is looking into it and Congress is as well.

SANCHEZ: To the point of getting answers to specific questions, if the U.S. attorney goes before the Oversight Committee, what are you wanting to ask him?

GARCIA: Well, look, if we have, obviously, that opportunity, we're going to make sure that we ask all of the questions, and broad questions, to make sure we do get the facts.

Particularly when it comes to statements that have been made, as you referenced earlier, about comments or statements made by the U.S. attorney. We've got to clarification as to what those actually were. I think that's a legitimate question.

But the issue, the broader issue with our Oversight Committee, it's essentially being run by conspiracy theorists. And hearing after hearing after hearing, we've had a wide variety of folks to come forward. And the Republicans, of course, are not asking the right questions.

You saw for weeks the chairman hyping up a possible witness or whistleblower that turned out to be a Chinese arms dealer.

It's hard to give a lot of credibility to something in these hearings when they're really being set up to attack the president and support Donald Trump.

At the end of the day, Hunter Biden should be held accountable. He's a private citizen. That's separate from the White House.

SANCHEZ: Again, focusing on getting answers to very important questions, Congressman, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy raised the idea that undergoing impeachment inquiry would allow Congress more of a broad scope to be able to ask, again, important questions.

What do you make of the speaker leaving the door open for a potential impeachment inquiry of President Biden?

GARCIA: I mean, look, that's just crazy. I think, at the end of the day, Kevin McCarthy is working for Donald Trump and wants to do whatever he can to politicize this and help Donald Trump win another election.

He's almost said as much. And certainly members of his party have said the same.

President Biden has been doing a phenomenal job of leading this country. And is known as an ethical strong president.

So this idea that we would impeach him for political reasons I think is really concerning and it's something that's distracting us from actually doing real work in Washington.

SANCHEZ: Congressman Robert Garcia, we appreciate you joining us. We look forward to you coming back to talk about the unidentified aerial phenomenon.

GARCIA: Happy to do so. Thank you.

SANCHEZ: Thanks so much.

Jim?

SCIUTTO: Our Marshall Cohen has been inside the courtroom for the proceedings today.

[13:55:02]

And, Marshall, there are questions about what happens next. But I wonder how -- you can describe how the lawyers on each side, the prosecutors and Hunter Biden's lawyers, were reacting at each stage of this.

Because one of the most remarkable moments was when, in effect, Biden's lawyers said, OK, this deal is null and void, right? We're not on board with how it is playing out right now.

MARSHALL COHEN, CNN REPORTER: Well, right. That's right, Jim. When the hearing started, it seemed like business as usual. Everything was going as planned. The deal was on.

Then, as the judge sort of scrutinized the specific provisions of the deal, and asked some pretty challenging questions to both sides, she sort of teased out that Hunter Biden's team and the Justice Department weren't actually in the same place on a key question of whether or not he could be charged with future crimes related to some of his foreign work.

At that point, like you mentioned, the deal seemed to be off. They asked for a recess. They tried to get together, reach an agreement. They did come back and told the judge, basically, that they were all good. Ready to move forward. They had settled their disagreements.

And that's when she took the reins. She had concerns still remaining, specifically about the provisions of the deal to resolve the felony gun charge that Hunter Biden would have been charged with, because he was in possession of a firearm while being a drug addict. The questions that the judge had were about important whether or not

that deal was even constitutional. She repeatedly asked, is this even constitutional? What happens if it's not constitutional? Is there a separation of powers issue?

And at that point, she appeared to basically call the whole thing off. She asked both sides to file legal arguments, more briefings to explain the deal, defend the deal.

So the proceedings closed today with no deal, much to basically everyone's surprise -- Jim?

SCIUTTO: And they're closed today and that means it continues into another day.

Marshall Cohen, outside the courthouse there, thank you.

We're joined by Norm Eisen now and our Evan Perez.

As I read the details of this, it strikes me that a lot of the remaining questions are fairly in the weeds, as I can read them.

Norm, maybe I can ask you, given you've got a J.D. somewhere in your past.

One of the issues is the assurances that no other charges be pursued on tax or filing as a foreign agent were part of the structure of the gun case, not the tax case, and that's a complication that the judge took issue with?

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Jim, the issue here is that the judge wants to make sure that the plea agreement is the entire agreement between the parties.

And here the question was, had the parties agreed that this would resolve everything? Or would there be some lingering exposure? And when we started there was some confusion about that.

SCIUTTO: Yes.

EISEN: I do want to say having been mostly a defense lawyer for my career, it's not unusual to get some questions from the judge. That is the job of the judge, to make sure that the plea agreement is on track.

This judge, perhaps reflecting that it is an exceptionally high- profile plea agreement, leaned in a little bit more.

Typically, if the parties say, for example, on the constitutionality question, defendant, do you think it's constitutional? Yes. Government, do you think it's constitutional? Yes. Judges will usually leave it there.

So to order additional briefing on some of these questions that is a pretty active federal judge in this case.

SCIUTTO: Understood.

Evan Perez, you actually talked about this prior to today's events. And that is, that the door was always left open --

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Right.

SCIUTTO: -- to some degree to further prosecution for other crimes not covered by the agreement. One outcome of today's hearing, it seems, is that that's established and everyone agrees on that? Is that correct?

PEREZ: Right. I think that is now the agreement that both sides have is that there is at least some aspect of this investigation, which has covered a lot of different issues, that remains ongoing and that Hunter Biden could still be exposed to those things.

SCIUTTO: What other -- such as?

PEREZ: Well, so what we know -- well, here's what we don't know. The answer is we do not know what those other things are, necessarily.

We do know that this agreement, at least the second agreement that they made, the one where they said, OK, we've put us back on the rails, it covers any tax, any gun or drug issues from 2014 to 2o19.

So that's what they said they -- again, this is the second agreement -- they finally said they were ready to go forward with.