Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Hunter Biden Faces Charges Related To Firearm Purchase And False Statements. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired September 14, 2023 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

JENNIFER RODGERS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: But you know, it's this one provision because it's so uncertain and so much harder to prove is the one that you don't see very often. The penalties vary. It really depends on the person's prior record and it really is on a sliding scale of what the criminal activity was, what kind of gun it was, if it was a particularly dangerous firearm, if it was used, discharged.

In this case, with Hunter Biden having a regular handgun for a brief period of time, not using it or discharging it in any other way, having no prior convictions on his record, at least as far as I know, he would be looking at not very much time, maybe around a year. Twelve months could be even less than that, depending on whether they consider the gun to have been possessed for sporting purposes or collection. And I don't know if he could make a case for that or not. But you know, we're talking about probably somewhere in the 12-month neighborhood, I would think.

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN ANCHOR: Jennifer, please stay with us. We want to reset for our viewers. If you are just joining us on CNN News Central, a historic decision by the Department of Justice. They have filed charges against the son of President Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, three different charges, two of them related to lying on statements in an effort to buy a firearm. The third charge for actually possessing that firearm as a prohibited person.

A reminder, the case being brought by Special Counsel Daniel Weiss is based on Hunter Biden's purchase of this weapon as he wrote in this form that he was not abusing narcotics and later in a biography wrote that he did. We have a team of reporters and analysts with us to break down this news. First to Paula Reid. Paula, you're getting some new reporting about what's going on.

PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDNENT: Yeah, I've been speaking over the past few days to people in Hunter Biden's camp, and I got the sense that it's just pretty dark and gloomy over there. They feel really defeated. They really thought that they were going to be successful with that plea deal that they had negotiated. Even when it first fell apart, they felt like ultimately the judge would approve it. And when that didn't happen, there was quite a bit of despair because Hunter Biden is facing millions and millions of dollars in legal debt from his various legal issues, and it's very difficult for him to find employment right now or raise money. So these charges today, I am told these came as news to their team. They have not scheduled an initial appearance or how exactly he's

going to turn himself in, right? Will he be arrested? Well, typically you arrange a time to turn yourself in. But I've also been asking a lot about his relationship with his father and with the White House. And I'm told by multiple sources that he's actually still very close to his dad. They talk frequently, but they don't talk about this criminal case a lot. I'm told that Hunter doesn't want to burden his father with it.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Yeah, and they shouldn't be talking about it, right? I mean, that's also, they should not be talking about this. I want to go to Kayla Tausche at the White House. As you're seeking a reaction there, tell us what you're getting.

KAYLA TAUSCHE, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, we are hearing from the White House Counsel's Office who, as expected, when asked to respond to the news of the indictment today, said that any questions should be referred to the Department of Justice or Hunter's personal representatives, given that this is an independent investigation. That has been the official line from the White House ever since this began. The White House has pointed out the Trump appointment of David Weiss as essentially legitimizing the investigation back when it was expected to result in a plea deal, and also suggested that the five-year nature of the investigation meant that wherever it was going to end up was going to be done in a way that evaluated all of the facts at hand.

Certainly, it has taken a different turn than the White House, than the president had expected. The president was said to be relieved when this was headed toward a plea deal, and that when the plea deal fell apart, there was quite a bit of uncertainty and frustration that entered the situation. But when I spoke to some people who are close to the White House about the efforts by Republicans to try to tie the president to the actions of his son, they said, at this point, the only thing the president is guilty of is loving his son and keeping him close, and that aides within the White House know that. They know not to cross the president when it comes to issues involving Hunter, that he remains extremely close, as Paula said to his father.

The two men speak regularly. Hunter is still invited to official White House events. He's invited on the president's plane, on his vacations, and that despite these legal troubles, the president has not been willing to keep Hunter at a distance. And so that is the nature of this relationship behind the scenes at the White House. There is said to be some frustration that this did not end the way that it was expected to end just a few weeks ago.

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN ANCHOR: Jessica Dean, to Kayla's point there, there's of course a political backdrop to this. The former president is facing four trials, right? There are allegations on the Hill hat Biden though they presented no public evidence of this. It was somehow involved in Hunter Biden's business dealings. So you have Republicans claiming there's a two tiered system.

[14:05:09] You're trying our president in a way you're not trying. But the fact is this is the first time the Justice Department has ever charged the son of a sitting president happens to be Joe Biden's son. Do you speak to Democrats who believe that politics intervened here from the other direction that the DOJ or the special counsel or David Weiss the prosecutor felt political pressure that the deal they made and were signed on to was too soft and therefore they had to go tougher.

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENR: Look I think the DOJ and you all have followed this so closely. DOJ the attorney general have done everything they can to keep this as nonpartisan as possible. They have tried to do that in a hyper partisan world that we live in. Everything has political implications. This of course has political implications for a variety of reasons. You remember our polling that just came out. Fifty five percent of Americans believe that President Biden acted inappropriately around what the handling of this investigation into his son.

Again, as you mentioned there's no evidence that the president has done anything wrong. But when you look at that and you separate it out into Democrats and Republicans it tells a story that I think everyone is going to think is exactly the story we would expect which is that Democrats a much smaller group of Democrats think that that happened. It is the Republicans, a much larger swath of Republican voters believe that President Biden has acted inappropriately here. But the fact remains that in a general election this is going to be an issue and it is going to come up.

And I covered President Biden's campaign in 2020 and it was already coming up. The Hunter issue came up again and again. And they went back to what we are hearing still from them which is this is a president that loves his son. He has struggled. And so the question is to voters is is the cake bake with Biden in the sense that you already factor in Hunter and you've made your decision on how you feel like everybody has behaved there. Or is this is this going to be a new layer.

SCIUTTO: Also how do you compare the current legal troubles facing the former president. But if that is the choice in the end. Right. By the way there are allegations you can make in public unproven still make those allegations. But to prove them in court is a separate issue.

SANCHEZ: Of course in the politics of this is playing out on Capitol Hill with Kevin McCarthy and his impeachment inquiry. Notably when we heard from Kayla the White House directing questions to DOJ. But there is some separation between how the White House has approached this very quietly. Joe Biden not really talking about it publicly to the way that Hunter and his legal team have approached it. They've been certainly more aggressive.

TAUSCHE: You're absolutely right. And this has been fascinating to watch because earlier this year the Hunter Biden legal team they decided to take on a much more aggressive strategy. And they did this over objections from the White House. There are senior advisors in the Biden White House who would prefer that Hunter just you know take his licks. Stay quiet. Don't engage. But it got to a point where Hunter and one of his lawyers said no we don't want to do that anymore. We want to punch back. He brought on a high profile and very aggressive attorney Abby Lowell who's been working with his longtime friend and attorney Kevin Morris and they have started filing off lawsuits filing off letters to the Hill seeking ethics investigations into certain Republican lawmakers.

Just yesterday we saw them file a lawsuit against a former Trump -- Trump White House official who they accused of hacking into his iPhone and the backup for his laptop. Again this is it sounds clear he's going to be successful. But this is a much more aggressive forward leaning strategy. It makes waves. It makes headlines and it makes some people at the White House a little crazy. They would prefer that this not be the approach. But also we need to do something. We can't just sit here. So this has caused tension with some White House advisors. But again every source I've spoken with that our colleagues have spoken with on all sides agree that the president and his son are extremely close and he has his support. But the people around the president and they're not so sure about this.

SCIUTTO: The president lost his other son. Yes. You know I mean it's just one of the many factors you have to throw into that relationship.

KEILAR: I want to get back to Evan Evan bringing you back into this conversation. Let's remind ourselves how long this has taken.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTIC CORRESPONDENT: Right. Five years. Right. No I think that's actually a huge factor in why you see so much so much drama around this investigation. Right. This is an investigation that began. This is that this is now the third the third attorney general that is having to deal with this investigation. It began before Bill Barr took office under the Trump administration. He is the one that decided that David Weiss was going to keep this case. There was there was different aspects of this investigation that were in other jurisdictions. And he decided near the end of the administration of the Trump administration that David Weiss the U.S. attorney in Delaware was going to keep this investigation.

[14:09:09]

And, of course, when Joe Biden took office, he let David Weiss stay in his position in order -- to help oversee this. And so here we are, again, five years after this investigation began, and this is the first actual criminal charge we're seeing. And one of the things that you -- one of the reasons why you see so much frustration and why you now have these whistleblowers who have been talking to Republicans on Capitol Hill is the frustration of why this investigation is -- This is not that complicated.

You know, this certainly this gun charge, if you wanted to bring it, you could have brought it, you know, a couple of years ago when certainly CNN, we reported two years ago that this was part of the consideration of what was being looked at. So we knew that this was being done. And yet here we are just days before they really had the deadline to bring it is when David Weiss, the special counsel, the now special counsel is bringing it. And so that is going to be part of the story that you are going to see play out over the next coming months as Republicans begin their inquiry, trying to figure out or trying to find evidence that they believe exists that ties the sitting president to some of the dealings of his son and other members of his family.

But what you're going to see a lot of of litigation and certainly a lot of a lot of testimony from people inside and behind the scenes is the infighting that has been going on behind the scenes, the sort of disagreements about this case and why it is stretched out to five years. A lot of times the criticism of the Justice Department is that you have a lot of lawyers there who are hesitant to make big decisions or major decisions because they don't want to get criticized. And then they punt these things down the road. And that's a criticism you hear a lot. And I think you're going to hear a lot more going forward because there is really no good answer as to why this has taken five years.

SANCHEZ: And on that question, let's take a step back with Kara Scannell, who I believe is still with us, because David Weiss, the U.S. attorney, has been a figure of intense focus, of intense scrutiny during the entire investigation. He reportedly appeared to be willing, according to The New York Times, to end the Hunter Biden probe with no charges earlier this year. And then things changed. Walk us through the entire process to where we are now.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right. So, I mean, this investigation has been underway for five years and it was wide ranging. There is some back and forth. What we've seen have come out through some of the testimony of agents that were working on this case and that have given testimony to the House committees, in which they talk about that there were meetings or there were discussions about how and where to bring these charges. And that one of the issues that we had the IRS, which investigates tax crimes, they wanted David Weiss to bring felony tax evasion charges. And they also recommended some misdemeanor tax charges. That has evolved as there often is.

There are disputes and back and forth between investigators and prosecutors about what they can prove. And then there was also presentations to the main justice and the tax division, which generally sees every tax case because they want a consistency in how the tax laws are applied to citizens. So there was some skepticism, some pushing back, as we have reported, about the strength of the evidence in this case on the tax charges. And that there were questions about how this was going to be resolved. I mean, this investigation was very, it was under investigation for a long time. It seems there was a lot of debate about how they would get to the finish line here and whether they would bring a case.

And ultimately, they did believe that they could bring a case. And then there were plea negotiations that got underway. And part of this, as we've been discussing, is because of the nature of the charges, the nature of, you know, is someone who has paid back their taxes, Hunter Biden has paid back more than $2 million in interest penalties and taxes, you know, is someone like that usually criminally prosecuted or is that handled in a civil manner? And the question on these gun charges as well as, you know, would you bring this as a standalone case or not? And then the constitutional issues that you've mentioned that have arisen more recently. But, you know, these are all part of the factors that were under discussion and on the table. And ultimately, a deal was struck, a deal that everyone had agreed to. And even when it was under scrutiny before a judge who asked a lot of questions about both the deals, that did Hunter Biden really understand what he would have immunity from in terms of prosecution? Because the question was essentially, you know, if there is a change in administration and a new Justice Department, how far back could they look at Hunter Biden? What was he really going to be protected on under this deal? You know, there were questions there. It seemed that it had fallen apart. They had come back together, the Justice Department and Hunter's team, in agreement on what this deal would be. And then the judge ultimately said she wasn't willing to approve it because she had concerns about the constitutional issues onstitutionality of the gun deal, as well as the scope of the immunity that he would receive and the structure of the tax deal.

[14:15:41]

I mean, then from there, as we have been talking about, there was no agreement between Hunter Biden's team and the Department of Justice about how they would try to renegotiate what was on the table in terms of taxes and guns. And then David Weiss, the U.S. attorney, Trump appointee, who's been overseeing this investigation from the start, he then went to Merrick Garland, the attorney general, and asked for special counsel status, saying that had reached the stage where that was necessary. And one of the questions here has been jurisdiction. Where can you bring this case? The gun was purchased in Delaware. That was squarely in the Delaware U.S. attorney's jurisdiction.

But then the questions of taxes, you know, it would either be L.A. or Washington, D.C., where Hunter Biden lived and where his taxes were filed. And that was a question of how that would be brought. I mean, when it was negotiated, that was an issue that they had negotiated away, that it didn't matter. But this is the next stage of this investigation of where will the tax charges be brought. And the special counsel, Weiss's office, is saying that they do look like they're going to bring this. And the question now is where they will bring it and what exactly they will charge.

I mean, one thing that we do see from this indictment today, I mean, they -- the plea deal essentially on the gun charge was no prosecution as part of a diversion agreement. It was just on the possession. And today, Hunter Biden is indicted on three counts. Two counts relate to false statements. One false statement on the form that he filled out saying that he was not addicted or a user of a controlled substance, in this case crack cocaine. And then a false statement that he made to the gun dealer in which he made that same affirmation. The third count being that he possessed it while he was an addict. And this charge here is from October of 2018. He held this gun for 11 days.

And at the time, Hunter Biden has been open about that he was using drugs. You wrote in his memoir about his drug use. So those are the three charges that he's facing, ranging from a maximum of five years in prison and one of the counts to a maximum of 10 years in prison on two of the counts. So certainly serious charges, Boris.

SCIUTTO: Paula, a lot of allegations are going to get mixed up in the same pot here, right? A prosecutor's charge on gun charges here has not yet made a decision on whether to charge on the tax charges, may be very well heading in that direction. Republicans are alleging that President Joe Biden is involved in bribery and business dealings with Joe Biden. They have presented -- the political investigations or Hill investigations have presented no public evidence of that. They at some point. They haven't yet. Has --- what have prosecutors, investigators found that we're aware of that tie Hunter Biden to the current president of the United States, right? Because what we're going to hear and probably already hearing already is a merging of all these various allegations, regardless of what the facts show.

REID: At this point, there is no evidence from the Justice Department that has been put forth to suggest there is a connection between the president and his son and his business dealings. Now, this investigation went on for five years. They looked at a lot of different things for a time. They did look about questions, questions of possible foreign lobbying, things like that. And when they came to have to decide on what charges they were going to bring to potentially pursue this plea deal, they believe that their strongest case, the case that they could support with evidence, possibly beyond reasonable doubt, it had to go to trial, would be the tax charges. And then they're diverting this gun charge.

And I think as Kara and others have said, you have to look at this and ask whether this case would be brought against anyone else. And Hunter Biden's attorneys believe it would not. They believe that for a first- time person who failed to pay their taxes for the first time, paid them back with penalties and fees, that that is not a criminal federal prosecution that would be brought against other people. The gun charge, it's really interesting to watch how that is changing almost in real time because the Fifth Circuit recently ruled on this issue. It's something Hunter Biden's legal team was watching very closely, that people with prior drug use should not necessarily be barred from owning a firearm. And they believe that if that ever went to trial, that they would be able to easily win.

It's interesting that laws that expand gun rights, something his father has fought against, could actually wind up helping his son here. But they would argue to you, they've argued to me, that they do not believe this is a case that would be brought against anyone else. But to your question, when the Justice Department, a Trump-appointed prosecutor, came to present his case, the plea deal that he had was focused on tax crimes and a gun charge, neither one of which had anything to do with President Biden.

SCIUTTO: By the way, to your point, for a time, the prosecutor agreed, or at least made a deal, that would not have led to charges here, right? For a time. And then of course the judge involved, overseeing, said not good enough --

(CORSSTALK)

REID: Plead Guilty --

(CROSSTALK) SCIUTTO: -- and then they went back.

REID: Plead guilty to it. Yeah, plead guilty to it. Yes.

KEILAR: Interesting, we just got word that James Comer, who of course is the Republican chairman of the House Oversight Committee, has called, I was just told in my ear, the charges a smart start, which is pretty small. Pardon me, can you repeat it in my ear? A small start? Yeah, a small start, I believe is what, correct me if I'm wrong.

[14:20:35]

Well, it matters and it really does matter because Republicans have been very critical of David Weiss, right? Let's remember he's Trump appointed, stayed on, but at the same time, and there've been some questions I think of timing and when he decided to ask for special counsel status, but there's also been this need of Republicans to kind of not like David Weiss for their purposes, their political purposes, and they haven't, this isn't satisfactory. His whole approach is not satisfactory to them as they are the ones pursuing this impeachment inquiry.

DEAN: After they asked for well over a year, I think, months and months and months for a special counsel, and then they get that and it's not enough. We heard there were a number of Republican senators that signed a letter that were asking for this and then as soon as that was granted to David Weiss, it was like, well, this is also, this is terrible as well.

So yes, it's never quite been enough to your point, Brianna , and that is, look, they continue to push forward with this as my colleagues on the Hill have been reporting with this impeachment inquiry and where they're trying to go with this and they believe this is what they should be doing right now. But the bottom line is we're hearing that the Biden team, Hunter Biden's team thinks that no other person would be prosecuted like this. Meantime, Republicans pushing back saying, oh, it's not enough. They should have gone further here. So there is a lot of politics, especially on the Hill --

(CROSSTALK)

SCIUTTO: We could look at the record --

DEAN: -- at play here. Yeah.

SCIUTTO: -- You could look at how many charges are filed for the cases like this. We've asked our lawyers and they say that generally no, --

DEAN: Right, Right.

SCIUTTO: but there are cases. So I mean, there's a record. Let's get more of a political perspective now with two former congressmen we have with us, Congressman Charlie Dent and Francis Rooney. Congressman Dent, you as a former Republican congressman, we just heard Jessica Dean point out how essentially Hunter Biden has become like a pinata for congressional Republicans. What do you make of these latest developments?

CHARLIE DENT, FORMER US REPRESENTATIVE: Well, this whole Hunter Biden situation is a hot mess politically, I think, for President Biden. Look, I think Republicans have to be really careful with this. I think they have to watch that they don't overplay their hand. I mean, if the issue is they have a great political issue with Hunter Biden. You know, I'm not going to say this is an issue that's going to drive voters in the upcoming presidential election. But, you know, with the $ 80 000 a month on the gas company board, you know, the dealings with China, the shell companies, and now all these charges, there might be foreign foreign agent registration act issues, FARA issues.

So this is a real mess. But at the same time, I think a lot of voters also look at the Biden family in context and they'll say, yeah, he lost his wife and his daughter decades ago in a terrible car accident. He lost his son, Boda, cancer. And now he's got a son who has admittedly had substance abuse issues. And so there might be some sympathy there, too. So I think Republicans need to be really careful. I think they made a mistake going down this impeachment inquiry path. I don't think that's going to help them. And because they really haven't tied any of this to Joe Biden directly.

But Hunter Biden will be a pinata for the GOP. And I suspect this is something the Democrats would rather not be talking about. But it's out there now that he's been charged.

KEILAR: Yeah, they're hoping as they whack this pinata that Joe Biden comes out of it is what they're hoping. So far, that has not been the case. Congressman Rooney, what do you think?

FRANCIS ROONEY, FORMER US REPRESENTATIVE: Well, I think as usual, they're jumping into specific charges which are not nearly as important as the larger scale issue that Charlie referred to, which is the slimy influence peddling of Hunter Biden and whether any of that slime rubs off on the president or not. None of which has yet. I understand that.

But I've been on the board of four oil companies and I've never made more than one third of what they paid that Hunter Biden guy in the Ukraine. So it was definitely influence peddling. I understand that there have been numerous phone calls and visits with Biden, not talking about business, but that's influence peddling to me. And I think that's what the Republicans ought to be going after.

KEILAR: I think you really hit the nail on the head there. Because, I mean, look, even during the Obama years, you saw that there were officials in the Obama White House raising questions about some of the activities of Hunter Biden. Not necessarily because they were illegal, but because the appearance --

(CROSSTALK)

SANCHEZ: the apprearance --

KEILAR: of them was so terrible. --

(CROSSTALK)

ROONEY: Listen, if-

KEILAR: -- And that is something that is definitely something that he may have had to reckon with them. Then, they were concerned about congressmen and they're concerned about now you see it washing up on the shores of this administration.

ROONEY: You know, there's a canon of legal ethics that a lawyer should, and they don't always do it, avoid even the appearance of impropriety. And I think that's a standard that we ought to be able to hold our highest elected officials to.

SCIUTTO: But we don't, right? I mean, we don't with the Supreme Court. We certainly don't with members of Congress who buy and sell stocks all the time. And there have been allegations and some by the way prosecutions right of acting on insider information.

[14:25:16]

ROODNEY: For sure. Avoid even the appearance of impropriety. And I think that's a standard that we ought to be able to hold our highest elected officials to.

SCIUTTO: But we don't. Right. I mean we don't want Supreme Court. We certainly don't with members of Congress who buy and sell stocks all the time. And there have been allegations and some by the way prosecutions right of acting on insider information. And with the children of presidents if you bridge the administration's going back to the Trump administration we know there's been a whole host of activity by children with financial implications right?. Whether whether ethical or not. I'll leave--I'll leave the --

(CROSSTALK)

ROONEY: Not the Obama administration and not any Bush administrations.

SCIUTTO: -- True.

ROONEY: Just recently.

SCIUTTO: Just talking about the most recent too. Michael Moore is with us as well I believe. And Michael I just tried to defer back to the lawyers where I can here because a very basic question I asked this of Jennifer -- Jennifer Rodgers and I'm just curious in your experience would you or I or folks watching who did something similar here be likely to face charges like this. How often are these these both deal with lying on a on a statement an ATF statement when you buy a firearm but also being a prohibited person someone who is currently using illicit drugs when they purchase that firearm. How often are those things charged.

MICHAEL MOORE, FORMER US ATTORNEY: Yeah. Well I'm glad to be with you. I don't think you would have seen this very often and we didn't use it very often in this kind of case. I mean the facts obviously dictate your charging decisions in each individual circumstance and the facts of this case are just not compelling for bringing the charge. I mean sometimes you might use the gun charges in connections with other crimes that you're charging but to somehow go out and suggest that a particular time you said something that was wrong and had it for a short amount of time that's different.

This is not a situation where you had a convicted felon in possession of a gun. That's a totally different case than it is filling out a form like on this questionnaire about whether or not it's time he was using drugs or addicted to drugs at the time which I guess gives some room a little bit a little bit of a squishy answer perhaps at that particular moment he's filling out the questionnaire. But we just we just wouldn't have done it. And so it is in fact the law. That's that's the truth. But most of the time we spent the resources we had and we were always asking for more resources. We were looking for things like child sex traffickers whether or not there was civil rights violence. Those types of cases where I think the money of the federal government is is better spent.

I have more concern I think about the nexus and the status of the case given that there was agreement to resolve all the charges and then suddenly to see the case brought back to life. Lawyers don't like to do that because it certainly weighs on your credibility as you deal with other lawyers in the future and whether or not they can count on your word. And so I think that may that'll be an issue that gets raised later.

SCIUTTO: Obviously there are the legal implications. Let's see. So back to the political implications. We have CNN's Kristen Holmes with us who is in frequent communication with folks in Donald Trump's camp. And Kristen is it fair to say that the Trump campaign is happy to now conflate Hunter Biden's ongoing legal saga with what the president is facing in Congress an impeachment inquiry.

KIRSTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well there are two things going on. One you have to note of course they're going to be somewhat happy about this decision to indict Hunter Biden. They think it makes Joe Biden look bad and everything that they do is political. But the other part of this is this argument that they have been making for over a year and really since Donald Trump was in office particularly lately on all these legal challenges which that is that it is a two tiered justice system that it is unfair.

The only reason the Department of Justice is indicting Trump in these multiple investigations is because of the fact that he is running for president. He called various district attorneys Democrats and saying that this is all partisan. This takes away from that argument. And what I'm watching for now is to see how exactly they managed to square this indictment with what is happening with Donald Trump and the argument they've really been making for two years. If they are indicting the son of Joe Biden does that mean that they are not politically motivated. Those are the questions that they are going to have to answer now. And that's what people are going to push back on.

Well they indicted Hunter Biden. You have been saying this is election interference. You have been saying that because Hunter Biden has not been indicted and that Donald Trump has that this is unfair political and that Joe Biden is pulling all of the strings when it comes to the Department of Justice. The other thing I want to point out here it's not just Donald Trump. It is Republicans as a whole. When we talk to so many Republicans members in the House they talk about the Department of Justice as though it is the deep state that is independent that it is rogue. And it is interesting here to see how exactly they're going to marry this because again they say it is run by Democrats.

I think what you're going to end up hearing is what we heard from Representative Comer that this is a small start. It kind of incremental responses here. But this is years of messaging that they are now going to have to figure out how to rewrite because the messaging has been that this is only happening to Donald.