Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

House Debates Biden Impeachment Inquiry Vote; Hunter Biden Defiant on Capitol Hill. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired December 13, 2023 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Defiant and angry, Hunter Biden on Capitol Hill, and the president's son is not holding back, ignoring a subpoena from Congress, calling the impeachment inquiry into his father shameless, and saying that Republicans are going after him only to embarrass and damage his father.

Plus: having the final say. The Supreme Court says it will a weigh in on a key abortion pill, a decision that could guarantee access to the drug mifepristone or end it even in states where the procedure is still allowed.

PAMELA BROWN, CNN HOST: And a deal to save the planet. At the climate conference, an unprecedented call to move away from fossil fuels. But there's a catch.

We are following these major developing stories and many more, all coming in right here to CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

SANCHEZ: Thanks so much for joining us this afternoon. I'm Boris Sanchez, alongside Pam Brown, in the nation's capital.

And, today, House Republicans are set to formalize an impeachment inquiry into President Biden. This morning, the man at the center of it all, Hunter Biden, called them out just steps outside the Capitol. Facing a deadline to comply with a congressional subpoena, the president's son offered to testify, but, publicly, Republican lawmakers, remember, are demanding a closed-door interview first.

In his remarks, Hunter Biden singled out some of those Republicans for what he says is an absurd probe.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HUNTER BIDEN, SON OF JOE BIDEN: And in the depths of my addiction, I was extremely irresponsible with my finances.

But to suggest that is grounds for an impeachment inquiry is beyond the absurd. It's shameless. There is no evidence to support the allegations that my father was financially involved in my business because it did not happen.

James Comer, Jim Jordan, Jason Smith, and their colleagues have distorted the facts.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BROWN: Republican leadership now says contempt of Congress is on the table, but their first order of business, hours away, is a vote to formalize the Biden impeachment inquiry.

We are tracking this with CNN chief congressional correspondent Manu Raju and CNN senior justice correspondent Evan Perez.

So, Manu, how many Republicans -- how have Republicans reacted on the Hill? And has it factored into that vote later today?

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, they expect to have enough support to move forward with this impeachment inquiry, regardless of what Hunter Biden decided to do today.

We do expect contempt proceedings to happen and probably stretch into the new year over Hunter Biden's decision to defy that congressional subpoena. That is a separate matter. Then there's the impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden himself.

In order to get this through, Speaker of the House Mike Johnson needs to get a majority of the House to support this, meaning he can only lose three Republicans along this -- along party lines.

At the moment, we expect him to have the votes, in large part because the vulnerable Republicans, endangered Republicans who before had been concerned about voting to authorize an impeachment inquiry now say that they are on board to allow the investigation to go ahead, even though when I caught up with several of them, they made clear that they are not yet there on actually charging the president with high crimes or misdemeanors, saying there's a lot more evidence they need to gather.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: But it sounds like you're not sold yet on whether to actually support removing -- charging and then removing a president from office?

REP. DAVID VALADAO (R-CA): That's a very different level. Obviously, the inquiry is the beginning of it. And where we end up, we will how to figure out how -- when we get there.

But what we're talking about now is an inquiry to ask some serious questions and force the administration to actually respond to them.

REP. MARC MOLINARO (R-NY): I did not come to Congress to expel a member of Congress nor impeach a president. But I have a constitutional responsibility to provide the oversight and accountability.

RAJU: Do you think there's evidence yet he acted corruptly to benefit his son? REP. TONY GONZALES (R-TX): I don't -- I don't dive into that piece of

it too much. That's not what, I guess, gets me going on it. I look at the border and Afghanistan is the things that really upset me, and I'd like to see that be included in the inquiry.

But I think it's kind of too early to tell.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

RAJU: So a lot of those Republicans simply say they have not seen evidence yet to show that Joe Biden acted corruptly to help his son's overseas business dealings.

[13:05:03]

They need to see that evidence before they're willing to vote to impeach. And that is going to be the real challenge for Speaker Mike Johnson. He says he has not made a decision yet about whether to actually move ahead and impeach Joe Biden over all these issues.

But there are a lot of Republicans who are dead set for impeachment. But that's going to be the challenge for Mike Johnson. What does he decide to do when they formally authorize this inquiry? How far do they go? Do they decide to pull back in any way? All huge questions as they move down this road that will take them into 2024 -- guys.

SANCHEZ: And, Manu, as you're speaking, we're watching live photos live video from the House floor, where Jerry Nadler is right now debating the premise of the impeachment inquiry, where the House is set to vote later on tonight on the impeachment inquiry of Joe Biden.

Let's go to Evan Perez, because, Evan, Republicans are set to initiate contempt proceedings for the president's son Hunter Biden. What are they saying? And then what happens next?

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENIOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Well, the Republicans are very, very upset because the president's son did not show up for the deposition that they said he was supposed to show up for at 9:30 this morning.

Instead, what we had was Hunter Biden kept them guessing right up to the minute he was supposed to appear and instead appeared over on the Senate side just outside the Capitol, where he had that very extraordinary public statement, he made it to the cameras, where he really squarely took on these allegations.

We haven't heard from him much. But we have now hear -- we're now hearing from him a little more recently on more personal terms, where he talked about how Republicans are essentially weaponizing, mocking his struggles with addiction.

But he also addressed the big question that Republicans have been making. And I will read you just a part of what he says.

He says: "There is no evidence to support the allegations that my father was financially involved in my business because it did not happen."

And so that's, of course, at the center of what Republicans say they are still investigating. They're demanding more documents. They wanted him to come behind closed doors. He said he was prepared to do a public hearing, which is why he did that at the -- on the Senate side of the Capitol.

Look, we don't know what happens next. We know that Republicans are threatening to hold him in contempt. That is going to be a drawn-out process. In the meantime, Hunter Biden has real legal problems. He has to show up in court in California, where he's facing these tax charges.

He also has federal charges in Delaware on a gun that he -- that he purchased. So those are more real things for Hunter to -- Hunter Biden to have to address in the coming months. All of this, of course, Pamela and Boris, you know, is draped in the politics of it all, because we have a campaign ongoing. That's what Republicans are also focused on.

And Hunter Biden says they're simply doing this to try -- to try to hurt the president and his campaign.

SANCHEZ: And, Evan, if the impeachment inquiry is formalized, there's likely going to be another deadline and potentially another attempt to negotiate testimony, no?

PEREZ: Well, you can probably expect that they will still try to say to Hunter Biden, you can come at any time and resolve this problem. That is -- I think that's exactly, right, what you expect to see happen.

But the other thing that's also happening behind the scenes is that Republicans are going to be talking to the White House counsel to try to get to access to some of the documents that they say they have been denied. The White House, for its part, says that they have provided plenty of documents, and Republicans simply have no evidence for the allegations that they're making.

BROWN: All right, I'm going to go back to Manu, because we're learning some more about the talks under way in the Senate about that battle over immigration and Ukraine, Israel aid.

It seems like there's some movement today on that front, Manu. What's happening there?

RAJU: Yes, this is a hugely significant issue, because this debate, this negotiation over how to secure the border, changing immigration policies, Republicans have made central, saying that needs to be resolved before they will agree to billions of dollars in emergency aid for Ukraine, that President Zelenskyy of Ukraine came here yesterday to push for, as well as the aid for Israel, all tied to these talks on immigration.

We are hearing the White House has made some major concessions to move towards the Republican position for more restrictive policies, including giving the president more authority to expel migrants at the border. And they are moving, according to Republicans and Democrats, serious progress towards a deal.

Now, there is no deal yet. And one -- Senator John Cornyn of Texas, a top Republican, told me he is not ready to sign off on this, said he wants even more concessions from the White House. Democrats, meanwhile, many of them are outraged at the White House's concessions so far, but this is a very significant issue they're trying to resolve in the next couple of days to move forward on this massive aid package, as Ukraine and Israel waits for those resources -- guys.

SANCHEZ: Manu Raju, Evan Perez, thanks so much for the reporting.

Let's dig deeper now with former Nixon White House counsel John Dean and CNN presidential historian Tim Naftali.

[13:10:03]

Gentlemen, great to see you both.

John, first to you.

What do Republicans get by formalizing this inquiry with a vote? Does it actually make a substantial difference from what they're doing right now?

JOHN DEAN, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL: It really does not.

What they're doing is abusing the process. I must say, I started my career as a counsel to the House Judiciary Committee, which handles impeachments. Very familiar. I have watched it for 60 years. I have never seen more abusive use of this process that they are totally politicizing with baseless charges to try to make it difficult for a president and to honor Donald Trump's request that he be able to charge Biden in next year's election with also having been impeached.

That's what this drill is all about.

BROWN: Tim, I want to bring you in on this, because Democrats say this impeachment inquiry is a fishing expedition, as you know.

Republicans say it's a fact-finding mission. In essence, that means both sides agree the probe thus far has not uncovered anything that reaches the threshold for impeachment. Historically, has Congress investigated a president in this manner before?

TIM NAFTALI, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: You know, Congress has a constitutional obligation to engage in fact-finding. There's nothing surprising about that.

It's when you turn it into an impeachment inquiry that, historically, you're supposed to reach a different threshold. Impeachment inquiries have to have some basis in alleged high crimes and misdemeanors by the federal official.

Right now, the investigation is about acts that Joe Biden is alleged to have done when he was vice president and when he was a candidate for the president. He is neither of those things right now. So the idea that you would use this constitutional provision, which is a serious one, to investigate activities by someone who is no longer in the position, federal position, that interests you is -- let us put it this way.

It is just -- as John said, it is an abuse of a constitutional weapon. We have never seen anything like this before. I think it matters that the House passes a resolution because it -- once you turn something into an impeachment inquiry, historically, you have more power to investigate.

But we haven't reached the threshold where such a resolution would be justifiable.

BROWN: I want to ask about Hunter Biden.

John, I want to go to you on this, because Hunter Biden was subpoenaed for a deposition. He showed up to the Capitol today just steps outside, making a statement, saying he's happy to do a public hearing. Are there grounds here for a contempt referral to the Department of Justice, in your view, John?

DEAN: I don't think there are for the following reason.

What Hunter is not willing to do is go to a closed session, where he knows well that this committee has a history, the people behind this committee have a history of taking closed-door testimony, distorting it, leaking it, and portraying it as something that it is not.

If he has a public hearing, they can't do that. If they have a public hearing, the thinness of their pursuit of a crime is going to be quite evident. So I think he's very smart in doing what he's doing. I can't envision that the Department of Justice would ever bring this to court if they do vote for contempt.

I'm not sure they can even get a contempt citation the floor of the House from somebody like Jim Jordan, who is himself still in defiance of a January 6 Committee hearing subpoena.

SANCHEZ: John, if he were to testify in some form to the House, do you think his answers might factor into his criminal cases?

DEAN: Well, they could. He's not going to -- I -- if they go into his tax and his other problems, his gun registration problem, they will obviously be trying to influence his case. He might be forced to take the Fifth. He doesn't have to come up to Congress and testify about that.

And it has been the tradition to not force people to go to Capitol Hill to take the Fifth Amendment. If they -- if they say they -- their lawyer says they're going to do it, you don't come up and try to embarrass them. If they do that, they're really trying to influence his criminal case.

That could result in a judge saying, listen, you can't have one leg of the government doing one thing and the other leg doing something else. They don't -- we treat the federal government as an entity, an entirety, and so they have to be careful what they do with this.

[13:15:01]

BROWN: And what about the irony here of Jim Jordan pushing for contempt of Congress for Hunter Biden, when he himself violated a congressional subpoena, Tim?

NAFTALI: Well, of course, there's a -- it's once again a sign to the American people that the rules don't seem to apply to everyone.

One thing that's really going to be interesting is whether or not the committee, the Judiciary Committee, will take a contempt citation to the floor. I'm not sure that Speaker Johnson has enough votes actually to pass a contempt citation against Hunter Biden, when Hunter Biden has offered to testify under oath before Congress.

So, I'm not -- it'll be very interesting to see what, if anything, the committee does once it votes to hold him in contempt.

BROWN: All right, Tim Naftali, John Dean, thank you so much.

Right here on your screen, you're watching live pictures from the House.

We're going to be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:20:19]

SANCHEZ: Just into CNN, we are monitoring the debate on the House floor right now.

Democratic Congressman Dan Goldman of New York is giving his 2 cents on the potential impeachment inquiry vote of Joe Biden.

Let's listen in.

(JOINED IN PROGRESS)

REP. DANIEL GOLDMAN (D-NY): ... have not testified, even though their supervisors have.

Just this morning, Hunter Biden showed up to the Capitol ready to provide evidence. The Republicans refused to take his testimony. So, how can you sit there saying you need more evidence when you prevent the central witness in the investigation from giving you evidence?

What are you afraid of? I yield back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Members are reminded to direct their remarks to the chair.

Gentleman from Massachusetts reserves. Gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield one minute to my good friend distinguished gentleman from South Carolina Mr. Timmons.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Gentleman from South Carolina is recognized for one minute.

REP. WILLIAM TIMMONS (R-SC): Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Americans have lost faith in the impartiality of the Biden administration. We have ample evidence that the DOJ, FBI and IRS had refused to do their jobs. Americans deserve to know the truth and Congress has a duty to investigate.

The question is simple. What did President Biden know about his family's criminal enterprises and when? That is the question. That is why this inquiry is necessary. We have already uncovered that the Biden family received $25 million in payouts from foreign adversaries. Their scheme was simple.

Foreign client has a problem. Client pays a Biden. Vice President Biden travels to the foreign country. Vice President Biden leverages U.S. influence to force favorable outcomes for the client. The Biden family earns their fee. That's the scheme.

The proof of concept was Burisma in 2014. And they replicated it again and again. If President Biden was complicit, then our national security is vulnerable. His administration keeps stonewalling, while the president repeatedly lies about his involvement. As a member of the Oversight Committee, I believe the evidence we have uncovered thus far demands further investigation.

This vote is the only logical next step. I urge a yes-vote. Yield back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Gentleman yields back. Gentleman from Oklahoma reserves.

Gentleman from Massachusetts is recognized.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Mr. Speaker, I yield one minute to the gentleman from Florida, Ms. Wasserman Schultz.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Gentlelady from Florida is recognized for one minute.

REP. DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ (D-FL): Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise to oppose this perverse, illegitimate effort to do Donald Trump's political dirty work. This resolution is nothing more than an extreme political stunt built on absolutely zero evidence of wrongdoing. The one thing it does prove is that Republicans are focused on the wrong priorities. This resolution clearly has nothing to do with protecting the

Constitution from high crimes and misdemeanors. How do we know? Because a year of investigation, piles of documents and a herd of the Republicans' own witnesses confirmed there is zero evidence of wrongdoing.

Instead, the Republicans' wasteful witch-hunt just confirms that President Biden is a good and honorable man. What this resolution really does is cover up a full year of do-nothing Republican policies that ignored our families' needs and neglected an array of global threats to democracy.

Worse, this resolution tries to obscure the corrupt and criminal acts of the former President and wannabe dictator Donald Trump. This extreme political stunt is built upon the sick, twisted extremism of House Republicans and totally unmasks their complete absence of an agenda that helps the American people.

I urge a no-vote on this resolution. And I yield back the balance of my time.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentlelady's time has expired.

Gentleman from Massachusetts reserves.

Gentleman from Oklahoma is recognized.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield two minutes to my very good friend distinguished gentleman from South Carolina Mr. Fry.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman from South Carolina is recognized for two minutes.

REP. RUSSELL FRY (R-SC): Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 918. This year, House Republicans have conducted a methodical investigation into the alleged actions of the Biden family, including Joe Biden himself, and his family's foreign business dealings in foreign -- foreign peddling schemes.

As a member of both the House Judiciary and Oversight committees, I can say that our investigation has peeled back layer upon layer of Biden family scandals and has exposed to safety nets designed to insulate the Biden family and Joe Biden from impending accountability.

There's an old legal say, Mr. Speaker, that if you don't have the facts, you argue the law. If you don't have the law, you argue the facts. And if you have neither, you pound the table. What we are seeing from the other side today is that they want to talk about Donald Trump. They want to talk about January 6. They want to talk about a perceived lack of transparency.

They want to talk about how nothing is happening out in the open. Well, let me assure you that we have done this for months. We have done more in 10 months than law enforcement agencies have done in five years.

[13:25:06]

So, let's talk about the facts; $25 million have flowed to members of the Biden family, 20 corporate entities. Nine members of the Biden family have received these monies, $40,000 direct payment to Joe Biden himself, $200,000 direct payment to Joe Biden himself, allegedly under a loan.

We have WhatsApp messages, pseudonyms, fake e-mail addresses and 22 meetings in which Joe Biden himself met with Hunter Biden and his business associates. We have been stonewalled. We have even seen this today, as Hunter Biden paraded onto the Senate side and did not come to a lawfully issued subpoena deposition in front of the House Oversight Committee.

Now is the time for an impeachment inquiry. Thank you. And I yield back.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The gentleman yields back.

Gentleman from Oklahoma reserves.

Gentleman from...

BROWN: All right, you're listening to the debate on the floor there on Capitol Hill from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle expressing what they view.

And from the Democrats. we have heard from say that they are staunchly opposed to an impeachment inquiry investigation into the president, Joe Biden, and Republicans saying that they want to move forward.

And so now we know, later today, there is expected to be a vote formalizing this impeachment investigation into President Biden.

We will be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)