Why is Hunter Biden now agreeing to appear before Congress?

The spectacle of Hunter Biden continues – it’s all starting to look like a high school production of Hamlet.  Can he still believe he’s anything but a drag on his father’s second-term ambitions? 

Apparently, he can.  Here’s why. 

First, let’s recap. Two months ago, Congress, under their investigatory powers, subpoenaed Hunter to testify before them.  Instead of appearing, Hunter gave a performative press conference on the Capitol building steps, where he professed his innocence and played the victim (“…for six years, I have been the target of the unrelenting Trump attack machine…”). 

Since then, Congress has begun hearings to hold him in contempt – hearings which Hunter unexpectedly turned up at, with his lawyer, his Malibu “Sugar Bro” buddy who bankrolls/enables him, and a documentary film crew. 

So what’s the point of this circus? 

First, understand something: Hunter will NEVER answer any incriminating questions from Congressional Republicans.  His lawyer, Abbe Lowell, is an experienced Washington hand who defended the Clintons for years (now that’s combat training).  Lowell understands the landscape.  But really, it doesn’t take a sage.  

This is because Hunter has the ability to take the Fifth in front of Congress.  Now, it doesn’t look great – and Hunter looks bad enough already.  But it’s preferable to making statements that can be used against you in a federal tax case – or some other case, yet to be filed.

So my own view on why Hunter showed up at the hearings is the simplest: to show his own contempt.  He’s not used to not getting his way, and knows Congress has limited options (wait for it).  Further, he believes this will be some sort of heroic scene in the documentary the Sugar Bro is financing as part of the Dems’ hail Mary attempt to rebrand him as a loving father and son who succumbed to addiction like so many other Americans.

This is nonsense, of course. Recall that it was AFTER Hunter was allegedly “clean and sober” that he filed the false tax return in question; sold his ludicrous “art” to Biden family associates at equally ludicrous prices; and fought the mother of his love child about paying child support.  He may have been “cleaned up” for the first Biden election campaign, but his actions are a better metric of his character.

Now comes word that Hunter’s position is that if Congress issues a new subpoena, Hunter will “comply” with the subpoena. But, of course “comply” does not mean “testify.” Hunter’s only agreeing to show up — when, again, he will just take the Fifth.

Here’s another nuance: Hunter’s lawyer is only offering to “comply for a hearing or deposition”  — or being the operative word. Republicans want a real deposition, behind closed doors, where there can be true unrestrained questioning — not the non-substantive public spectacle of a Congressional hearing where the politicians from both sides go back-and-forth for five minutes asking the witness (futilely) to answer “yes” or “no” to their respective talking point.

This won’t get to the truth and the Republicans know it – so do the Dems.  So Hunter might actually show up to Congress. But in either scenario (hearing or deposition), he won’t answer any substantive questions -– he’ll just plead the Fifth on anything dicey. 

(The tortured artist, Hunter Biden)

So What Are Congress’s Options? 

For the Republicans on the committee, their options are indeed limited.  If Hunter does not appear, and were Congress to hold him in contempt, the matter would be referred to DOJ – who will do nothing, on orders from the President and Merrick Garland.  (Note that the House has yet to vote on holding Hunter in contempt – which is why the House Sergeant-at-Arms couldn’t just grab him when he showed up last week).

Now, DOJ’s likely declination is not as unusual as it sounds – prosecutors turn down cases all the time.  Sure, this one would be high profile.  But there have been a number of historical examples of DOJ refusing to move on a Congressional referral. 

So what should the committee do?  The Supreme Court has ruled quite clearly (albeit 100 years ago) that the House Sergeant-at-Arms could seek Hunter out and forcibly bring him before Congress to answer the subpoena (which might occasion a confrontation between the Sergeant-at-Arms and Hunter’s Secret Service detail).  Congress even has the power to lock Hunter up.

But should the committee do this?  Just to hear Hunter take the Fifth?  And risk making him look like a martyr?

That’s the question the Republicans face now.  Because all this is really being driven by politics, the issue is not what the House can do – it’s what they should do.  (Remember, an appearance before Congress is not a criminal proceeding – ostensibly, it is for the purposes of helping Congress to legislate going forward). 

These are the realpolitik currents blowing through this.  My own feeling is that the Republicans’ best move would be to refuse Hunter and Lowell’s latest conditions, making it clear they consider it a stunt.  Then, hold Hunter in contempt, and refer the matter to DOJ so Garland can ignore it. 

Then publicly draw the comparison between DOJ’s response to Hunter’s referral and DOJ pursuing the prosecution of Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro relating to the “insurrection.”  

And point out that Donald Trump, Jr, sat for hours of closed-door Congressional hearings — at least three times.

Either way, let’s be clear: Hunter will never say anything meaningful before Congress, he’ll never go to jail, he has been vastly undercharged, and he will be offered a cheap plea deal soon.  At worst, Dad will pardon him — likely after November 5th.   

Then hopefully he’ll just go the hell away. 

Two Brave Cops You Should Know — Who Happen To Be Women

Women in policing has come a very long way, even in my lifetime. Women in the NYPD started out as “matrons” — that is, civilians charged with overseeing female prisoners (one matron eventually became the NYPD’s first female detective, the legendary undercover Isabella Goodwin).

Here, in our latest podcast, we detail the tragic the case of the first female NYPD officer to be killed in the line-of-duty — Transit Officer Irma Lozada. It was in fact our colleague, Eric Seidel, who achieved a conviction in that difficult case while serving with the Brooklyn DA’s Office.

(NYC Transit Police Officer Irma Lozada)

And for a more current example of true courage, click the below image for astounding footage of a female officer rescuing a child from a frozen lake.

This writer — who to be honest, can’t really swim — once fell through the ice on a frozen lake. It was one of the scariest things that ever happened to me. Watch this officer — Vermont State Trooper Michele Archer — blow through all that as she jumps in the water — while keeping her head enough to keep the dispatcher updated.

Just exemplary.

So Where Are The “Insurrection” Investigations?

So a crowd of anti-Israel protestors rushed the White House gates to the point that the fence began to buckle, and all non-essential personnel were evacuated (scary video here).

Fortunately, no unarmed protestors were shot this time. But where are the DOJ investigations?

As we’ve been saying in this space for a while: J6 should not have happened. But it’s this sort of double-standard that destroys faith in our institutions.

And appears to be part of a pattern of not even investigating these threatening protests, which have shut down highways, airports, and commerce. No cases on the groups — or their funding.

If there had been one Proud Boy in that crowd, Biden would give a sputtering state-of-the-union, MSNBC anchors would be crying, and the entire cast of “Morning Joe” would have morning sickness.

And oh yeah — DOJ would be all over it.

Quick Incoming

• According to the Fraternal Order of Police, 2023 set a new record, with 378 cops shot in the line-of-duty. A full 115 of those shootings were ambushes. Anyone who thinks “defund” and the notion of defying law enforcement had nothing to do with this is dishonest or misinformed.

• No wonder no one will take the job. Meantime, NYPD is so short-handed, response time to critical incidents is up by roughly two minutes.

• Maine mass shooting follow-up: As we discussed in this space, the unavoidable conclusion appears to be that numerous balls were dropped in the case of mass killer Robert Card — and not just by law enforcement. According to this report, the military was warned — in writing — by Card’s best friend that he could be headed toward such an event.

• Also worthy of follow-up: A Congressional committee is investigating the Harvard board — the school’s real power — regarding allegations of antisemitism (six Jewish students are in fact suing the school as well). A reader points out that a worthwhile metric would be to examine the grades Jewish students received on-average in comparison to other students — especially those from a protected class.

• We previously examined the documentary, “The Fall of Minneapolis,” and the questions it raises regarding the conviction of Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin. Word comes now that Chauvin will appeal his federal civil rights conviction, utilizing evidence from the documentary.

• Accused Giglo Beach killer Rex Heurmann to be charged with a fourth murder — that of Maureen Brainard-Barnes. Brainard-Barnes, believed to be the first of the so-called “Gilgo Four” to be killed (all of whom were found within close proximity of each other, similarly wrapped in duck camouflage). Linking Heurmann to the remaining seven Gilgo bodies is, in our opinion, unlikely.

And finally…

This horse is slow — and dumb — enough for me to have bet on him at some point.