Julian Epstein: In Studio With Brian When Hunter Biden Crashes House Hearing

If you're interested in it, Brian's talking about it.

You're with Brian Kilmeade. Hunter Biden was and is a private citizen. But despite this, Republicans have sought to use him as a surrogate to attack his father. And despite their improper partisan motives, on six different occasions since February of 2023, we have offered to work with the House committees to see what and how relevant information to any legitimate inquiry could be provided.

Our first five offers were ignored. And then in November, they issued a subpoena for a behind closed doors deposition, a tactic that the Republicans have repeatedly misused. That is Abby Lohler, attorney for Hunter Biden.

Moments ago, Hunter Biden shocked everybody, not everybody, but most people, aside from Jamie Raskin and Josh Moskowitz at least, Democratic congressmen, by showing up with his lawyer and it looks like his rich producer has been financing his life. And to say, I'm willing to testify essentially, knowing that James Comer and his committee said, we want you behind closed doors for a deposition first. And he said, no, I want to go front and center.

And they said, no, you're not going to do that because the theater that goes along with it. And again, after holding a press conference on the Senate side, we were supposed to appear behind closed doors a few weeks ago before Christmas. Then he shows up in court today. Julian Epstein, we're very fortuitous to have him right now. He serves as chief counsel to that committee, the House Judiciary Committee and staff director to the House Oversight Committee from 96 to 2001 and is an outstanding attorney himself.

Julian, we're watching this unfold as you walked in. You said you work with Abby Lowell before. Your thoughts about his decision to go to this hearing today?

Yeah, Abby's a friend of mine. We worked together during the Clinton impeachment in 98 and good friend, very good attorney, not the tactic I would have used. You just, you don't get as a witness, particularly as the son of the president of the United States, the right to tell a congressional committee how to conduct an investigation and how you're going to comply with a subpoena. If a congressional committee says we want to do a deposition for a public hearing, that's what you do. You don't get to say, no, I want to I will comply with subpoena only if you do it in my way. You don't get to choose that when Congress issues you a subpoena. You can't say I'm not going to comply with subpoena because I think you're motivated on partisan bipartisan investigation or partisan intent. It's just not how the system works.

It breaks down right now. The attorney general of the United States is prosecuting Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro for contempt of Congress and failing to comply with subpoenas. And I just don't know how the president of the United States or the attorney general answers the question about the president's own son now defying a subpoena. When I ran that committee and there's plenty of evidence, plenty of precedent of Democrats using depositions before a public hearing.

Why would you do that? Because in a public hearing, you have a five minute rule. You go back and forth with members in a deposition.

The attorneys can ask questions, follow up questions for an hour, two hours as much under oath for as long as you need. You're not distracted by the klieg lights. You're not you're not interrupted by the five minute rule. And you can persist in a line of questioning in a much more meaningful way. There's lots of reasons to do that.

You lay the groundwork to find out what you're going to do in public if in fact that be the next step. Right. And the Democrats did that in the case of Bush 43 in the investigation that they did at the Judiciary Committee with the firing of the U.S. attorneys. So Democrats have used this process in high profile investigations of presidents before. I just think it's a PR stunt.

Abby's very good at PR, but I don't think it is a it is certainly not an argument that they can win from a legal point of view and from a PR point of view. I think the president and the Biden family would be better off answering the questions about what happened to the money, the money trail, what these clients overseas in China and elsewhere believed that they got in exchange for these payments, particularly when he was vice president, particularly when the vice president, Vice President Biden was enabling this sort of influence. Because the main thing that people have said and the critics said is, what's the product? The product is the Biden.

What's the product? I think we want to you have I think we want to know that. I mean, Hunter Biden and and and Joe Biden's brother don't appear to have a skill set other than consanguinity. That what does that mean? The bloodline that they were related to the by. They have the Biden name. They don't have a skill set that is readily apparent to anyone.

So let me put extra people. What's happening? So when Hunter Biden walked into the room, people were shocked, but not the Democrats who were prepared to defend him in their five minutes that they got. As soon as Marjorie Taylor Greene began to speak, he got up and left. And with Abby Law, then they walk it through the halls, the cameras all following them. There's probably what do you think, 40 cameras following him?

He got into a limousine and then they left. They made their point that they're willing to show up. And now all the networks are going to be forced to say, what is the case?

Anderson Cooper, that and you know, all the people that don't want this story are going to be forced to know what happened today. Yeah. So and do they if you're the president of the United States, this isn't helpful. I imagine it's not helpful. Maybe it gets Lloyd Austin's cancer surprise off the pages for a little while. I don't know.

It puts it back on the front pages. It is an argument. I mean, I don't think there's evidence that President Biden has committed impeachable offenses.

I don't think that's on the table. I do think there's a lot of evidence that suggests the need for further investigation, right? To find out what happened, particularly when he was vice president. That says a lot because you're Democrat. And I ran I used to run the government. I was a staff director of this government oversight committee for years. And I you know, if you look at the AP poll, most people either think that President Biden did something wrong or unethical.

So they have not been winning the argument. But what's astounding to me on a committee that I love very much and again, that I ran for many years as a staff director, I didn't run, I was a staff director of the committee for many years, is Democrats all in unison, sort of going along with this attempt to defy a subpoena. Because they're saying that at first, Jamie Comer made a statement that you pick any way you want. You want to come in front public, you want to come in private.

And then they go, we want to go public. And he said, no, that that chip of sale that I never offered that was in conversation. So that's what they kept holding him to. It doesn't matter what Comer said six months ago. What matters is what the committee is asking for today. If the committee is saying we want to do a deposition and then a public hearing, that's the committee's prerogative. And it's not the Democrats position to say or the minority position to say, hey, we think you're motivated in a partisan way. Therefore, we're only going to comply with subpoena in a way that's fitting to us. Now, you take back, look, take a look at all the high minded rhetoric that the Democrats used during the Trump impeachments and all the Trump investigations. And they claim that democracy was ending because Trump was defying so many subpoenas and that the system just couldn't survive like that. How do you square what they're doing today, which is we're not going to comply with a lawful subpoena because we think you're motivated in a partisan way. That was Trump's argument. We're not going to comply with a subpoena. We're going to do it our way.

It just seems to me to be a right, a pathetic showing on their part. Let me just tell you a bit more. So as you know, he became an artist and at that time he had a gallery, Georges Burgess, evidently in the art world.

His name is big. I don't know much about the art world, but people say, who bought the art? And they go, we'll sell your business because it was private. Who bought it?

Because are people trying to get influence with your dad who's president of the United States by buying the art? Is that a question you can ask? Sure. You can ask any question.

There's no limit. No, but is that a valid question? Inquiry? I think if there is evidence that there's something not on the up and the up, up, up and up with the purchase, that this is part of an influence peddling scheme to sort of gain influence with Joe Biden. It's a perfectly legitimate question to ask. So, I mean, there's this issue is not going to go away so long as Republicans are even in the white, either in the White House or one of the branches of Congress. This issue is not going to go away. And I said this when Biden first became president. It would be better off for this. The Biden family to get all the facts on the table would have been in the rearview mirror, but it would have been in the exactly the argument I made.

I had did a number of interviews in early 2021, and it's exactly the argument I made. Get it all out. Get everything in the rearview mirror, just as exactly as you said. Unless the story is so bad. But I'm going to give you just you can't you cannot strong arm the Congress. You cannot strong on the media. When there is a case of influence peddling that the vice president is enabling through his family.

So, yes, it's not going to go away. So they were there to do their five Hunter crashed into this contempt hearing. They're holding him in contempt when he doesn't show up for the subpoena and the with the rules that they've given. They will actually hold him in contempt.

And we'll see where that goes from here. So about his art, which is also an issue. Georges Burgess, who knew who bought the 70 percent of his art, including Elizabeth Hertz Naftali, whom the dealer revealed purchased works by the first son both before and after scoring a prestigious appointment from President Biden, a source told The Post. Naftali, who repeated visits to the White House during the time frame in question, inked a $42,000 sale in February of 2021 before her appointment that July by Joe Biden to the commission of the preservation of American heritage abroad. Then another $52,000 painting in December of 2022. And this isn't Picasso. This is a guy that started painting a month ago.

I mean, does that look bad? Look, I don't know. I don't know what was in her mind when she purchased the art.

I don't know which piece of art was purchased. I don't think just from that information you can say there was something that was done that's wrong. But to your earlier question, I think you can say there's something there that bears further investigation.

And there's something that, you know, there's something that looks a little bit odd and it's perfectly legitimate for Congress to say we want much more information on that. Here's what James Comer said last night. This is prior to the the antics that we just saw.

Cut 25. Burgess didn't know anything about it. And if they had an ethics agreement, they would have had it with one person, George Burgess. He said under oath today he had never spoken with anyone from the White House about it.

He didn't know anything about it. That's another lie that's been told by Joe Biden and or Joe Biden's administration. So that's what they're pursuing, too. And Hunter Biden, instead of knuckling under, he is now this is his second public stunt. Is this something that Abby Lowell does is known for? He's very look, again, I worked with him in the 98 impeachment of President Clinton. He's very good defense. Yeah. On the defense of Clinton.

And we partnered together. He's he's he's an excellent lawyer and he gets the PR game pretty well. So, yeah, he's very good on the PR. I think there is concern that they will be losing this debate as we get into 2024 in the presidential season. And Abby's regarding this as a preemptive strike to say, hey, look, we tried to cooperate, but they shunned us.

Maybe the best thing that they have right now. But, you know, I said this from the beginning, this issue is not going away. They'd be much better off to get all the information out on the table rather than sort of strong arming the Hill. So think about when we said this year, 2024 is going to be a big year. If you look at the court cases, the 91 charges, the four indictments, the civil suits against them, all the Super Tuesdays, the caucus, New Hampshire, everything just on the schedule. Stuff like this is the unexpected, you know, and this is what think about what this year is going to be like between the impeachment inquiry happening at the same time. Well, right. And I mean, I think to, you know, the Democrats who want to take Trump off the ballot and I think that's wrong and sort of waiting till year four of the Biden administration to prosecute Trump on what happened on January 6.

I think it looks terrible. I think I mean, there's no reason the Justice Department needed to wait till year four until we're in the middle of election season. I don't think we will see the prosecution of Trump. I think because the two major cases, the Mar-a-Lago documents case and the January 6, I think, are going to be tied up in this litigation that we've been talking about, the delays, both major cases that are before the Supreme Court.

I think it's going to delay it too far into the season. And I think sort of at some point, Democrats are going to have to answer the question, why is it if these activities were so bad on January 6th and I thought they were awful, whether they were criminally liable under the insurrection statutes and related statutes is another question. But why is it it took them to year four of the Biden administration to prosecute?

And the thing that the Democrats have to worry about is say Trump is elected. What happens in the Hunter-Biden case at that point? I mean, if there's going to be this lawfare going back and forth on both sides, what happens to Joe Biden on the documents case? We haven't talked about the Joe Biden documents case. And only Robert Herr has come to a conclusion on it and it's going to be damning, but it's not going to be something indictable. Well, so, you know, if you look at the statute in the espionage clause and the espionage statute, there is a criminal penalty for the gross negligence in the handling of the documents. So you don't have it doesn't have to be willful. You don't have to be obstructing justice.

You don't have to be any of the things that Trump was accused of leaving documents in a garage that Sun Hunter has access to for a period of years while Sun Hunter is looking to monetize influence, you know, might meet some people's definition of gross negligence. So you're going to get into this question that I don't know the Democrats are ready to answer about whether this is really being even handed. I got a question about the Georgia case when we come back. Julian Epstein, a few more minutes while following all the craziness that just happened on Capitol Hill as Hunter Biden crashes into a hearing in hope that was about holding him in contempt for defying a subpoena. And you could imagine the herd of press, the herd of press that followed him around as he got up after the first three lawmakers spoke. Brian Kilmeade Show, don't move.

Newsmakers and news breakers here at first on the Brian Kilmeade Show. Cozy Earth has everything you need to get the best night's sleep this holiday season. Reinvent your sanctuary with Cozy Earth's luxurious bedding collection from pillows to sheets and blankets. Indulge in the ultimate luxury and make your nights extra cozy with Cozy Earth pajamas made from ultra viscose from bamboo. Available in two limited edition festive holiday use and try Cozy Earth's newest star, the cuddle blanket, an oversized plush throw, perfect for sharing and softer than anything you've ever felt. So give the gift of ultimate comfort with Cozy Earth's lounge wear or the gift of relaxation and pampering with premium bath products.

And you can sleep with confidence thanks to Cozy Earth's remarkable 10 year warranty promising decades of restful sleep. Cozy Earth's provided an exclusive offer for my listeners today, so listen up. Up to 35% off site wide. When you use promo code Brian, that's B-R-I-A-N, go to CozyEarth.com and use the code Brian for 35% off. That's CozyEarth.com code Brian. Radio that makes you think.

This is the Brian Kilmeade Show. I'd like to know the rules of the house and our committee. They're available to every member. The rules stay for a deposition if that's what you're asking. Three days notice.

You have to have the sonographer and all of that. So it's been crazy. This is what's taken place before in the unscripted hearing, but it was not scripted to Josh Moskowitz. It was not a surprise to Jamie Raskin. They knew Hunter Biden was coming. They used their five minutes each to defend him and challenge James Colmer on why he hasn't just let him come out and do this publicly. Five minutes, five minutes, five minutes to make Hunter Biden look fearless.

That's the same reason why they had the presser on the Senate side a couple of weeks ago. Julian Epstein is here. Julian Epstein, an attorney, used to be chairman of this committee, right? Staff director.

Staff director of this committee. So we're going to unwind this and see who got the better, but I want to ask you about what happened in Georgia. To be real simple, somewhat complicated, the prosecutor hired the suburban attorney to do this, be the special prosecutor on this. It turns out, according to the accusation by one of the people indicted with Trump, that they were having an affair and they spent city money up to, state money up to $650,000, maybe more.

They took lavish vacations, but I think it's most damning that the invoices that appear in the Daily Mail today that showed he billed for a White House meeting with the with the White House attorneys. Why would a Georgia state special prosecutor meet with White House attorneys at the same time say they have nothing to do with the White House and their prosecution of Donald Trump and election tampering in 2020? Yeah, I mean, it's mind boggling, Brian. Mind bogglingly stupid.

Mind bogglingly stupid. I mean, I don't understand how the how funny the Georgia prosecutor finding Willis is not recused in the first place, given her political activities before the indictment. I think she should have recused herself. She told everyone she's going after Trump. Yeah, she's just a partisan prosecutor. I mean, I think it's just a terrible precedent for the country for which they'll be paid back.

I think the the the money exchanges where she has paying sort of huge sums to her apparent boyfriend, who's now she's now the subject of a divorce litigation herself, that by funny Willis's. And so that is incredibly messy, incredibly stupid. I think it throws the entire case up in the air now as to whether they're going to proceed. Really.

But yes, I do, because I think there's going to be all kinds of conflicts. I think this is that this will be subject to, unfortunately, as you know, the music gets louder and the coordination with the White House, the fact that there will be that kind of stupidity on both the White House's part and the prosecutor's part to be discussing something that, you know, what else would they be discussing and doing this with the president saying Biden's coming after me and they said no proof. Now they got proof. They got an invoice. Julian Epstein, thank you. Listen to the show ad free on Fox News podcast, plus on Apple podcast, Amazon music with your prime membership or subscribe wherever you get your podcasts.