Speaker Johnson responds to Hunter Biden’s public testimony offer with a strong rebuttal

House Speaker ⁢Mike Johnson Rejects Hunter Biden’s ⁢Offer to Testify Publicly in Impeachment Inquiry

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA)⁣ has dismissed Hunter Biden’s⁢ offer to publicly testify as part of the corruption-focused impeachment inquiry into his father, President Joe Biden. ‌Instead, Johnson insists on ⁤complying with a subpoena for a deposition.

“It’s the precedent,” Johnson said during an interview with Fox News on Saturday, adding later, “Every investigation‍ of Congress in the modern era, the deposition‍ has come ​first, and the‌ public testimony follows. Why ‌would we break that precedent now?”

Johnson was joined ‌on “Fox & Friends‌ Weekend” by ‍House Republican Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik (R-NY), both of whom‌ defended former President⁣ Donald Trump during⁤ his impeachment.

Stefanik said the​ offer by Hunter Biden and his legal ⁤team was “unacceptable” ‍and ‌insisted that “the ‌only correct response ⁣to a subpoena is​ a deposition.”

Oversight Chairman⁢ James Comer (R-KY), leading ‍the impeachment inquiry⁤ and issuing⁤ the subpoena, has already rejected the ⁤terms offered by Hunter Biden’s lawyer.

The ​attorney,‌ Abbe Lowell, argued that a “public proceeding would prevent selective leaks, manipulated transcripts, doctored exhibits, or one-sided press statements.”

Comer indicated⁤ that‌ lawmakers would ‍be willing to have Hunter Biden testify in an open hearing at a “future ‍date” — but insisted that the first son must also testify in the closed-door deposition scheduled for mid-December.

In an interview⁢ with​ Newsmax, Comer said Johnson “has ⁤our back” and House Republicans would “take steps” to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress if he does⁤ not comply with the subpoena.

The top Democrat on the oversight panel, ​Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), ⁢issued‌ a statement condemning his Republican counterparts ‍for rejecting the open hearing offer.

“What an epic humiliation⁣ for our colleagues and what a frank confession that they are simply not interested in the facts⁤ and have no confidence in their own​ case or the ⁤ability of their own members to pursue ‍it,” Raskin said.

“After the miserable failure of their impeachment ⁣hearing in September, Chairman Comer has now ⁤apparently decided to‍ avoid all ⁢Committee hearings where ⁢the public can actually see for itself the logical,​ rhetorical and factual contortions they have tied themselves up‍ in,” he added.

Stefanik made the case for ⁢why an open hearing can be counterproductive to a serious inquiry.

“An open hearing is five⁣ minutes on the Democrat side, five minutes on ⁢the Republican side. It becomes a very public press ‍opportunity for the Democrat to politicize,” Stefanik said. ⁢“We want to‍ go about⁤ this from a legal and factual perspective and​ the only way to go about‍ that is through a deposition.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ ‌APP

Why ⁣do House Speaker ​Mike Johnson and his Republican ​colleagues argue that a deposition is‌ necessary⁤ before any public testimony can take ⁤place?

N_house_subpoenas_hunter_biden_johnson_we_are_not_accepting_public_testimony_we_are_accepting_a_deposition_first.html” target=”_blank” ​rel=”noopener”>“articulated it⁣ very well” ⁢ when he explained the ‌significance ⁢of the deposition coming before public‍ testimony.

The rejection of Hunter Biden’s offer to ‍testify publicly comes ​amidst increasing pressure on the Biden family ‌over allegations of corruption. Hunter Biden has faced scrutiny for his business dealings ⁣in Ukraine and China, with critics accusing him of using his ⁣father’s position as Vice President for personal gain.

However, the impeachment ‍inquiry into President ⁤Joe Biden is not focused on Hunter Biden’s actions, but rather on allegations that President Biden abused his power by ‍pressuring Ukraine to investigate his political ⁤opponent, Donald Trump, and his‌ son, Hunter Biden. ‍The inquiry centers on a phone call between President Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, during which President Biden allegedly threatened to withhold military aid ‌unless Ukraine⁤ launched an investigation into the Bidens.

While Hunter⁢ Biden’s offer to testify publicly may have been seen by some as an opportunity for transparency and accountability, House Speaker Mike Johnson and his Republican colleagues argue that ⁤a deposition⁢ is necessary before any public testimony can take place. They insist ​on ⁤following the precedent set by previous congressional investigations, where depositions were‍ given first and public testimony followed.

Johnson and Stefanik’s defense of former President Donald Trump during his ⁤impeachment reflects their loyalty to their party and their belief in due process. They maintain that the impeachment inquiry‍ into President Biden should follow the same procedures and respect the same ‌rights ‌as previous investigations.

Hunter Biden’s lawyer, Abbe Lowell, argued that a public proceeding would prevent selective leaks and manipulated narratives. While this ⁤argument⁣ may hold some validity, Oversight Chairman James ‍Comer and other Republicans still prioritize the deposition as a crucial first step. They ⁤want to hear Hunter ‍Biden’s testimony in ‌a closed-door session before any public hearings ‍are held.

Comer’s statement that lawmakers would consider having Hunter Biden testify in an open‍ hearing at ‍a future date‌ shows a willingness to address public concerns​ and ensure transparency. However, they believe‍ that the closed-door deposition is an essential​ part of the process ⁣to gather ⁣all the necessary information and establish facts ‌before presenting them to the public.

The rejection of Hunter Biden’s offer to testify publicly does not necessarily indicate a lack of transparency or an‍ attempt to hide information. Instead, it reflects a commitment to following established procedures and ensuring a ‍fair and thorough investigation. By insisting on a deposition before public testimony, House Speaker Mike Johnson and his Republican colleagues aim to maintain the integrity of the impeachment inquiry and respect‌ the rights of all parties involved.

As the impeachment inquiry continues, it⁤ remains⁢ to be seen whether Hunter ⁣Biden will eventually testify publicly and how ‌his testimony will impact⁤ the ⁣proceedings. The decision to reject his offer sets a precedent for the ‍process and highlights the importance of due ⁤process and following established‌ procedures in congressional ‍investigations.

Regardless of ‌the ​outcome, the handling of Hunter Biden’s offer to testify​ publicly underscores ⁢the deeply divisive nature of impeachment proceedings and the increasing polarization in American politics.