Subpoena Showdown: Hunter Biden’s Next Move?

The House Oversight Committee and Judiciary Committee have issued an official notice for Hunter Biden’s deposition scheduled for next week, despite Hunter Biden’s previous refusal to comply with the subpoena for a closed-door testimony.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., issued a subpoena for Hunter Biden to appear for a deposition on December 13, to be conducted behind closed doors.

Hunter Biden’s attorney informed Comer and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, on Wednesday that Hunter Biden would only testify before the committee in a public setting.

In response, Comer and Jordan threatened to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress if he does not appear for his deposition on December 13.

The official notice for Hunter Biden’s deposition was obtained by Fox News Digital and was posted by the committees on Thursday. The notice indicates that the deposition of “Robert Hunter Biden” is scheduled for 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, December 13.

Hunter Biden’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, had previously informed the committee that Hunter Biden preferred to testify in a public hearing.

Comer and Jordan asserted that Hunter Biden would not receive special treatment and was obligated to appear for a closed-door deposition. They also pledged to release the transcript of his testimony shortly after the deposition and to schedule a public hearing at a later date.

Lowell sent a letter to Comer on Wednesday, stating that Hunter Biden would only appear for testimony in a public hearing setting. Lowell cited concerns about closed-door sessions being used to manipulate or distort facts and misinform the public.

Comer and Jordan responded by reiterating that the subpoenas compelled Hunter Biden to appear for a deposition on December 13, and they threatened to initiate contempt of Congress proceedings if he failed to comply.

House Oversight Committee ranking member Jamie Raskin, D-Md., criticized Republicans’ approach, stating that Hunter Biden was willing to answer questions under oath in a public setting but not in secret to prevent potential misquoting.

The situation continues to evolve, with ongoing disputes between the parties involved.