right now on "ana cabrera reports," breaking news from capitol hill, two house committees meeting this hour on whether to hold hunter biden in contempt of congress. what it means for the president's son. plus, countdown to the caucus, nikki haley and ron desantis preparing to go head to head this evening with just five days to go. this as donald trump aims to play spoiler tonight and siphon attention. and there's a new twist in his appearance in a new york courtroom tomorrow. also ahead, extreme weather, millions impacted by a winter storm system that brought everything from snow to floods to tornados. thanks so much for joining us on this busy wednesday. it is 10:00 eastern. i'm ana cabrera reporting from new york. we begin with breaking news on

capitol hill where two house committees are kicking off meetings right now to consider whether to hotel hunter biden in contempt of congress. the house judiciary and oversight panels both expected to vote on whether to proceed with contempt for defying a subpoena. the president's son refused to appear behind closed doors for questioning last month insisting he would only appear publicly. this comes one day before hunter biden's scheduled arraignment in california on tax-related charges. let's bring in nbc news capitol hill correspondent julie tsirkin. julie, two committees beginning these hearings right now. walk us through what we can expect. >> reporter: exactly. the house judiciary committee and the oversight committee, both panels led by republicans who are investigating and leading an impeachment inquiry into hunter biden's father, the president, joe biden. they are set to meet this morning. you see them getting ready in their chairs now to mark up these reports to hold hunter biden in contempt of can congress.

it is expected that they will successfully vote that report out of committee when it comes due later today, but that full vote has to go before the house before, of course, this matter can be referred to the justice system for any legal repercussions against hunter biden for not showing up for that closed-door deposition last month, and instead appearing, surpriing everyone, holding a press conference outside of the capitol. watch some of what he had to say last time. >> they ridiculed my struggle with addiction. they belittled my recovery, and they have tried to dehumanize me all to embarrass and damage my father, who has devoted his entire public life to service. there is no fairness or decency in what these republicans are doing. >> reporter: so hunter biden and his attorneys continue to state that he is willing to testify in a public setting.

they say they are concerned that republicans would misconstrue what hunter biden has said behind closed doors. this has been on ongoing back and forth between comer and jordan. certainly something that the hunter biden team is pointing out here, ana, but a big escalation, a big step forward today with these contempt votes in the committees. and we'll see, again, if the house can pass that when it gets there. >> okay. so it goes through the committees first, and then it would go to the full house for a vote if it passes the committees, right? when would the full house take this up? and then what? do we expect it to actually be recommended that the doj press charges? >> reporter: well, that's the big question here, ana. it is not clear when the housey. james comer has said he hopes the whole house will report this matter out. this is going to go to the doj

where merrick garland is attorney general. some republicans have raised questions about how seriously that effort will be enforced there. this is something the house is poised to do. they have a very slim majority when it comes to republicans. i should note they all voted to formalize an impeachment inquiry just a couple of weeks ago, ana. it should be expect that had republicans are ready and prepared to take this step. >> and julie, we are just getting this reporting in that hunter biden is expected to make an appearance today there on capitol hill during these committee hearings as they consider voting to hold him in contempt of congress. how does that impact what happens now? >> reporter: ana, if anything, i think it would be even more likely that republicans on the committee will vote to hold him in contempt of congress. i want to be clear, our team there on the ground has not yet seen him or his lawyers. i'm looking at my phone just as we're communicating in realtime, enter the room there, but if he does show up as our sarah fitzpatrick is reporting here,

that would certainly be a big surprise, not only to all of us, but certainly the committees. but i don't anticipate that to change much. again, he is appearing sort of in sense taunting them to hold him in contempt of congress. he is not going to testify in a private setting like they want, like republicans are asking him to do, so i anticipate that besides seeing hunter biden in the room, if and when he does show up, this will certainly be something that republicans will take, a step they will take in committee and further move to the full house for consideration. it's not going to be like they see hunter biden in the chair and then all is well and done and they can call this vote off. i do expect them to move forward. >> so julie, just back up for us and remind us why they want to talk to him so badly. is this all part of their official impeachment probe into president biden? again, there has been no direct connection between actions that hunter biden has taken in his past as a drug addict with his financial troubles that have

connected him to president biden doing anything wrong here. >> exactly. this is certainly part of the bigger picture here, and what republicans have spent the last 11 months trying to establish is that connection, looking into these business dealings of the president's son, which certainly have had some legal troubles over the years. he certainly battled addiction. he talked about that in front of the capital. he's saying republicans are using personal and private troubles trying to paint his father as if he had something to do with this. you're absolutely right to establish the fact that they have not presented any evidence linking joe biden to any business dealings, any misgivings, those tax charges, for example, that hunter biden is expected to plead not guilty to in los angeles. all of these matters republicans are trying to connect between hunter and his dad. they have not been able to do so, but certainly they want to -- >> julie, we have these live images right now. we see hunter biden appearing at the capitol just walking through the door. it looks like he's surrounded

with his secret service team there and other members of his entourage. but he is officially at the capitol as these hearings get underway. we're look thing at live images right now as he goes through, it appears, the metal detector or nearby the metal detectors, and we presumably expect him to enter at least one of these committee rooms. because, again, this is before the oversight committee. also action happening in the judiciary committee. we're just going to follow these camera and hunter biden and see where he's going to head, what's going to happen next. again, he wasn't expected to show up for these hearings in the sense that he wasn't called by the people holding these hearings to appear, so he's choosing to be be there. i want to bring in catherine christian and federal and white collar defense attorney caroline

poe lee see. his attorney is alongside him, ladies, what do you think his strategy is showing up during these hearings as they contemplate a contempt of congress vote? >> i think it's his way of saying i will testify. i've always said i would testify. i'm not going to do it in secret. i'm going to do it in public. he has always said he will testify. he just doesn't want to do it in secret. it's really hard to argue that he's in contempt because he refused to testify. it's just the forum. secret or in public for toerch everyone to see it. >> he's not defying a subpoena. he's trying to make sure sha everything he says is before the american public to hear. his fear was that the committee members, republicans would kind of splice and dice whatever he said behind closed doors and put out partial transcripts that would misconstrue the context. if you were advising hunter biden right now, caroline, what

would your advice be? >> well, i think that ship has sort of sailed at this point in terms of you can't go back in time. abby lowell as we see there, incredibly well-respected criminal defense attorney. he knows what he's doing. we've seen this movie before, you will recall that during the january 6th committee congressional hearings, there were many referrals to the doj for contempt -- >> hold your thought for just a second, just looking at these images. viewers are wondering where did he end up. he's in the oversight hearing right now. you see he's just sitting there i guess where the public would typically sit. continue, please. >> you recall that the justice department did receive, you know, these referral letters from congress. there's no legal meaning to the letters meaning doj can decide on its own whether or not they want to pursue charges. you'll recall peter navarro, steve bannon, they were both prosecuted for contempt of congress. they asserted sort of these bogus executive privilege claims

to coming and testifying. it's a different situation hunter biden here. abby lowell engaged in extensive back and forth communications with the committees. you're right, the only issue here is he was willing to testify. he just wanted to do it publicly. the defense will be something in that vain. >> let's listen in for just a moment. this is the ranking member, jamie raskin speaking right now. >> to meet with the chairman and his staff and with members of this committee. on february 9th # just one day after the chairman's first letter to hunter biden, mr. hunter biden's lawyer responded and offered chairman comer to, quote, sit with you and your staff including the ranking member is and his staff, to see whether mr. biden has information that they informed some legitimate legislative purpose and be helpful to the committee. the chairman never responded. on september 13th, mr. biden's lawyer wrote to chairman comer after a news max interview in

which the chairman falsely claimed he never got a response back to his original letter. mr. biden's attorney explained the chairman actually never responded to his offer to sit down and discuss the committee's request, but stated he remained available to have the discussion, but the chairman again completely failed to respond. two months later on november 8th, chairman comer and jordan issued subpoenas to mr. biden requiring his appearance for a deposition on december 13th. the cover letter, the chairman noted given your client's willingness to address this investigation publicly up to this point, we would expect him to testify before congress. throughout the fall, the chairman urged mr. biden to come up here at a public committee hearing is. on september 13th on news max, the chairman stated, hunter biden is more than welcome to come in front of the committee. if he wants to clear his good

name, if he wants to come and say, you know, there weren't 20 shell companies, he's invited today. we'll drop everything. on october 31 on a nationwide podcast, the chairman stated we have mountains of evidence. now we're ready to bring him in. we're in the downhill phase now because we have so many documents and we can bring these people in for depositions or committee hearings, whichever they choose. for depositions or committee hearings, whichever they choose, and we can ask these questions with evidence. on november 6th our good chairman stated i will extend that invitation on your show right now, rob. if the biden family wants to join tony bobolinski in an official oversight committee hearing and answer questions that the american people have then that invitation is open right now. they can come in and do that. on november 28th hunter biden through his lawyer agreed to chairman comer's multiple public

requests. he agreed to appear precisely at a public hearing under oath to answer the committee's questions on december 13th. exactly what our good colleagues the republicans who had information about january 6th never agreed to do. they never agreed to testify anywhere under oath about what they knew. the letter that came in from mr. biden embraced the importance of having a public proceeding that, quote, would prevent selective leaks, manipulated transcripts, doctored exhibits or one-sided press statements, especially in light of the committee's past use of closed-door sessions to manipulate, even distort the facts -- >> mr. chairman, mr. chairman, i have an inquiry. >> state your point. >> mr. chairman, don't we have house rules and committee rules regarding subpoenas and then rules about having hearings and

having questions with witnesses that must be followed? >> i'd like to reclaim my time. >> hold on, hold on. >> we can just interrupt each other with an inquiry. >> i'd like to know the rules of the house and our committee. >> read them. >> they're available to every member. >> the rules state for a deposition if that's what you're asking three days notice. you have to have a stenographer and all of that so that's -- mr. chairman. >> just to clarify, we can't have someone just walk in -- >> mr. chairman -- >> do any other members wish to be heard? >> point of inquiry. >> mr. chairman, i did endure multiple interruptions in my opening, can i finish? >> you went over your five minutes. i'll give you 30 more seconds. >> okay. the chairman refused to take yes for an answer from hunter biden. instead on december 1 they pulled a bait-and-switch. they changed the terms of their

request. his offer or his acceptance of their offer and insisted he come in and sit for a secret closed-door deposition. on december 6th, hunter biden's lawyer reiterated that hunter biden's was willing to accept the original request and once again offered to appear on december 13th or any other date in december to answer any question pertinent and relevant to the subject matter. he again raised concerns about closed-door sessions. that's what brings us to today, mr. chairman. he has materially, substantially in good faith complied with what your requests were. >> he complied with the subpoena. your time's expired. >> we would have loved that -- >> do any other members wish to be heard? chair recognizes ms. maze from south carolina. >> thank you, chairman comer. my first question is who brought hunter biden to be here today? that's my first question. second question, you're the epitome of white privilege, coming into the oversight committee, spitting in our face,

ignoring a congressional subpoena to be deposed. what are you afraid of? you have no balls to come up here and -- >> mr. chairman, point of inquiry. >> mr. chairman. >> the lady is recognized -- >> if the gentle lady wants to hear from hunter biden, we can hear from him right now, mr. chairman. let's take a vote and hear from hunter biden. >> i'm speaking. are women allowed to speak here? >> hold on, hold on. >> are women allowed to speak in here or no? are women allowed to speak in here or no? because you keep interrupting me. >> i'll interrupt the chairman, i don't know that he's a lady. >> i think that hunter biden should be arrested right here right now and go straight to jail. our nation is founded on the rule of law -- >> come on, come on. >> and the premise that the law applies equally to everyone. >> point of order, plft chairman. >> it doesn't matter who you are. >> point of order. >> donald trump jr. -- >> state your point. >> my point of order is this, are we going to continue on with this blatant interruption?

this is absurd and inappropriate. i intend to give my statement. i don't intend to have anybody interrupted. i'm not going to interrupt your statements. i think you should have decorum and courtesy and don't act like a bunch of nimrods. >> you just interrupted a woman. zbli got permission. >> can we agree everyone has five minutes? >> can we agree? >> point of order again, the assertion that i interrupted was absolutely false. that's typical of the gentleman who spoke it. i got permission to speak from the chairman. i spoke. i was interrupted yet again by the gentleman who doesn't choose to go through the chair and follow proper order. i encourage us. i think if we're going to have any respect at all we need to have proper decorum. >> well said, well said. >> i'd like to finish. >> the rules are everyone's going to be recognized for five minutes. anyone that wants to be

recognized will be recognized for five minutes. ms. maze has 4:13 left. chair recognizes ms. maze. >> it does not matter who you are, where you come from or who your father is or your last name. yes, i'm looking at you hunter biden as i'm speaking to you. you are not above the law at all. the facts in this case are crystal clear. this committee used and issued a lawful subpoena to hunter biden. a critical witness in this committee's investigation into biden family corruption. hunter biden and his lawyers did not claim privilege of any kind because clearly he has none. they didn't contest the legitimacy of the reasons for issuing the subpoena, no reasons because they clearly are legitimate, and yet, he refused to comply. trump's family members, don trump jr., he did not defy a congressional subpoena. he showed up multiple times for multiple depositions for several hours. in doing so, you know, hunter biden broke the law. he did so deliberately. you did so flagrantly. you showed up on the hill on the

senate side the day of that congressional subpoena to defy it and spit in the face of this committee. that's what you did. the question the american people are asking us is what is hunter biden so afraid of? why can't you show up for a congressional deposition? this is just a pr stunt to you. this is just a game that you are playing with the american people. you're playing with the truth. hunter biden wasn't afraid to sell access to joe biden to the highest bidder when he was in elected office. he wasn't afraid to trade on the biden brand. peddle influence and share those ill gotten gains with members of his family. he wasn't afraid to compromise the integrity of the presidency and vice presidency by involving joe biden's shady business deals with our foreign adversaries. but hunter biden you are too afraid to show up for a deposition. and you still can't today. i believe that hunter biden should be held completely in contempt. i think he should be hauled off to jail right now because it wasn't long ago too my friends

on the other side of the aisle that you also believed in the power of a congressional subpoena. you believed in holding those who refused to comply with congressional subpoena accountable, and i stood with each and every one of you. i am the only member in this room today who has held a member of my own party in contempt of congress for not showing up for a subpoena. and i see nothing but complete hypocrisy on the other side of the aisle. the ranking member of this committee even so eloquently put it, the lesson is please tell your children out there in america, if you get a subpoena to go before congress, go. you have a legal responsibility to do so. so the hypocrisy is stunning. what are we to tell our children today? there's nothing the other side can say with a straight face. as the only member of this committee to vote to hold a member of contempt of my own party, let me be clear, this should not be a partisan issue. if congress issues a subpoena,

you show up, period. this is not a responsibility we take lightly. it brings no joy for us to do this, but the president's son broke the law and must be held accountable in the same way anybody else would. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do so. and my last message to you hunter biden, you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes. >> will the gentle lady yield for a question? will the gentle lady yield? will my friend yield from south carolina? >> sure. >> i do want to commend the gentle lady who was the only republican who stood up and voted to hold in contempt the republican members of the house who blatantly and categorically refused to comply with subpoenas that came from the bipartisan january 6th committee. i would like to ask my friend ms. maze from south carolina whether she's aware of all the case law which says that the committee has to engage in good faith interaction with the

witnesses they've called and they're supposed to arrive at a solution and what do you think about the fact that the chairman on multiple occasions gave this witness the opportunity to come before the full committee and he agreed to that? >> we issued a congressional subpoena and i know with your constitutional law background you know exactly what that means, and he should have showed up. and because of your vote and because of your statements, you should be voting to hold this man in contempt of congress today right now. if you're going to be consistent on your own policies and your own words. >> gentle lady's time is expired. chair recognizes mrs. moskowitz for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. good to see you after a long break. so i'm listening to the gentle lady from south carolina about the witness being afraid to come in front of the committee. that's interesting. he's here. he doesn't seem to be too afraid. in fact, for some reason the

chairman who on multiple occasions invited the witness to come on tv, apparently the chairman wants to pretend like his statements on television or in interviews don't matter. it didn't happen once. had it didn't happen twice. it happened multiple times, the chairman said the witness can choose whether to come to a deposition or to a public hearing. in front of the committee. the witness accepted the chairman's invitation. it just so happens the witness is here. if the committee wants to hear from the witness and the chairman gave the witness that option, then the only folks that are afraid to hear from the witness with the american people watching are my friends on the other side of the aisle. i don't know if there's a proper motion, mr. chairman, but i'll make a motion. let's vote. let's take a vote. who wants to hear from hunter

right now today? anyone? come on. who wants to hear from hunter? no one. so i'm a visual learner. and the visual is clear, nobody over there wants to hear from the witness. oh, one, thank you. >> will you yield for a question? >> i'm not there yet, but i will eventually. >> so there's no one other than one or two that want to hear from the witness. the majority of my colleagues over there including the chairman don't want to hear from the witness with the american people watching. so mr. chairman, i just want to hear from you, will you acknowledge that you invited the witness on television to choose whether he could come to a public hearing and do you stand by your words or do you renege that invitation to the witness? >> to answer the question, i've said repeatedly after the deposition mr. biden can come in front of a public hearing. >> mr. chairman, i don't want to play the video, but that is not

what you said on television multiple times. we have the quotes. we can put them up. you said the witness can choose between a deposition or -- >> listen, mr. moskowitz, mr. biden doesn't make the rules. we make the rules. >> mr. chairman, you make the rules, and the rule you made is that he can choose. >> the rule is -- >> those were your -- those were your words. >> he was issued two lawful subpoenas. >> reclaiming my time, mr. chairman. you issued those subpoenas after he took you up on your invitation to come and then you were like oh, no, what did i do? i invited him to come so the american people can hear his side of the story. i put my foot in my mouth so now i must bury him in the basement where we can staten island what we're going to release to the public so that we can continue to tell that story. mr. chairman, you have said multiple times that this is not about hunter. it's about joe biden, and even this morning on mornings with maria, she asked another simple

question. the question you have been asked multiple times, which is do you have evidence to impeach the president of the united states? before you said i hope so. today you said i think so. and the answer is you don't. and you still don't. we continue tok here and have charades. to my colleagues who talk about lawful subpoenas. i appreciate the gentle lady from south carolina who voted to hold people in contempt. listen, i'll make this bipartisan. i'll vote for the hunter contempt today. you can get my vote, but i want you to show the american people that you're serious. here is the subpoena to representative scott perry, who did not comply. i'd like to enter this into the record. here is the subpoena to mark meadows. i'd like to enter this into the record. who did not comply. here is the subpoena to jim jordan who did not comply with a lawful subpoena. i'd like to sfwr that into the

record. here is the subpoena for mo brooks who did not comply. here is the subpoena to mr. bigs who did not comply. i'd like to enter that into the record. here's the subpoena to mr. mccarthy, who did not comply. i'd like to enter that into the record. there's an amendment coming into add those names into contempt order. you vote to add those namgs is and show the american people we apply the law equally, not just when it's democrats. it's a crime when it's democrat but when it's trump and the republicans it's just fine. no, show that you're serious and that everyone is not above the law. vote for that amendment, and i'll vote for the hunter biden contempt. i yield back. >> gentleman's time's expired, chair recognizes ms. green from georgia for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. excuse me, hunter, apparently you're afraid of my words. oh, i'd like to reclaim my time, mr. chairman. >> order. >> wow.

that's too bad. >> chair recognizes ms. green from georgia. >> i think it's clear and object for everyone watching this hearing today that hunter biden is terrified of strong conservative republican women because he can't even face my words as i was about to speak to him. what a coward, and this is also a coward that -- >> okay, we're hearing marjorie taylor greene inside the committee room. we're looking at images outside that hearing room where we're seeing abby lowell, hunter biden's attorney speak. let's listen. >> 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 in their political crusade to selectively lead and mischaracterize what witnesses have said. >> what are you going to do when the house -- >> last fall chairman comer -- that people like hunter and had like him the option to attend a deposition or a public hearing, whichever they chose. hunter chose a hearing where republicans could not distort, manipulate, or misuse that testimony honoring and then ignoring that invitation and proving once again that they cared little about the truth and wanted only to, quote, move the

needle of political support, which was a quote chairman comer confessed was his true purpose. the republican chairs today then are commandeering an unprecedented resolution to hold someone in contempt, who has offered to publicly answer all their proper questions. the question there is what are they afraid of? thank you. >> they called you to testify today -- >> okay. we'll watch to see where they head next. we know there are two committee hearings happening right now. they just stepped out of the oversight committee room where that hearing was underway, proceeding with potential contempt of congress votes against hunter biden and we'll see if he's heading into the

judiciary committee room. we don't know. we just heard from his attorney throwing the republican lawmakers' words back at them saying what are they afraid of. something we heard initially asked of hunter biden when he showed up today unexpectedly into that committee hearing room. it was a chaotic scene, frankly, as clearly lawmakers were taken off guard when he showed up. we're going to stay with these pictures. can we listen in again to see if he's answering questions? okay. walking in silence right now, this is the rayburn house office building near the capitol where these committee hearings are taking place. it appears he may be leaving the building. we're going to follow this. i want to bring in our analysts who have been joining me here on set, former assistant manhattan district attorney catherine christian, federal and white collar defense attorney, caroline polisi, also joining us david jolly.

we haven't heard from you yet, congressman. can we start there as we watch him getting into his car perhaps leaving the building, what is your reaction to what we just witnessed? >> yeah, ana, a remarkable day on capitol hill. the approach by hunter biden is clear, if you cannot win the process, win the story. and hunter biden knows, his legal team knows he won't win the process. they don't have the votes. republicans control the house. they want to hold hunter biden in contempt, and they want to impeach his father. what can he do? he can show the american people, hunter biden can, that he is present and available to answer questions, and in that way hopefully win the story. it also can't be lost that hunter biden has two lawyers on his team. one is abbe lowell a renowned defense attorney who represents some of the most notable names in politics from jared kushner to bob menendez to hunter biden and others. but the second attorney is kevin morris, who is a hollywood lawyer who represents a-list

celebrities, actors and actresses, he has been part of the architect for this now very public response to house republicans. i would say the white house i don't think is very pleased with this. the senior white house staff. they do not like a high profile hunter biden story. but hunter biden, kevin morris, and abbe lowell have said we're going to make our own decisions and i do believe that hunter biden believes personally that what is in the best interests of his father is in his best interests and vice versa. the lingering question then is what about this contempt resolution? does the house refer to doj? let's presume the votes are there, but does doj prosecute? i don't know, this case gets fairly complicated. doj is not really quick to prosecute congressional contempt cases, you know, in normal circumstances. in this circumstance, abby -- abbe lowell has a good case to say we have tried to cooperate, and this is not a case where you want to bring criminal charges for contempt of congress. >> what do you ladies think, our

two brilliant legal minds here? would this be something the doj would proceed with? >> no, and the congressman is right. hunter biden says i'm here. i'm willing to testify. i just don't want to do it in secret. so he is not being, you know, violating a subpoena. this is all what you saw this morning was not a legal proceeding. it was partisan political proceeding and there is just no way, and it's not just because of the biden administration that i see doj prosecuting someone who has said i will testify. i just don't want to do it in secret. >> do you agree? >> i think it's a closer call maybe than we might think. we've seen it -- we've seen it play out before. the reason why jamie raskin went into all the back and forth of the abbe lowell emails to the committee is because the hallmark of a doj prosecution for a contempt of congress is really bad faith meaning jamie raskin wanted to show to the committee that there had been this good faith engagement between the parties, which as

we've seen previously in those cases doj has chosen not to come in and prosecute. so for example, mark meadows, they got a referral letter from the congressional committee, the january 6th committee referring mark meadows. doj looked at it closely and said, look, there's enough good faith negotiation. he has enough of a plausible argument for executive privilege that we're not going to prosecute. maybe here it that good faith gets him out of a prosecution. this is just an absolute mess. this hearing is a clown show. >> it's a mess. >> it's unbelievable and just insanity. i think him showing up really just amped up the, you know, the ability of people to use his presence there to make this a real pr moment. >> well, it was described as a charade by at least one of the lawmakers who was there in that committee hearing room. david jolly, back to you because you've been in these hearing rooms. what we just witnessed, to see

nancy mace saying i think hunter biden should be arrested right now and then, you know, asking what is he afraid of? even then going on to quote i think a taylor swift line at one point. it was -- was it just playing to the cameras in this moment? have you ever seen anything like that? >> i don't think i have. i will share with you a real congressional insight here. i know one dynamic that happened in that room that no one was expecting is we learned that house democrats have been coordinating very tightly with hunter biden. this doesn't happen if jamie raskin and others have not coordinated this moment, and that is a reveal to house republicans. and so on a committee where the anger, and frankly, you can say hatred between the sides, between some members is very real. house republicans learned this morning that, wait a minute, dems have been setting us up all long, and that just fuels that anger. i think in mace and marjorie

taylor greene and others that you see, they were reaching for that moment that they wanted to lay that line on because the other thing that struck me is for house republicans, who for three years between fox news and republicans, they've tried to make hunter biden this dark villain of politics and culture. i think they were shocked by seeing somebody they consider the boogeyman, they didn't know that he was real. democrats have had reason to see him in the past, but house republicans, this was a moment where they had to stand up to him. you saw mace try to do it. who knows what marjorie taylor greene did. at the end of the day, does it change the vote? probably not. i think julie tsirkin said at the beginning, this probably ensures more so that house republicans hold hunter biden in contempt. >> one thing we heard, julie tsirkin who's with us, from democratic representative jared moskowitz was although for a contempt of congress here, if we're going to hold everybody accountable, if both parties are held to this same standard when it comes to responding to congressional subpoenas, does he have a point there?

i mean, he listed jim jordan, mo brooks, kevin mccarthy who have all been requested for either documents or their presence and testimony at some point the, and who have just simply ignored or haven't responded. >> reporter: exactly. nancy mace sort of walked right into that. she's the one who actually brought up the fact that the january 6th select committee wanted to enforce their subpoenas against some of those folks that you've mentioned, including current members of congress who are chairing some of these hearings right now. she brought that up, and then jared moskowitz sort of took that bait and went with it. when he first said he would vote to hold hunter biden in congress, we all sort of perked up to listen to what he was saying, and he had a pretty big caveat, and it's not likely -- it's actually very doubtful that republicans would take him up on that. this is of course as you mentioned as the guests have been talking about, a coordinated moment between democrats and hunter biden. this is a moment in which you clearly saw republicans going after one another. andy biggs was the voice of reason at one point in the

beginning of the hearing telling all sides to sort of simmer down. i did want to peel back the curtain a little bit, when you saw hunter biden walk out of the oversight room, marjorie taylor greene was talking and she said actually when he walked out that the reason hunter biden left the room is because he was, quote, afraid of republican women. so that's a moment that happened when abbe lowell was defending his client, of course, and saying that he does -- that he is willing to testify in public, something republicans on the committee just are not willing to accept. certainly a wild 21st minutes with the house back in session this morning. >> i am looking at a quote from hunter biden when he spoke about a month ago when he showed up on capitol hill, said he was prepared to testify publicly on the day that they had asked him to come in for that closed-door deposition. he said, quote, what are they afraid of? i am here. presumably, that is the message he was trying to send this morning as he showed up for this

hearing. congressman jolly, do you think republicans are afraid of putting hunter biden on the stand publicly? >> i don't know if they're afraid, but they do want to control the process very tightly because they want to win politically. what i find intriguing about this and i know we have two other attorneys on the panel far more seasoned than myself, what i find interesting is if republicans called his bluff, i'm not sure how much hunter biden could testify to because there are open doj investigation s into a lot of his life. not just the tax filings, but also now new questions under a special counsel about fara and other business dealings. if i'm abbe lowell and i had my client in front of the congress, i would say my client can't answer anything until the doj investigation is closed. i don't know if republicans are willing to call that bluff. i do know republicans want to control the entire process without fail. >> and let's remember, tomorrow

he will be in california for an arraignment on criminal charges, tax-related charges, nine of them including three felony charges along with six misdemeanor charges. so that being said, catherine, i guess what is his biggest worry here? >> fifth amendment, i don't know how and he has two indictments, he has the gun indictment in delaware, and then he has the california indictment, and he's still apparently under investigation. you would not allow a client to speak publicly. he's going to exercise his right to remain silent. >> so he was just calling their bluff essentially or he was prepared to say i plead the fifth or what? >> well, i think, you know, republicans wanted that political win of seeing him say i've been instructed by my attorney to take the fifth. of course there's this wrong talking point out there that if you take the fifth, you must be sort of guilty of something. it's not true we all know that, there are legal reasons behind

it, but that would be an instance in which certainly he would not be on the table for contempt of congress charges. that is a good faith sort of immunity defense to being able to testify. however, i would note that it's not just a blanket. he couldn't say i'm going to take the fifth amendment and not show up. you have to use a scalpel with these types of assertions with privilege and things like that. he would have to show up to the deposition and answer by answer, question by questions say i've been instructed to take fifth amendment. he can't just say fifth amendment i'm not showing up. >> how serious are these tax charges he's facing and will be, you know, in court facing tomorrow? >> they're very serious. i'll remind people that just last june he was offered two misdemeanors and no time meaning probation, and he was offered no prosecution of the gun case. so they're very serious, but just six months ago the government was offering him misdemeanors. it's a very serious indictment. >> going back to the action on

capitol hill, julie, these two committees are preparing to vote today as we discussed earlier on a contempt of congress recommendation that would then be passed along to the doj should it pass both the committees as well as the full house vote eventually. what is the threshold for them to hold hunter biden in contempt of congress? >> reporter: you just need a simple majority, ana, and that of course is welcome news for republicans who want to take this step. also as we've been talking about, especially when it comes to a full house vote, they have about a two to three-seat majority. it fluctuates slightly over the next couple of weeks. depending when they put that on the floor, all of those votes are going to be very important for speaker johnson. when it comes to the committees, the oversight and judiciary committee, you have some overlap. again, that's just a simple majority needed. republicans expect they'll hit that threshold. not a single republican standing up in the room saying, wait a minute, we shouldn't take this step. so by all accounts, we do expect that to happen. again, it was interesting of hunter biden to show up and sort

of taunt the panel and his lawyers say, listen, if you want him to testify, he will. and my colleague ryan nobles was able to catch hunter biden who wasn't speaking at all to the press, but did answer one question from him. ryan asked hunter whether he would testify today should the committees allow him to do so, and he just replied yes. so there you have it. but of course the committee is not willing to take him up on that offer unless it's behind closed doors. >> now they continue their discussion in these committee rooms and i guess traditional order is ongoing. our ryan nobles who julie just referenced is standing by for us on capitol hill. you questioned hunter in the hallway. describe that scene and your interaction with him. >> reporter: well, we saw it play out live on television, ana. just to give you the experience here inside the house office building, i mean, it was incredibly chaotic. no one expected hunter biden to appear here today.

there was a capitol police and secret service presence, but the committee didn't expect him to be here. the members of the staff that are in the halls that patrol this area didn't expect him to be here. so when he walked into the building, it created an enormous amount of chaos. i walked with hunter biden from the minute he walked into the building into the hearing and then walked out with him and peppered him with dozens of questions of which he didn't respond to any except right after his attorney abbe lowell addressed the press, gave their explanation as to why he still refuses to appear for a closed-door deposition but prefers a public hearing instead. i asked him if the committee asked you to testify publicly today, would you do it, and hunter biden looked back at me and said yes. now, that option obviously was not presented to him when he was inside that hearing room. he has now subsequently left. what fundamentally will change about the forward progress of this contempt resolution is that it's not really going to change very much, ana. we expect both the house and -- or i'm sorry, the oversight and

judiciary committees to mark up these resolutions and pass them out of their subsequent committees as i'm sure you discussed. it only requires a simple majority and then this contempt of congress charge will end up in the full house for a vote, and if it passes, at that stage we'll end up in the department of justice. this was in many respects, a public relations effort by hunter biden. he's attempting to demonstrate that he is willing to answer these questions, but he only wants to do it in a public setting. that is the tactic that he is taking. again, it is congress that sets the rules when it comes to these investigations and inquiries like this. that's why house republicans are holding firm and are instead of allowing him that opportunity to testify publicly first are going to move forward with the contempt resolution. but this showdown is just continuing, ana, and it doesn't look like there's any letup at this point. >> what a morning, ryan nobles, julie tsirkin, david jolly, thank you. catherine, caroline, stay with us. we're going to keep a close eye

on the hunter biden hearings underway on capitol hill. also, we are tracking the legal developments involving donald trump. he wants to speak during closing arguments in his civil fraud trial tomorrow. will he be allowed to do so? we're back after a short break. k i was short of breath just reading a book... but i didn't wait. they told their doctors. and found out they had... atrial fibrillation. a condition which makes it about five times more likely to have a stroke. if you have one or more of these symptoms irregular heartbeat, heart racing, chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue or lightheadedness, contact your doctor. this is no time to wait. are you taking the right multi-vitamin? with new chapter, you get excellent quality, organic ingredients, and fermentation.

fermentation? yes. feel the difference with 20 plus nutrients your body can absorb. so you can do you. learn more at newchapter.com. a force to be reckon with. no, not you saquon. hm? you! your business bank account with quickbooks money, now earns 5% apy. 5% apy? that's new! yup, that's how you business differently. (ella) fashion moves fast. (jen) so we partner with verizon 5% apy? that's new! to take our operations to the next level. (marquis) with a custom private 5g network. (ella) we get more control of production, efficiencies, and greater agility. (jen) that's enterprise intelligence. (vo) it's your vision, it's your verizon.

news in one of donald trump's trials, the former president has asked to speak in court during the closing arguments tomorrow in the civil fraud trial and to his business empire, according to a source with direct knowledge. it's not a done deal just yet. nbc news correspondent vaughn hillyard is with us from iowa, and back with us former assistant manhattan district attorney catherine christian po. when he comes here to new york tomorrow, to confront the judge in this civil fraud trial, my understanding is trump's attorneys still have to meet certain conditions for the closing argument, right? what are we learning so far?

>> reporter: right, usually the week before iowa, the candidate, major presidential candidate is here in the state campaigning. and that's why i'm here. instead he's going to voluntarily appear in lower manhattan for the closing arguments. our producer adam reese who has been in the courtroom every single day for the civil fraud trial is reporting that donald trump does intend to speak on his own behalf during those closing arguments, but his team, his legal team must file a reply with the judge today to the extent of the specifics of not only time, but also what he intends to all but say is part of the closing arguments. because typically, when a defendant testifies in closing arguments, they must only talk about the specific evidence that was brought over the course of that trial. of course, donald trump usually doesn't stick to the requirements. and when he testified two months ago for three and a half hours inside of that courtroom, it was

that very judge who said that he would have no choice but to draw negative inferences from donald trump's nonanswers and tendency to veer off and answer questions in a tangential, quasi tangential way. it is notable if donald trump were to go into the courtroom tomorrow, if he could actually stick to the script and stick to the demands of the judge if they were to grant and allow him to testify. >> vaughn hillyard, thank you. go get warm. catherine, your reaction to the idea of trump offering part of the closing argument, it would seem. >> i don't see the judge allowing it. he doesn't have to allow it. i'm thinking donald trump wants to stand up and make a political statement or talk about his campaign or the witch-hunt and although there is not a jury here, it is a bench trial, the only way the judge would allow it, he says let him do it, who cares, there is no jury here, but i don't see it. >> is there any benefit from a defense team perspective of having trump do this? >> no, no. this is a hail mary.

there is an old saying in the legal profession the man who represents himself has a fool for a lawyer. it is just not done. it is a really horrible idea. and as vaughn said there, trump will not be able to adhere to the legal requirements that, you know, are required in a court of law, sticking to the evidence. it is not actual evidence or testimony per se, it is a closing argument and it is just a bench trial, but he won't be able to fulfill the requirement. >> and there is a gag order in this case, which trump seemed to try to defy throughout this trial. and it was really to protect the judge's staff, his court clerk, right? at the end of the day, does it seem like those repeated violations to test the gag order limits, did that hurt him? >> it certainly hurt him and the judge is going to think about that. am i going to allow this man to get up and speak and then once again say ridiculous things? it is just unheard of. you're allowed to represent yourself, but he has attorneys who are representing him.

>> let's talk to -- talk about another case that happened this morning. the second e. jean carroll case will go to trial next week. the judge ruled trump is not allowed to suggest carroll fabricated her account of the assault or that she had any motive to do so. if that's the case, if trump can't talk about that, caroline, what is his defense? >> well, he's, first of all, he's been ordered not to talk about things previously as we just discussed that in the new york trial. he can't help himself from doing so. look, this is -- he's getting in trouble over and over again for the same conduct and this case obviously e. jean carroll has already won a defamation case against trump and this case is only for the conduct thereafter in which he doubled down on his claims. sort of reminiscent of rudy giuliani with the defamation case he's undergoing right now. they just can't help themselves. so i would be surprised if he

even follows this -- that order. >> the judge also ruled that the access hollywood tape can be introduced as evidence. we saw that, it was also used in the first defamation trial, involving e. jean carroll. how does that factor into this second case, catherine? >> just about damages, this case, by the way. just about how much money will he have to pay e. jean carroll. and the "access hollywood tape" where he brags about you know what shows how reckless he is and shows, you know, what he doesn't care what he says including, you know, against miss carroll. it was intentional and defamatory and she suffered damages. it will go to how much money the jury is going to say that miss carroll is entitled to from mr. trump. >> those are two civil cases. let's talk about one of his criminal cases, we were all here yesterday, we brought our viewers and those listeners who are just tuning in on the radio the audio from the appeals court hearing on trump's presidential immunity claims and the federal election interference case.

how long until we have some kind of a ruling, caroline? >> we could hear a decision from the appeals court from the three panel appeals court. i think as early as this week, honestly. i think they are taking this case, you know, seriously, dealing with it. the real issue is will trump i think likely will ask for it to be appealed on bond. i don't think they'll take that case. but they have to go through the procedural process which takes time. and, of course, everybody is saying this is a case that is rife for supreme court review and it is just a complete question mark there, what the court will do. they really have the power at this point, remember, this case is stayed. tanya chutkan no longer has jurisdiction over this case. nothing can happen, even, you know, the parties can't continue to exchange discovery, things of that nature. so, this could really put that march 4th trial date in, you

know, danger and hopefully we'll get it in before the election, but who knows. >> thank you for covering so much with me this hour. catherine christian, caroline polisi. up next on "ana cabrera reports," for a second hour of the show today, more on the fallout from hunter biden's surprise appearance moments ago on capitol hill after a short break. rance moments ago onap citol hill after a short break. a force to be reckon with. no, not you saquon. hm? you! your business bank account with quickbooks money, now earns 5% apy. 5% apy? that's new! yup, that's how you business differently. for moms, from centrum. ♪ (this new mom here i go) ♪ ♪ (i am strong and brave) ♪ ♪ (i know) ♪ ♪ (with a little time for me) ♪ ♪ (no doubt i'll get through) ♪ ♪ (loving me is loving you) ♪ from centrum, the women's choice multivitamin brand. what can i put down as your profession? thief! actress. she means actress. thief! [silence]

dice dreams, attack your friends and steal their coins. play now. (ella) fashion moves fast. (jen)tack your friends so we partner with verizon to take our operations to the next level. (marquis) with a custom private 5g network. (ella) we get more control of production, efficiencies, and greater agility. (jen) that's enterprise intelligence. (vo) it's your vision, it's your verizon. my mental health was much better. but i struggled with uncontrollable movements called td, tardive dyskinesia. td can be caused by some mental health meds. and it's unlikely to improve without treatment. i felt like my movements were in the spotlight. #1-prescribed ingrezza is the only td treatment for adults that's always one pill, once daily. ingrezza 80 mg is proven to reduce td movements in 7 out of 10 people. people taking ingrezza can stay on most mental health meds. ingrezza can cause depression, suicidal thoughts, or actions in patients with huntington's disease. pay close attention to and call your doctor if you become depressed, have sudden changes in mood, behaviors, feelings, or have thoughts of suicide. don't take ingrezza if you're allergic to its ingredients.

ingrezza may cause serious side effects, including angioedema, potential heart rhythm problems, and abnormal movements. report fevers, stiff muscles, or problems thinking as these may be life threatening. sleepiness is the most common side effect. it's nice. people focus more on me. ask your doctor about #1 prescribed, once-daily ingrezza. ♪ ingrezza ♪ ♪♪ with fastsigns, create factory grade visual solutions to perfect your process. ♪♪ fastsigns. make your statement™.

thank you for staying with us. here are the top stories we're following this .