pay big. >> rudy giuliani was doing this at the behest of the former president, and in coordinate with the former president, spreading all these lies. i traveled to michigan and other swing states, and it's a world where they now have to put security on their houses, where they never had it before. they're going through training they never had before, all because of those lies. thank you all so much. appreciate it. it's a very busy news day. "cnn news central" starts right now. ♪ hunter biden's plea deal is revised. a dramatic day in court. the president's son had been expected to plead guilty to two

misdemeanors, but then things took a turn. where does it go in here? plus rudy giuliani's election concession. he concedes he did make false statement about election workers in georgia. how will he be held accountable? we're following the latest. and questions about ufos. three military veterans are testifying on the hill about unidentified flying objects. we're following these major developing stories and many more, all coming into "cnn news central." ♪ a historic plea deal that nearly unraveled at the last moment. this morning hunter biden pleaded guilty to to misdemeanor counts of failing to pay taxes. it was the first time the child

of a sitting president pleaded guilty to a federal crime. now, a hearing like this is usually a formality, but today the defense threatened to walk around once justice department prosecutors indicated that future charges could still be on the table. the two sides huddled, and then appears to refine the scope of the deal. on a political side, house republicans are barreling ahead with their own probe, based on unve unverified indication that joe biden was tied to his son's deals. this was supposed to be a boilerplate procedure, instead, some twists and turns. >> a lot of drama, boris. certainly these hearings tend to take about 20, 30 minutes max. in this case, it is still ongoing. it's a hearing that began about 10:00 a.m. we know that the scope of in the

agreement is what really certainly began unraveling, certainly when the judge began asking questions of the two sides. it appears that they have an agreement they are now moving forward it on. as a part of that, hunter biden is agreeing -- talking to the judge right now, answering questions, discussing some of the sources of his income that are at issue here. he said he worked for a ukrainian company, burris ma, an energy company, and talked about being paid by another company. at part of this, he's agreed to plead guilty to two misdemeanors covering the tax years of 2017 and 2018. part of this agreement covers all of his tax issues, all of his drugs issues as well as any

potential gun crimes he committed from 2014 through 2019. a gun charge is where the things went off the rails a bit, when the judge asked about the relationship, whether the two things were connected, whether the tax counts were connected to this diversion program under which hunter biten agrees to abide by any stipulation from the court. as part of that, this possession of a gun charge goes away. it is a felony, so it is a serious charge. hunter biden bought a firearm at a time he was not qualified to own one, because he was addicted to drugs. that was part of the issue today. you pointed out, part of the issue now is that the government says this is still an ongoing investigation, so there are certainly things that perhaps hunter biden could perhaps by charged with that are not covered by this investigation. >> potentially acting as a foreign agency for other

governments within the united states. they're still in court. boris, please keep us posted. sara, we no that lawmakers have been keeping a close eye on this, specifically republicans who have made all sorts of agencies not only about hunter biden, but also about his father. >> yeah. one thing is house republicans want more information from attorney david weiss, and they want more answers about allegations they have heard from i.r.s. whistle-blowers who are working on this case about political interferes. weiss has debunked some of those allegations already, and he's said he would be willing to testify in september or october, but the committee will have to figure out if that's worth his time if there's an ongoing

investigation and a number of questions that weiss won't be able to answer. the other thing that's going on, we are hearing the increasing drumbeat about a potential increase of talk about a biden impeach month. we've heard kevin mccarthy making his most pointed comments yesterday that some of these allegations could rise to that level. republicans have not been able to prove that joe biden benefited from his son's overseas business dealings. at least some of them believe that launching an impeachment inquiry could be a way to get more answers. thank you, sara. jim? eliot, have you seen an

expected plea deal like this blow up in court in the final moment before a judge? should both sides have been prepared for this? >> it happens. look, i personally never had a plea deal blow up, but it's perfectly common, jim, for two parties to go into court with their notions of what was about to play out in court, they differ. the judge says what did you agree to? and both sides will have clearly different stories. the problem is this follows weeks, if not months of discussions between the two parties, and number two, in an investigation that stretched back five years. so it's egg on the pa face of both parties when they didn't have agreement. it just doesn't sit right, i

think. >> and very much playing out in the public eye. one aspect, susan, is that this plea deal does not inoculate hunter biden against future charges, but we knew that to some extent prior. we knew it was not an all-encompassing plea deal. >> there was disagreement, because the prosecutor said the investigation continued, but the hunter biden people said this sewed it up. it's not great to have your son be the first son in u.s. history to plead guilty in court, but it would enable them to lead to two tax misdemeanors, and a deferred gun charges. they cannot say that anymore. >> some say this is a sweetheart deal.

based on your experience, is it? do the penalties match what we know about the crimes that were proven in court? >> well, that's the important clause, what we know about the crimes proven in court. for these offenses, the sentences here aren't out of line with what would have happened in any other plea deal. to be clear, jim, i think 96, 97, 98 percent get resolved. i think they're talking about all the other matters for which they are alleging hunter biden engaged in misconduct. as we've been talking about today, foreign act registration or any other questions surrounding enrich the president. that's for congress to figure out. they're going to have david weiss testify, they can ask all about that, but for these

specific charges, the sentences are in line. mccarthy was at least talking about an impeachment inquiry. i did see don bacon say that they haven't made the case yet. that's a republican. does mccarthy have the votes to likely get theo pursue that inquiry? >> let's thing about the 18 representatives that represents the areas that joe biden carried. i think it's just become another political tactic that gets threatened as a matter of routine. that's been one of the big changes in our politics. >> we've had discussion of everybody on at least the wish list for some republicans. elliott, before we go, if you're hunter biden's defense lawyers

right now, given that the door is open at least to the possibility of further charges, what is your recommendation? what would you be doing right now? >> well, i think they did exactly what they should have done, which is holding the government accountable, and pushing the government on any potential opening or mistake. i would still be alarmed if the justice department said before that an investigation is on ongoing, and it appears they might have smoke to the fire as to other charges that they could eventually bring against him. i don't think they have a reason to completely go home and sort of see this as completed. i think they ought to at least be concerned more could be coming. >> thank you both so much. boris? one of former president trump's top allies and promoter

of baseless theories, is now conceding he made false claims. in a late court filing, rudy giuliani claims he does not dispute that he made defamatory statements about two georgia election workers. he's trying to resolve a civil lawsuit. he repeatedly falsely accused these two women of being a vote manipulation scheme in georgia. here is a reminder some of the things the former mayor of new york said. >> if ruby freeman and shay moss, and one other gentleman surreptitiously passing arballo as if they're cocaine. it's obvious they're engaged in surrepetitious, illegal activity that day. >> not so obvious now.

paula reid joins us. there's a lot to parse through. notably while rudy giuliani is conceding to making defamatory statements, he doesn't acknowledge he caused these two women any harm. >> he's trying to contain the fallout. now, this is his effort to resolve a lawsuit and satisfy a judge who has threatened to sanctioned him. essentially what he's saying is yes, he smeared these two election workers, but he argues the claims are protected under the first amendment. he also insists the two women did not suffer any damages, but they see it quite different live. let's listen to their words. >> i've lost my name and i've lost my reputation. i've lost my sense of security, all because a group of people, starting with number 45, and his

ally rudy giuliani, decided to scapegoat me and my daughter shay. >> i don't want to go anywhere. i second-guess everything that i do. it affected my life in a major way, in every way, all because of lies. >> an important reminder how these actions impacted real people. now in a statement today, their lawyer says this is a milestone. this is all subject to review by a judge. notably even after all of this, the giuliani spokesman parsed these concessions even further, saying he did not acknowledge the statements were false, but did not contest it to move on to the portion of the case that would permit a motion to dismiss. this idea of harassing election

workers, fall claims about them, this is something that the special counsel has been focused on in its investigation into january 6th. >> it seems like rudy giuliani is trying to thread a thin needle there, and trying to make sure the concession only apply to this lawsuit. as you said, this is not only being investigated by the special counsel, but also the d.a. in fulton county, georgia. >> here's what we know about rudy giuliani and the special counsel. we know he sat down with investigators over the course of two days. we're told he was cooperative -- small c, and his lawyer says they do not expect him to be charged, but it's unclean hour his conduct, this specific aspect of his conduct, and other statements he made, it's unclear how it will factor in. at this point, his lawyer insists on the record that he does not expect rudy giuliani to be charged.

>> paula reid, thanks so much for walking us through that. fed chair's jerome powell racing interest rates could be over soon. and the latest condition on lebron james' son bro bronzy -- bronny, who remains in the hospital. and you're watching "cnn news central." ♪ it takes two to make it outta sight ♪ ♪ it t takes two to make a thing go right ♪ ♪ it takes s two to make it outta sight ♪ ♪ one, two, get loose now ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ ♪ it takes two to make a... ♪ stay two nights and get a $ 50 best western gift card. book now at bestwestern.com.

the morgan stanley client experience? listening more than talking, and a personalized plan ♪ to guide you tough a changing world. ♪

breaking news. the judge in the hunter biden case making a surprise addition after a whirlwind morning in court. kara, bring us up to speed. >> reporter: boris, the judge said she could not accept the plea agreement as structured. there was a plea agreement where he would plead guilty to two tax misdemeanors, and diversion on a felony gun charge. the judge says on the plea agreement related to the tax charges, she was saying that this agreement as structured just had what she said was a rubber stamp. it did not allow her to weigh in on whether the plea was acceptable. she had questions, and wanted both sides to brief her. also, on the gun diversion, she had questions about howle deal was structured. it inserted her into the process if hunter biden breached the

deal, because they cited the political nature of this investigation and who hunter biden is. the judge things that was it constitutional for her to have a role that could interfere with the decisions to bring a criminal case. she told hunter biden that i am sorry, she knew he wanted to resolve it, but she wanted to make sure that the diversion agreement was constitutional. both sides will be briefing on this issue. the judge will have them back in court again to resolve the matter. as it stands, he entered a plea of not guilty, because he would only plead guilty if the agreement was intact. we also have evan perez with us. just a moment ago, we were talking about the back and forth of this ordeal, where prosecutors walks in with the

defense team. they had something laid out, an agreement on they two federal charges for tax evasion and the gun charge, and then essentially there was a dispute over the agreement. they then went into recess, came up with a new agreement, but the judge ultimately decided it was invalid, it wasn't up to her standard. >> reporter: right. i think at issue for the judge she's trying to protection hunter biden's rights that whatever he thinking he is agreeing to is indeed what the government is agreeing to. as a result of the judge's questions, the prosecution admitted that there were some aspects of this that are not covered. there are some aspects of this investigation. remember, boris, this is a five-year investigation, an investigation that has spanned three u.s. attorneys general all the way back to 2018. we have a trump-appointed u.s.

attorney who had been held over by joe biden's administration to continue this investigation. it has looked at everything from money laundering, from this potential violation of the foreign agent's registration act, the drug issues, and of course the tax issues, and what the justice department was saying, there is some aspect that's still ongoing, still being investigated and really hunter biden has some legal jeopardy over. that's why she has these concerns. she wants to make sure that anyone agreeing to plead guilty, they understand what they're agreeing to. in the end, if that is not buttoned up, it raises constitutional questions, obviously for the defendant. what appears now is going to happen is that the two sides will go back to the table, try to work out what it is that they can agree to, and then they can

come back to the judge. it appears the judge will ask them to put this all in court filings, and then she will bring them back to make sure there's an agreement that can be -- she can consider to be constitutional. boris? >> evan perez, please stand by. jim, this is a case with tremendous scrutiny. it appears the judge wants every detail it look at closely. elliott, you heard evan perez' description there, that the judge wants to make sure that hunter biden knows what he's getting in the deal. >> i think the judge doesn't live in the vacuum and now there's tremendous congressional and meimmemedia scrutiny. in terms of this whole rights

question and the constitution, it's important to know what a plea deal or plea hearing is, jim. the defendant is not just saying i'm guilty of the crime. number one, he's waiving a number of rights he has. he has a right to a trial in front of his peers. you maybe acknowledged that you may not be and loyed to vote or ironically pose -- possess a gun. all of those things could jeopardize the integrity of the vote. she is on something. you need to be clear that the defendant knows what he's getting rid of by agreeing to plead guilty. >> last time i spoke just moments ago, when we thought we had a deal, you thought the

penalties are in line with how these crimes are generally charged. you said yes. when you look at the judge's involvement, so probably they're taking some extra care, but do you see the judge doing anything out of line as they discuss this? or does it seem on the up and up as one would expect? >> right now it does seem up and up. there's a template to firearm and tax cases. there isn't really a template for the son of the current president being charged and pleading guilty to a crime. >> right. >> i do think that every party involved is being extra-careful -- or ought to be extra-careful to recognize the maelstrom that would certainly follow. >> we know the scrutiny we're

living in right now. thank you, both. we have some reporting from kara scannell, who is standing outside the delaware courthouse. the judge saying parts of this deal contains nonstandard terms. she described it as unusual. walk us thus what that was like in court and what specifically she found unusual. >> she was focusing on the gun diversion agreement, saying in other instances, that was usually brought up as a false statement case. that's something that prosecutors were looking at in this case as part of their married negotiations. they had worked it down into a diversion, but she had questions whether it was constitutional, because there was a ruling in

the third circuit on another case, a question of whether this law that he's pleading to is constitutional. so she was saying, what if this is decided it's unconstitutional, what happening here? both sides saying this is what they had agreed to, and then the judge was pushing on this point. they said they would accept this was a contract between the parties that they would both agree the terms. the biden lawyer says even if the law that this agreement was under was found unconstitutional, they would still abide by this. so the judge still very concerned. she said it looked like they were trying to do form other substance today because of the eagerness to get it done, but she wanted to make sure it was done appropriately. as evan said, she's looking here to protect the interests of hunter biden, so he knows

exactly what he's pleading to and what exactly are the terms of the deal. there could be change in the administration. and it's not really clear. this investigation was under both of trump administration and the biden administration. there's a lot of politicalization around it, so she's wanting to make sure that everything lines up and hunter biden knows exactly what he's pleading guilty to. >> i'm also curious, there was speculation whether he would hear directly from hupper biden early in the day, when we thought it was going to a boilerplate agreement, essentially put a stamp on it and move forward. what was his disposition like in court? >> i mean, he kept very

composed. initially, again with the perfunctory, he was responding yes, your honor, he understood what she was saying, but when it looked like the plea was back on track and the judge was going through literally line by line, asking him to explain what tax deduction what was this, what was that, he was walking through it, and we did hear a bit from him about part of these charges is when he had told the judge he was already sober. she said to him, you were sober, so why didn't you pay the taxes? he said, his life was in an enormous mess, he was trying to put the pieces together and it essentially fell through the cracks. he was very firm he was not going to plead guilty to anything today without a plea

agreement. it seems like they still have a lot of work to do between both the prosecution and biden's team to work out an agreement on this diversion. the issues about whether the judge had about whether it was constitutional, and the tax-related agreement and exactly what is included in that and what the judge's role in that agreement should be. >> it seems like the plan we went into today has been thrown out the window, kara. have we gone a sense of timetable from the judge? >> the prosecution said they needed a couple weeks to put together a briefing for that. i had run out of court before the judge had slammed the gavel, but the prosecution said they would need time to read through the transcript, to make sure

they're addressing all the issues, and to deal with any of the legal constitutional issues at hand. it sounds like it would be a couple weeks at least before anything will be back before the judge. >> let's take a step back, kara, and walk through the issues that the judge had earlier in the day with the plea deal. she brought up a question to prosecutors and the defense team as to whether there was agreement about the scope of potential future cases coming up against hunter biden, raising the possibility he may be charged with acting on behalf of a foreign government without registering. that's kind of where things started to unravel the first time, right? >> she thought it was broadly

written and didn't spell out what possibilities existed. so she was asking the prosecutor, is the investigation still ongoing? and she was pressing him, what are you agreeing do and what is hunter biden pleading to? he couldn't say what potential charges were on the table, about you what they would not prosecutor under this is drug, tax or gun offenses. and she said what was about the fara charges? the prosecution said that means the deal is off the table if they're not agreeing to this. hupper biden's team said, if that's the case, then it's null and void. but then hunter biden's attorney said, can we have ten minutes to try to work it out?

and when they came back, they said we will agree to what the prosecution is saying the deal will encompasses, protection from other tax charges, gun charges or drug charges, but not an open-ended immunity. it seemed that the plea was then back on truck. the judge started to go through the normal motions. but then they moved on to this gun diversion agreement. that's again where the judge had issues. she said, why displop me in the middle of this agreement? you have given me a role here, where he's made clear this is a deal between you two, not necessarily something the judge sees. she requested why, if there was a dispute over whether he had breached this gun diversion program, why would it land back in her court, she didn't think that was constitutional. so ultimately, she said i'm not

in a position to accept this plea deal. she said, i'm sorry, i know you wanted to get this resolved, but she wanted to make sure he knew what he was pleading guilty to and what he was protected from, and also to ensure that this gun diversion agreement was constitutionally sound. so that made everything fall apart after about four hours into the hearing, which everyone came in expecting would be be preperfunctory. >> kara, please stand by as we tack this breaking news. the judge asked both sides to file additional briefs as the plea deal's legal structuring remains under scrutiny. jim, this was already heating up rhetoric on capitol hill. you can imagine lawmakers have a lot more to say. >> and a lot of the rhetoric not based in fact, a lot of allegations.

manu is getting reaction on capitol hill. >> reporter: yeah, republicans reacting swiftly, as they have been very critical about this plea agreement before today's collapse of that agreement, saying this is in their view a sweetheart deal, something that joe biden's zonal got because he's joe biden's son, arguing it could have been much stiffer. they're essentially saying this confirms their point. there are several members who want to investigate this deal and potentially open up an impeachment inquirinquiry. a number of them said that this essentially bolsters their investigation. one member who is not on the committee, but influential on the far right told me that this deal was an effort to protect

joe biden, and now this has essential unraveled them to go forward to investigate potentially joe biden's culpability in all of this. of course, that's not been proven. there's not been in the link to this plea deal or joe biden and some of these business deals that republicans are trying to tie joe biden to. so you can only imagine how republicans are reacting to. >> sure. >> reporter: it will bolster their push to look at all of this, and potentially lead to an impeachment inquiry in the fall. >> let me test that for a moment, manu. one, we have talked to lawyers about the typically penalties for the crimes he's pleading guilty to. it seems to be within line, but this plea agreement does not inoculate hunter biden from

other allegations. what do republicans say to that? they might well be prosecuted for other crimes if there is evident of other crimes. >> reporter: yeah. that still has to play out. that's going to be a major question in the weeks ahead. typically when these investigations are ongoing, it's much harder for congress to investigator, to get records. there's been an effort by jim jordan, the chairman of this committee, to ask for information from the justice department about everything that's going on here. if the vase is i don't think going, as the justice department is indicating, that makes it much more difficult, only makes things more kecontentious.

that is all going to be part of the discussion and the debate on capitol hill for republicans in the weeks and months ahead. now, david weiss, the u.s. attorney, has agreed to come to capitol hill. the republicans have not yet agreed to a date for david weiss to come and testify. jim jordan told me he wants to interview a number of witnesses before bringing weiss forward. they believe it's all an effort to set the record straight. they have not had any involvement in weiss's decision. so they's being prevented to publicly testify. >> just as you know, the prosecutor was appointed by the previous president, a republican. manu, thank you very much.

we'll continue to follow this news over hunter biden's plea deal. please do stay with us. all leard their money with chase. the chef's cooking up firsts wiwith her new debit card. hungry? -uhuh. the designer's eyeing sequinins. uh no plaid. while mom is eyeing his spending. nice. and the engineer? she's taking control with her own account for college. three futures, all with chase. freedom for kids. control for parents. one bank for both. chase. make more of what's yours. okay everyone, our mission is complete balanced nutrition. together we provide nutrients to support immune, muscle, bone, and heart health.

yaaay! woo hoo! ensure with 25 vitamins and minerals and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ (man) mm, hey, honey. looks like my to-do list grew. "paint the bathroom, give baxter a bath, get life insurance," hm. i have a few minutes. i can do that now. oh, that fast? remember that colonial penn ad? i called and i got information. they sent the simple form i need to apply. all i do is fill it out and send it back. well, that sounds too easy! (man) give a little information, check a few boxes, sign my name, done. they don't ask about your health? (man) no health questions. -physical exam? -don't need one. it's colonial penn guaranteed acceptance whole life insurance. if you're between the ages of 50 and 85, your acceptance is guaranteed in most states, even if you're not in the best health. options start at $9.95 a month, 35 cents a day. once insured, your rate will never increase.

a lifetime rate lock guarantees it. keep in mind, this is lifetime protection. as long as you pay your premiums, it's yours to keep. call for more information and the simple form you need to apply today. there's no obligation, and you'll receive a free beneficiary planner just for calling. hey bud. wow. what's all this? hawaii was too expensive so i brought it here. you know with priceline you could actually take that trip for less than all this. i made a horrible mistake. ♪ go to your happy price ♪ ♪ priceline ♪ i'll always take care of you. ♪ i'm gonna hold you forever... ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ be by your side... ♪ ♪ i'll be there... ♪

if you're following the breaking news, hunter biden set to plead guilty to several

charges before a judge ultimately put the brakes on that effort. let's go to kevin liptak. you're getting reaction from the white house, which is basically taking a step back. >> yeah, the press secretary's briefing right now, and she did say that hunter biden was a private citizen and emphasized this was a personal matter, but that the president and first lady do stand by their son, and this is the stance they have taken throughout this whole proceeding. it's important, because the bidens really do view this as a family matter. of course, we have seen hunter biden, a very visible presence in his father's life. we saw him at the lavish state din for india. we saw him for the fourth of july celebration.

it hasn't always sat well with some democrats, who saying this could be a distraction for the president and for the white house, as he trying to accomplish his agenda. certainly president biden is not backing away. you know, when you talk to people close to the bidens, they do view these charges as an example of a very dark period in hunter biden's life. he was obviously rattled by addiction, which is a problem that so many american families are dealing with. they really did view today's proceedings and today's plea as a way to close the chapter on what had been a very dark period in hunter's life. so the white house is saying today that they do stand by him, but as they have throughout these proceedings are resisting comments.

we want to bring in elliott williams. quite the back and forth, the on again/off again/on again plea deal. the back drop is the doj has its hands full. right now jack smith is potentially awaiting word from a grand jury on whether donald trump will be indicted for a third time, this over his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. the doj is trying to appear impartial. in a perfect world, one case does not impact the other, but in a pr case, when they're being attacked over this alleged sweetheart deal, how much do donald trump's legal woes play into the messaging behind the hunter biden case. >> that's an important point.

they are independence deals, and they've made it clear. david weiss was kept on to maintain a continuity. jack smith, who is overseeing the donald trump investigation, was put in place as special counsel to remove the question of conflicts. they are fully independent, and any other justice department, the mere fact there's two high-profile cases doesn't mean they're handled in the same way. you used the term pr. it's still a matter that the justice department has to confront, the mere fact that looming out there is the prospect of charges for the president. what if president trump were tried today? that -- the grand jury is

expected to come bag into session tomorrow, i believe. but at its core, they've been very, very careful making clear these are two very different investigations run by two people that the attorney general have said very close to full autonomy if not full autonomy. >> this is a trump-appointed judge and a trump-appointed attorney that are overseeing and prosecuting this case with all sorts of accusations pointing to president biden, but not presenting actual evidence that his son's dealings about his dealings with burisma in ukraine and with his dealings allegedly in china. how are they connecting the two, when there is no clear evidence? >> well, they can connect the

two, because they are consequence. they have a large platform and can do so. to be clear, this is all fair game for congress to ask the questions and investigate if they so choose. they have broad oversight authority over the justice department. the question is, where does it go from there? david weiss, the u.s. attorney in delaware, has full -- he will be coming up to talk to congress in the coming weeks or months. he is not likely to provide specifics as to the specific decisions he made along the way, investigative steps and so on, but congress can still ask. sometimes it's who has the loudest microphone can make the latest statement about how the justice system works, even if they're not simply based in

reality. >> elliott williams, please stand by. let's actually discuss today's developments with democratic congressman robert garcia. congressman, thank you for being with us. originally you were scheduled to talk about uaps, but obviously we have to ask about the latest developments in court. what do you make of this judge pumping the brakes on this plea deal that hunter biden had agreed to? >> look, i think the most important thing to remember is hunter biden is a private citizen, and anyone in this space has a right to have their day in court, and the judge has a right to make changes to the deal. so we have to let the process play out. i think all of us in congress on the democratic side, that hunter biden should go to the process. it's important not to politicize this issue. he should be committed fairly. if he's committed wrongdoing, he

should be held accountable, and i think all of us agree on that, but hunter biden is not joe biden. the focus needs to stay on hunter >> congressman, what do you make of the allegations from the irs whistl whistle-blowers, that the u.s. attorney in this case, david weiss, made comments in private that he ultimately didn't have the power to decide if hunter biden was going to face specific charges? how do you interpret their testimony? >> well, look, i obviously heard the irs whistle-blower testimony as well. i mean, much of that hearing, unfortunately, was a whistle-blower circus. i think what we ought to keep in mind is on the oversight side, much of the witnesses have been brought forward by representative comer, by the chairman of the committee, by some of the hearings topping out on the judiciary side as well have been a big circus. and we have not really had

credible testimony. as far as what david weiss may have said or not said is going to in the weeks ahead. we want to get to the truth. all congressmen, including democrats have to make sure that hunter biden is held accountable who is not joe biden, and they're taking steps to do that. as we speak, kind of the unravel of the case in front of us i think in the days ahead we'll find out where this will all end. >> congressman, we hear your point about hunter biden being a private citizen. obviously, there are questions whether behavior that he's alleged to have committed is actually criminal or simply unethical. but does it concern you that the son of a former vice president, and current president, was allegedly on the phone with, for example, a chinese businessman, or sending text messages, i should say to a chinese businessman saying he's sitting next to his father, that if he

doesn't get what he's look fog in terms of a deal the reverberations of going to be felt? does that seem ethical to you? >> well, first, i think hunter biden has admitted to some wrongdoing, as part of that original deal so hunter biden is a private citizen and we should is not judge his father these actions and clearly in that this case, serious action that's he needs to be held accountable to. as to what exactly has happened, i think the white house has been very clear as well with what they're putting out. and they want to ensure that the process runs fairly and that justice is served in the appropriate way. we cannot be judging the president or a father based on action that's a son is doing. a lot of us have family and oftentimes, our family does things that we may not agree with. hunter biden certainly needs to be held accountable for any crimes he may have committed. and gets, getting the answers to the facts answered are fair. and i think that's being discussed, some of the media is

looking into it and congress as well. >> to the point of answering specific questions, if the u.s. attorney goes before the oversight committee, what are you wanting to ask him? >> well, look, if we have, obviously, that opportunity, we're going to make sure that we ask all of the questions, and broad questions, to make sure we do get the facts particularly when it comes to statements that have been made, as you referenced earlier, about comments, or statements made by the u.s. attorney. we've got to clarification as to what those actually were, i think that's a legitimate question. the issue, the broader issue with the oversight committee it's essentially being run by conspiracy it tt theorists. we saw for weeks a chierman hyping. a possible whistle-blower that turned out to be a chinese arms dealer. it's hard to get something in

these hearings when they're set up to attack donald trump. at the end of the day, hunter biden should be held accountable. he's a private citizen, separate from the white house. >> focusing on very important questions, congressman, house speaker kevin mccarthy raised the idea that undergoing impeachment inquiry would allow congress more of a broad scope to ask, again, important questions. what do you make of the speaker leaving the door open for a potential impeachment inquiry of president biden? >> i mean, look, that's just crazy. i think at the end of the day, mcckevin mccarthy is working fo donald trump and wants to do whatever he can to politicize this and help donald trump win another election. he's almost said as much. and certainly members of his party have said the same. president biden is doing a phenomenal job of leading this country. and is known as an ethical strong president. this idea that we would impeach

him for political reasons is concerning and distracting doing the work in washington. >> congressman robert garcia, we appreciate you joining us, we look forward to you coming back to talk about the unidentified phenomenon. >> happy to do so. >> marshal cohen have been in the courtroom for the proceedings today, marshall, there are questions about what happens next. but i wonder how, you can describe how the lawyers on each side, hunter biden's lawyers were reacting, one of the remarkable moments in effect, biden's lawyers said this deal is null and void. we're not on board with how it is playing out right now? >> well, right, that's right, jim. when the hearing started it seemed like business as usual. everything was going as planned. the deal was on. then, as the judge sort of

scrutinized the specific provisions of deal, and asked some pretty challenging questions to both sides, she sort of teased out that hunter biden's team and the justice department weren't actually in the same place on a key question of whether or not he could be charged with future crimes related to some of his foreign work. at that point, like you mentioned, the deal seemed to be off. they asked for a recess. they tried to get together. receive an agreement. they did come back and told the judge, basically, that they were all good. ready to move forward, they had settled their disagreements. and that's when she took the reins. she had concerns, still remaining, specifically about the provisions of the deal to resolve the felony gun charge that hunter biden would have been charged with, because he was in possession of a firearm while being a drug addict. the questions that the judge had were about important that deal is even constitutional. she repeatedly asked is this

even even constitutional? what happens if it's not constitutional? is there a separation of powers issue? and at that point, she appeared to basically call the whole thing off. she asked both sides to file legal arguments, more briefings to explain the deal, defend the deal. so the proceedings closed today with no deal, much to basically everyone's surprise. jim. >> and they're closed today means it continues into another day. marshall cohen outside the courthouse, thank you. we're joined by norm eisen and evan perez. as i read the details of this, it strikes me that a lot of the remaining questions are fairly in the weeds, as i can read them. norm, maybe i can ask you given you've got a j.d. somewhere in your past. one of the issue is the assurances that no other charges be pursued on tax or filing as a foreign agent was part of the

gun case, not the tax case, and that's a complication that the judge took issue with? >> jim, the issue here is that the judge wants to make sure that the plea agreement is the entire agreement between the parties. and here the question was, had the parties agreed that this would resolve everything? or would there be some lingering exposure? and when we started there was some confusion about that. >> yeah. >> i do want to say having been mostly a defense lawyer for my career, it's not unusual to get some questions from the judge. that is the job of the judge, to make sure that the plea agreement is on track. this judge perhaps reflecting that it is an exceptionally high-profile plea agreement leaned in a little bit more. typically, if the parties say, for example, on the constitutionality question, defendant, do you think it's

constitutional? yes. government, do you think it's constitutional? yes. judges will usually leave it there so to order additional briefing on some of these questions that is a pretty active federal judge in this case. >> understood. evan perez, you actually talked about this prior to today's events. and that is, that the door was always left open. >> right. >> to some degree to further prosecution by other crimes not covered by the agreement. one outcome of today's hearing, it seems, that's established and everyone agrees on that? is that correct? >> right. i think that is now the agreement that both sides have is that there is at least some aspect of this investigation which has covered a lot of different issues that remains ongoing and that hunter biden could still be exposed. to those things. >> such as? >> well what we know -- well, here's what we don't know. the answer is we do not know what those other things are, necessarily. we do know that this agreement, at least the second agreement

that they made, the one where they said, okay, we've put us back on the rails. it covers any tax, any gun or drug issues from 20 f14 to 2019. that's what they said -- again, this is the second agreement,they finally said they were ready to go forward with. what that leaves open to is whether there is some aspect of this investigation that we've known for some time were part of this, including money laundering. whether he violated the law on foreign agent registration, whether those things are still on the table. again, those are big, big things. and if you're hunter biden, why would you agree to a deal whereby some of these things, again, have been under an examination, under a five-year investigation, right? >> yeah. >> whether those things are still on the table. that is, to me, very perplexing. one thing i'd say, we were surprised when this day began we had not yet seen a statement of facts from the government. the government had not filed it pe