Hunter Biden Associate Accuses GOP Of Misrepresenting Testimony

James Comer

For weeks now, Hunter Biden has been sparring with House Oversight Committee Republicans over their demands that he give closed-door testimony in response to a congressional subpoena. Biden has insisted on answering questions in a public setting, instead, which would prevent the GOP from cherry-picking and warping his testimony in their favor.

Committee Chairman James Comer threatened to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress, and on Thursday the president’s son finally agreed to sit for a closed-door deposition, with a public hearing to come at a later date. He still has reason to be worried about Comer misrepresenting what he tells the committee in private, however, as one of Hunter Biden’s associates is now accusing the committee of releasing “cherry‐picked, out of context, and totally misleading descriptions” of his own testimony. 

Attorneys for Kevin Morris, an American businessman and close confidant of Hunter Biden, sent Comer a letter accusing him of misrepresenting Morris’ testimony. According to a copy of the letter obtained by Rolling Stone, attorney Bryan M. Sullivan had previously sought a commitment from Oversight Republicans that Morris would not be subjected to the “practice of Republicans in making partial leaks of witness’ statements rather than releasing the actual [deposition] transcript so the public would know the truth and not your often inaccurate spin and misstatements.” 

Comer did not comply, according to Sullivan. “Not two hours after we left Mr. Morris’ transcribed interview, you issued a press statement with cherry‐picked, out of context and totally misleading descriptions of what Mr. Morris said,” he added, demanding that Republicans release the full transcript of the testimony to correct the record. 

In the letter, Sullivan detailed several examples in which he alleges Comer misrepresented Morris’ testimony. In one instance, Sullivan takes issue the committee’s characterization of loans provided by Morris to Biden as an effort to “insulate then‐presidential candidate Joe Biden from political liability.”

Sullivan responds that “Morris testified that he never thought about President Biden’s campaign [and] that he was only focused on helping his client Mr. Hunter Biden.” 

Throughout the committee’s press release on Morris’ testimony, the words “loan” and “loans” are placed in quotation marks. Sullivan writes that this was done by Republicans “to give the

impression that Mr. Morris’ loans to Mr. Hunter Biden were somehow not real,” adding that Morris “repeatedly testified he actually loaned the money to Mr. Hunter Biden, that these loans were reviewed by lawyers for each of them, that they have proper loan terms such as interest and a term, and that he expected Mr. Hunter Biden to repay these loans.”

Republicans also claimed in their statements that Morris’ financial support of Hunter Biden granted him “access to the Biden White House and [that he] has spoken to President Biden.” The letter counters that such characterization misconstrues what Morris told the committee, which was that he only engaged in very casual small-talk with President Biden, and had only visited the White House a handful of times for large, public events. 

Earlier this month, Hunter Biden pleaded not guilty to federal tax evasion charges brought against him in California. For years now, Republicans have been attempting — unsuccessfully — to find evidence linking Hunter Biden’s alleged misconduct to their accusations of political corruption against President Joe Biden.


In December, the GOP announced their plans to move forward with an impeachment inquiry against President Biden, even as members of the party publicly admitted that there was no concrete evidence suggesting the president had engaged in any “high crimes and misdemeanors.” Comer has been repeatedly criticized for the way he has attempted to create an impression that their fishing expedition against the Bidens is producing tangible results, and Sullivan did not mince words in the conclusion of his letter. 

“Now, other potential witnesses should be on notice that a statement from you or your staff that you will treat a witness ‘fairly’ means you will do what you want, which is what you have done repeatedly, and is the farthest thing from ‘fair’ as you can get,” Sullivan wrote.

Source link:

Recommended For You

About the Author: News Reporter

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *