Category: fox-news/politics/justice-department

Hunter Biden: A look at how the saga spanning over six years unfolded

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

President Biden pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, ending a saga that has lasted for more than six years, with wide-ranging investigations by the Justice Department and both chambers of Congress related to his conduct and business dealings. 

Hunter Biden was found guilty of three felony firearm offenses stemming from Special Counsel David Weiss’ investigation. The first son was also charged with federal tax crimes regarding the failure to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes. Before his trial, Hunter Biden entered a surprise guilty plea. 

BIDEN PARDONS SON HUNTER BIDEN AHEAD OF EXIT FROM OVAL OFFICE

The charges carried up to 17 years behind bars. His sentencing was scheduled for Dec. 16. 

Here’s a look back at how it all began: 

The federal investigation into Hunter Biden began in 2018.

The probe was predicated, in part, by suspicious activity reports (SARs) regarding foreign transactions. Those SARs, according to sources familiar with the investigation, involved funds from "China and other foreign nations."

Fox News first reported the existence of some type of federal investigation involving Hunter Biden in October 2020, ahead of the last presidential election. It became known then that in the course of an existing money laundering investigation, the FBI had subpoenaed the laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden.

Stories about the laptop were widely panned by Democrats and mainstream media outlets as Russian disinformation. At the time, then-Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe confirmed that the laptop was "not part of some Russian disinformation campaign," but that claim was rejected by Democrats and many in the media.

Social media companies like Twitter and Facebook censored and limited the circulation of stories related to Hunter Biden's laptop before the 2020 presidential election.

Only in 2022 did media outlets verify that the laptop did belong to Hunter Biden and did hold legitimate records belonging to him.

Twitter, under the new ownership of Elon Musk, released records surrounding the company's decisions to block the circulation of the Hunter Biden stories – even though he had been under federal investigation at that point for nearly two years.

Hunter Biden confirmed the investigation into his "tax affairs" in December 2020, after his father was elected president.

But Hunter Biden’s business dealings were also, simultaneously, being investigated by Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., in 2019. Specifically, the senators were investigating Hunter Biden’s business dealings with Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings. 

Grassley and Johnson released a report in September 2020 saying that Obama administration officials "knew" that Hunter Biden’s position on the board of Burisma was "problematic" and that it interfered "in the efficient execution of policy with respect to Ukraine."

Hunter Biden joined Burisma in April 2014 and, at the time, reportedly connected the firm with consulting firm Blue Star Strategies to help the natural gas company fight corruption charges in Ukraine. During the time Hunter Biden was on the board of the company, Joe Biden was vice president and was running U.S.-Ukraine relations and policy for the Obama administration.

Also in 2019, Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine came into the spotlight during the first impeachment of now-President-elect Donald Trump. 

House Republicans wanted to call Hunter Biden to testify in the impeachment proceedings in the fall of 2019. 

HUNTER BIDEN INVESTIGATORS LIMITED QUESTIONS ABOUT 'DAD,' 'BIG GUY' DESPITE FBI, IRS OBJECTIONS: WHISTLEBLOWER

Trump was acquitted in Feb. 2020 on both articles of impeachment against him — abuse of power and obstruction of Congress — after being impeached by the House of Representatives in December 2019. 

Trump was impeached after a July 2019 phone call in which he pressed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to launch investigations into the Biden family’s actions and business dealings in Ukraine, specifically Hunter Biden’s ventures with Burisma and Joe Biden’s successful effort to have former Ukrainian Prosecutor General Viktor Shokin ousted.

At the same time as that call, Hunter Biden was under federal investigation, prompted by his suspicious foreign transactions. 

Trump's request was regarded by Democrats as a quid pro quo because millions in U.S. military aid to Ukraine had been frozen. Democrats also said Trump was meddling in the 2020 presidential election by asking a foreign leader to look into a Democrat political opponent.

Republicans had been investigating Hunter Biden’s business dealings, specifically with regard Burisma. House Republicans, who were in the minority at the time, made several requests to subpoena Hunter Biden for testimony and documents related to the impeachment of Trump and his business dealings that fell at the center of the proceedings.

Biden has acknowledged that when he was vice president, he successfully pressured Ukraine to fire Shokin. At the time, Shokin was investigating Burisma and Hunter Biden had a highly lucrative role on the board, receiving thousands of dollars per month. The then-vice president threatened to withhold $1 billion of critical U.S. aid if Shokin were not fired.

FLASHBACK: DEMOCRATS CLASH WITH REPUBLICANS OVER PROSPECT OF CALLING HUNTER BIDEN IN IMPEACHMENT TRIAL

"I said, ‘You’re not getting the billion.' … I looked at them and said, ‘I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money,’" Biden recalled telling then-Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko. Biden recollected the conversation during an event for the Council on Foreign Relations in 2018.

Meanwhile, once President Biden took office, the House Oversight Committee led by Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., began investigating Hunter Biden’s business dealings and the business dealings of the Biden family. Comer ultimately found that the Biden family and its associates had received more than $27 million from foreign individuals or entities since 2014.

But it wasn’t until 2023 that whistleblowers from the IRS, Gary Shapley and Joseph Ziegler, brought allegations of politicization in the federal probe of Hunter Biden to Congress. 

The two alleged that political influence had infected prosecutorial decisions in the federal probe, which was led by Trump-appointed Delaware U.S. Attorney David Weiss, who they said had requested to become a special counsel. 

After Shapley and Ziegler testified publicly, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Weiss as special counsel to continue his investigation of the first son and, ultimately, bring federal charges against him in two separate jurisdictions — Delaware and California. 

House Republicans continued to investigate allegations of politicization brought by Ziegler and Shapley, as well as findings related to the Biden family’s business dealings from Comer’s probe. 

BIDEN COMMITTED ‘IMPEACHABLE CONDUCT,’ ‘DEFRAUDED UNITED STATES TO ENRICH HIS FAMILY’: HOUSE GOP REPORT

Comer, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan and Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith came together and launched an impeachment inquiry against President Biden to determine whether he had any involvement in his son’s business dealings. Biden repeatedly denied having any involvement, despite evidence placing him at meetings and on phone calls with his son and his foreign business partners.

In August, House lawmakers released their final report, spanning 292 pages, saying that Biden had engaged in "impeachable conduct." They said he had "abused his office" and "defrauded the United States to enrich his family."  

Republicans said there is "overwhelming evidence" that Biden had participated in a "conspiracy to monetize his office of public trust to enrich his family." They alleged that the Biden family and their business associates had received tens of millions of dollars from foreign interests by "leading those interests to believe that such payments would provide them access to and influence with President Biden." 

In the summer of 2023, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty to federal gun charges as part of a plea deal that collapsed before a federal judge in Delaware. In a stunning reversal, Hunter Biden was forced to plead not guilty and sat for a trial this year. 

Before his trial for federal tax crimes, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty. 

President Biden’s pardon of his son came after months of vowing to the American people that he would not do so. 

But on Sunday, the president announced a blanket pardon that applies to any offenses against the U.S. that Hunter Biden "has committed or may have committed" from Jan. 1, 2014, to Dec. 1, 2024. 

"From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted," Biden said. "There has been an effort to break Hunter — who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me — and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough."

Biden added, "I hope Americans will understand why a father and a president would come to this decision." 

Special counsel, IRS whistleblowers say don’t buy Biden ‘spin’ about Hunter Biden legal saga

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

President Biden pardoned his son, Hunter Biden, late Sunday evening, sparing him from being sentenced in a pair of separate court cases in which he was found guilty of illegally purchasing a gun and failing to pay $1.4 million in taxes — convictions the president claimed were politically motivated and a "miscarriage of justice."

A review of Hunter Biden’s yearslong legal saga, however, shows another story, and those involved in the prosecutions are making sure that side of the story is told in the aftermath of the president's decision. 

"There was none and never has been any evidence of vindictive or selective prosecution in this case," special prosecutor David Weiss said in a court filing following the pardoning. 

Two IRS whistleblowers who sounded the alarm on Hunter Biden's tax issues also slammed the decision to pardon Hunter Biden, saying, "No amount of lies or spin can hide the simple truth that the Justice Department nearly let the President's son off the hook for multiple felonies."

"President Biden has the power to put his thumb on the scales of justice for his son, but at least he had to do it with a pardon explicitly for all the world to see rather than his political appointees doing it secretly behind the scenes. Either way it is a sad day for law abiding taxpayers to witness this special privilege for the powerful," IRS whistleblowers Supervisory Special Agent Gary Shapley and Special Agent Joe Ziegler said in a statement Sunday evening. 

2 TIMES BIDEN SAID HE WOULD NOT PARDON SON HUNTER BIDEN 

"No amount of lies or spin can hide the simple truth that the Justice Department nearly let the President's son off the hook for multiple felonies. We did our duty, told the truth, and followed the law. Anyone reading the President's excuses now should remember that Hunter Biden admitted to his tax crimes in federal court, that Hunter Biden's attorneys have targeted us for our lawful whistleblower disclosures, and that we are suing one of those attorneys for smearing us with false accusations," they continued, referring to their $20 million defamation lawsuit against Hunter Biden’s high-profile attorney Abbe Lowell in September for claiming the IRS investigators illegally leaked Hunter Biden’s private tax information.

The guilty plea, guilty verdict and the president’s pardoning caps off a yearslong legal saga for the first son and his family, with the cases stretching back to 2018 and notably featured the IRS whistleblowers who sounded the alarm on Hunter Biden’s tax issues. 

Hunter Biden was found guilty in the gun case in June, with a jury of his peers determining he made a false statement in the purchase of a gun, made a false statement related to information required to be kept by a federally licensed gun dealer, and possession of a gun by a person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance. 

He has a well-documented history of drug abuse, which was most notably documented in his 2021 memoir, "Beautiful Things," which walked readers through his previous need to smoke crack cocaine every 20 minutes, how his addiction was so prolific that he referred to himself as a "crack daddy" to drug dealers, and anecdotes revolving around drug deals, such as a Washington, D.C., crack dealer Biden nicknamed "Bicycles."

In the tax case, Hunter faced another trial regarding three felony tax offenses and six misdemeanor tax offenses regarding the failure to pay at least $1.4 million in taxes. As jury selection was about to kick off in Los Angeles federal court in September, Hunter entered a surprise guilty plea. 

TRUMP PREVIOUSLY PREDICTED BIDEN WOULD PARDON SON HUNTER

BIDEN PARDONS SON HUNTER BIDEN AHEAD OF EXIT FROM OVAL OFFICE

The tax case investigation originally kicked off in 2018, when the U.S. attorney in Delaware opened a probe into Hunter Biden’s finances. The first son initially notified the public that he was under investigation one month after his dad won the presidential election over President-elect Donald Trump in 2020. 

​​"I learned yesterday for the first time that the U.S. attorney’s office in Delaware advised my legal counsel, also yesterday, that they are investigating my tax affairs," Hunter Biden said in a statement released in December of 2020. "I take this matter very seriously, but I am confident that a professional and objective review of these matters will demonstrate that I handled my affairs legally and appropriately, including with the benefit of professional tax advisers."

After President Biden took control of the Oval Office, his administration retained David Weiss, a Trump-appointed Republican charged with overseeing the investigation into Hunter Biden in his capacity as U.S. attorney for Delaware. The Biden administration had gutted all Senate-confirmed U.S. attorneys under the Trump administration, except for two individuals: Weiss, and Special Counsel John Durham, who investigated the origins of the Russia probe surrounding the 2016 election. 

KJP SAYS PRESIDENT BIDEN STILL HAS NO PLANS TO PARDON HUNTER BIDEN FOR TAX FRAUD, GUN CHARGES

Last year, Hunter Biden was in the midst of hashing out a plea agreement to two misdemeanor tax counts of willful failure to pay federal income tax, as well as a pretrial diversion agreement regarding a separate felony charge of possession of a firearm by a person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance. The plea agreement unraveled in Delaware court, however, and heightened his legal woes. 

Weeks later, Attorney General Merrick Garland appointed Weiss as special counsel, broadening the scope of the investigation into Hunter Biden. With the plea deal officially at an impasse, Weiss subsequently charged Hunter Biden in September of last year for the gun charges, and brought forth the nine tax-related charges against Hunter Biden in December of 2023 in California court. 

"The appointment of Mr. Weiss reinforces for the American people the department’s commitment to both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters," Garland said in the announcement of Weiss as special prosecutor. "I am confident that Mr. Weiss will carry out his responsibility in an evenhanded and urgent manner and in accordance with the highest traditions of this department."

Simultaneous to the investigations into Hunter Biden’s tax dealings and gun purchase scrutiny, IRS whistleblowers sounded the alarm that they gathered evidence Hunter Biden had allegedly committed "felony and misdemeanor tax charges." The whistleblowers were identified as IRS Special Agent Joseph Ziegler and his supervisor Gary Shapley. 

HUNTER BIDEN FOUND GUILTY ON ALL COUNTS IN GUN TRIAL

The whistleblowers told Congress last year that prosecutorial decisions made throughout the federal investigation into the president’s son were allegedly impacted by politics, claiming the Justice Department and IRS handled its probe of Hunter Biden’s finances with kid gloves. 

Ziegler said he felt the investigation into Hunter Biden was "handcuffed" and that the DOJ and Weiss slow-walked the investigation, while underscoring that he is a Democrat and worked to remove any personal political bias. 

"I'm a Democrat. In the last presidential election, I actually did not vote," Ziegler told CBS News last year. "I thought it would be irresponsible of me to do so because I didn't wanna show bias one way or the other."

The whistleblowers said the tax discrepancies stretched back to 2014 and related to Hunter Biden’s employment with Burisma Holdings, a Ukrainian natural gas firm. Fox Digital first reported in 2020 that Hunter Biden did not report "approximately $400,000" in income he collected from his position on the board of Burisma Holdings when he joined in 2014. 

Weiss' charges against Hunter Biden ultimately only focused on his failure to pay taxes between 2016 and 2020. However, the president's pardon of his son shields him from prosecution for offenses between 2014 and 2024. 

After the whistleblowers' attorney sent a letter to lawmakers in April of last year indicating they wished to "make a protected whistleblower disclosures to Congress" over claims the Biden admin was allegedly mishandling the matter, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., subpoenaed the FBI to turn over materials related to a "criminal scheme involving then-Vice President Joe Biden and a foreign national."

JOE BIDEN MET WITH AT LEAST 14 OF HUNTER’S BUSINESS ASSOCIATES WHILE VICE PRESIDENT

Comer did ultimately receive documents related to President Biden’s alleged "criminal scheme," known as the FD-1023 document, but slammed the materials as essentially useless as they were reportedly overwhelmingly redacted. 

Meanwhile, the House Ways and Means Committee interviewed the IRS whistleblowers and released transcripts of their interviews last year showing claims the Biden administration slow-walked the investigation and claiming the DOJ refused to appoint Weiss special counsel status. The DOJ denied the claims. 

Shapley claimed the agency obtained a message from WhatsApp dated July 30, 2017, from Hunter Biden to Henry Zhao, CEO of Harvest Fund Management, where the president's son allegedly threatened his business associate by leveraging his father’s political clout.

"I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight," Hunter Biden allegedly wrote. The message was sent after Biden’s term as vice president under the Obama administration, and before he was elected president in 2020.  

"And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction," the message continues. "I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father."

HUNTER BIDEN FACES NEW INDICTMENT IN CALIFORNIA

The White House has repeatedly denied the president had any business dealings with his son. 

As the investigations and whistleblower claims mounted, House Republicans opened an impeachment inquiry into Biden, with the House Oversight Committee, House Judiciary Committee and House Ways and Means Committee releasing a lengthy report in August that Biden engaged in "impeachable conduct" and "defrauded the United States to enrich his family." 

Republicans said there was "overwhelming evidence" that Biden participated in a "conspiracy to monetize his office of public trust to enrich his family" to the tune of more than $27 million from foreign individuals or entities since 2014.

The inquiry has fizzled in recent months, as the presidential election took center stage on the national level. 

Biden declared in his statement Sunday evening that the prosecution of Hunter was a "miscarriage of justice," apparently bolstering his reasoning for the pardon after he said at least twice he would not pardon his son. 

"From the day I took office, I said I would not interfere with the Justice Department’s decision-making, and I kept my word even as I have watched my son being selectively, and unfairly, prosecuted," Biden said in his statement announcing the pardon. 

"It is clear that Hunter was treated differently. The charges in his cases came about only after several of my political opponents in Congress instigated them to attack me and oppose my election. Then, a carefully negotiated plea deal, agreed to by the Department of Justice, unraveled in the court room – with a number of my political opponents in Congress taking credit for bringing political pressure on the process. Had the plea deal held, it would have been a fair, reasonable resolution of Hunter’s cases," he continued. 

"I believe in the justice system, but as I have wrestled with this, I also believe raw politics has infected this process and it led to a miscarriage of justice – and once I made this decision this weekend, there was no sense in delaying it further. I hope Americans will understand why a father and a President would come to this decision." 

Similar to his dad, Hunter Biden released a statement Sunday arguing the investigations and prosecutions were politically motivated.  

​​"I have admitted and taken responsibility for my mistakes during the darkest days of my addiction — mistakes that have been exploited to publicly humiliate and shame me and my family for political sport," Hunter Biden said in a statement to Fox News. "Despite all of this, I have maintained my sobriety for more than five years because of my deep faith and the unwavering love and support of my family and friends."

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House and Weiss's office for comment, but did not immediately receive a reply. 

Fox News Digital's Brooke Singman, Greg Wehner, and Charles Creitz contributed to this report. 

President Biden’s pardon of son Hunter a political gift for Trump going forward

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Legal and political analysts are characterizing President Biden's stunning "full and unconditional pardon" of his son Hunter as an early holiday gift for President-elect Donald Trump.

"He's essentially endorsing Trump's long-held opinion that the Department of Justice is politicized and isn't acting impartially," longtime Republican strategist and communicator Ryan Williams said of the move by Biden.

In absolving his son ahead of twin sentencings on separate gun and tax convictions later this month, the president argued that the Justice Department's handling of the cases against Hunter Biden was politicized.

DID TRUMP PREDICT BIDEN PARDON OF HIS SON HUNTER?

Biden said in a statement Sunday night that his son, who is a recovering addict, was "treated differently" because of who his father is.

"No reasonable person who looks at the facts of Hunter’s cases can reach any other conclusion than Hunter was singled out only because he is my son — and that is wrong," the president said in the statement. "There has been an effort to break Hunter — who has been five and a half years sober, even in the face of unrelenting attacks and selective prosecution. In trying to break Hunter, they’ve tried to break me — and there’s no reason to believe it will stop here. Enough is enough."

TRUMP STATEMENT ON BIDEN'S MOVE TO PARDON HIS SON

Biden, in his statement, appeared to be pointing to the way the case was handled by David Weiss. He is the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney from Delaware who originally investigated Hunter Biden and was later appointed as a special counsel during the Biden administration by Attorney General Merrick Garland.

While an impeachment inquiry by House Republicans that looked into the president and his son's business relationships fizzled, Trump, during the presidential campaign, hinted at continuing to investigate the younger Biden in his second term in the White House.

However, Trump will not be able to undo the pardon when he takes office. Additionally, the pardon's sweeping nature means the next Trump Justice Department would not be able to reopen the criminal probe against Hunter Biden.

However, Trump gains something arguably more valuable - political cover.

Trump was heavily criticized during his first term for using pardons to protect political aides and allies - including longtime fixer Roger Stone and 2016 campaign chairman Paul Manafort - and relatives, including his daughter's father-in-law, whom the president-elect named as his second term ambassador to France. 

Biden's pardon of his son now gives Trump a powerful rebuttal.

"Biden has endorsed this idea that the Department of Justice acts in a political way, and he's thrown out long-held precedent when it comes to pardons," Williams told Fox News.  "He's blowing up an institution and procedures, which is what Democrats have long criticized Trump for. They don't have any moral authority to say that Trump is undermining institutions and changing long-held procedures. That's what Joe Biden just did with this pardon."

The president-elect will be under pressure as he takes office next month to pardon many of those convicted of crimes in the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters aiming to upend congressional certification of Biden's 2020 election victory. Many of those convicted are still in prison.

HUNTER BIDEN SAYS HIS MISTAKES WERE EXPLOITED BY REPUBLICANS

Fox News legal editor Kerri Kupec Urbahn said that "Joe Biden has lowered the bar so much here in offering this pardon to Hunter Biden, that I think Donald Trump will be able to pardon a whole host of people including Jan. 6 [defendants]."

Trump, in a statement following Biden's move, raised expectations that he should issue pardons for some of those Jan. 6 convicts.

"Does the Pardon given by Joe to Hunter include the J-6 Hostages, who have now been imprisoned for years?" Trump wrote in a social media post Sunday night. "Such an abuse and miscarriage of Justice!"

Biden's pardon came 24 hours after Trump announced he would nominate loyalist Kash Patel as FBI director. Patel, a controversial pick, has long amplified Trump's unproven claims the 2020 election was stolen and long vowed to clean house at the FBI.

The move by Biden may help Trump as he works to push the nomination of Patel and Pam Bondi - a former Florida attorney general and another Trump loyalist who the president-elect named as his second pick for attorney general - through the Senate.

Republican Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas, a leading Trump ally in the Senate, argued in a social media post that "Democrats can spare us the lectures about the rule of law when, say, President Trump nominates Pam Bondi and Kash Patel to clean up this corruption."

The Hunter Biden pardon may convince Republican senators who may have serious reservations regarding the Patel and Bondi picks to now back Trump.

"I do think it makes it more likely that some of these more traditional Republican senators will be p****d off enough to help Trump confirm some of his more controversial nominees," a Republican who works on Capitol Hill told Fox News, as he noted that "it's the most sweeping pardon since Richard Nixon" a half a century ago.

Who is Pam Bondi, Trump’s new pick for attorney general?

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

Just hours after former Florida Congressman Matt Gaetz withdrew his name from consideration to be attorney general, President-elect Trump tapped former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as his AG nominee.

"For too long, the partisan Department of Justice has been weaponized against me and other Republicans – Not anymore," Trump wrote in his announcement. "Pam will refocus the DOJ to its intended purpose of fighting Crime, and Making America Safe Again.

"I have known Pam for many years – She is smart and tough, and is an AMERICA FIRST Fighter, who will do a terrific job as Attorney General!"

Bondi chairs the Center of Litigation and co-chairs the Center for Law and Justice at the America First Policy Institute. 

PRESIDENT-ELECT TRUMP ANNOUNCES PAM BONDI AS HIS NEW PICK FOR US ATTORNEY GENERAL

Here's what to know about Trump's new AG pick:

Bondi, 59, is a Tampa native and earned her bachelor's degree in criminal justice from the University of Florida and her law degree from Stetson Law School. She was admitted to the Florida Bar in 1991.

She worked as a prosecutor out of the Hillsborough County State Attorney's Office for more than 18 years, trying a variety of cases from domestic violence to murder.

Bondi made history in 2010 as the state's first female attorney general. Her campaign emphasized challenging the Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, and later focused on human trafficking issues once in office. She also notably shut down pill mills and tackled the state's opioid crisis. 

She held the post until 2019. 

Bondi worked as one of Trump's defense lawyers in 2020 after he was first impeached on allegations that he had abused his power and obstructed Congress. 

"They have not charged the president with any crime because the president did nothing wrong," Bondi said when articles of impeachment were sent by the House to the Senate. "There was no crime. The transcript of that phone call speaks for itself."

MATT GAETZ WITHDRAWS FROM CONSIDERATION TO SERVE AS ATTORNEY GENERAL

Bondi also worked on Trump's Opioid and Drug Abuse Commission during his first administration. In her role on the commission, Bondi collaborated with national leaders on drug prevention and treatment. 

Bondi is a partner at Ballard Partners, a Florida-based lobbying firm founded by Brian Ballard. Bondi splits her time between Florida and Washington, D.C., chairing the firm's corporate regulatory practice. 

The D.C. office notably earned more than $70 million in lobbying fees during Trump's first term by representing various corporate clients, according to federal disclosures. 

Trump's incoming chief of staff, Susie Wiles, also works for the firm after becoming a partner there following Trump's 2016 victory. 

WITH GAETZ DROPPING OUT, DO HEGSETH, RFK JR. AND GABBARD NOW HAVE BIGGER TARGETS ON THEIR BACKS?

Bondi has been vocal in her criticism about Trump's prosecutions, going so far as appearing alongside Trump in New York City during his hush money trial. 

"They make it sound like it's a first-degree murder case, and I've tried plenty of trial cases, Trace, and never seen anything like this," Bondi told Fox News host Trace Gallagher in April, shortly after Trump was issued a gag order in his New York case. 

"They're trying to gag him not only of his First Amendment rights but of defending himself," Bondi said at the time. 

Fox News Digital's Chris Pandolfo contributed to this report. 

Who’s who on Trump’s short list for attorney general

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

President-elect Donald Trump has wasted little time in naming top White House and Cabinet officials to serve in his administration as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in January.

It remains to be seen, however, who Trump will pick to head up his Justice Department, perhaps one of the most important vacancies to be filled in the next administration. 

Early contenders for the post include sitting U.S. senators, former Justice Department personnel and at least one top White House adviser from Trump's first term.

Though each would bring widely different backgrounds and perspectives to the position, they all share one common trait: loyalty to the president-elect and a willingness to back his agenda and policies over the next four years. 

As the U.S. awaits a formal announcement from the president-elect, here are some of the top names being floated for the role of U.S. attorney general.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LOOKING TO WIND DOWN TRUMP CRIMINAL CASES AHEAD OF INAUGURATION

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah

Sen. Mike Lee, R- Utah, is considered to be a more conventional pick to head up the Justice Department. Lee is a high-ranking Republican in the chamber and would face a somewhat easy path to Senate confirmation, at least compared to some of the more controversial names that have surfaced.

But he may not be gunning for the role.

The Utah Republican told reporters last week that while he has been in frequent conversations with Trump's transition team, he plans to focus his sway in the Republican-majority Senate on helping gin up support for Trump's Cabinet nominees and helping select the Senate majority leader, a leadership election in which Lee, as current chair of the Senate Steering Committee, is poised to a play a major role.

"I have the job I want," Lee told the Deseret News in an interview. "And I look forward to working in the next Congress and with President Trump and his team to implement his agenda and the reform agenda that Republicans have offered and campaigned on, and it’s going to be an exciting time. We’ve got a lot of work to do."

John Ratcliffe

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe is among the top names being considered to head up the Justice Department. 

Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor and a former U.S. representative from Texas, earned the spotlight during Trump’s first term for his outspoken criticism of the FBI and of the special counsel investigation overseen by Robert Mueller.

Trump tapped Ratcliffe in 2019 to replace Dan Coates as the Director of National Intelligence. The following year, he was tapped by the outgoing president to be a member of his impeachment team.

Mark Paoletta 

Former White House attorney Mark Paoletta served during Trump’s first term as counsel to then-Vice President Mike Pence and to the Office of Management and Budget.

Paoletta is also already working on the Trump transition team, including helping steer Justice Department policy in the next Trump administration, making him a potentially natural fit for the role.

Paoletta also made clear Monday that if tapped to head up the Justice Department, he would not tolerate any resistance to Trump’s agenda by career prosecutors and other nonpolitical officials.

In a lengthy post on the social media site, X, Paoletta said career employees are "required to implement the President’s plan" after an election, even ones they may consider unethical or illegal. 

"If these career DOJ employees won’t implement President Trump’s program in good faith, they should leave," Paoletta said, noting that employees who engage in so-called "resistance" to Trump’s agenda would be guilty of "subverting American democracy" and subject to "disciplinary measures, including termination."

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is also among the names floated to lead the Department of Justice. Bailey was tapped by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson in 2022 to be the state’s top prosecutor after then-state Attorney General Eric Schmitt was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Since taking over the state AG’s office, Bailey has led dozens of lawsuits against the Biden administration and sought to defend the state on a number of conservative issues as well. 

Those familiar with Bailey’s ascent say his lower-profile career could be an asset as a possible U.S. attorney general, especially since the role requires Senate confirmation. He could be aided here by Sens. Josh Hawley and Eric Schmitt, two Missouri Republicans who also served as state attorney general before their Senate service.

Since neither appear to be seeking the role of the top U.S. prosector, they could play a key role in stumping for Bailey in the Senate if his name does come up for consideration.

TRUMP TO APPOINT FORMER ICE DIRECTOR TOM HOMAN AS NEXT ‘BORDER CZAR’: NOBODY BETTER AT POLICING OUR BORDERS'

Matt Whitaker

Former Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker temporarily led the Justice Department after Trump fired former Attorney General Jeff Sessions during his first term.

Asked last week in a Fox News interview whether he wants the role, Whitaker declined to answer, saying that the decision is Trump's to make. 

"He's going to want someone who he knows, likes and trusts," Whitaker said. "He's going to want someone who was there from the beginning," he added, and who can help defend against what Whitaker described as "all this lawfare nonsense." 

The Trump transition team did not immediately respond to Fox News's request for comment as to who remains on its list of candidates to lead the Justice Department.

Who’s who on Trump’s short list for attorney general

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

President-elect Donald Trump has wasted little time in naming top White House and Cabinet officials to serve in his administration as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in January.

It remains to be seen, however, who Trump will pick to head up his Justice Department, perhaps one of the most important vacancies to be filled in the next administration. 

Early contenders for the post include sitting U.S. senators, former Justice Department personnel and at least one top White House adviser from Trump's first term.

Though each would bring widely different backgrounds and perspectives to the position, they all share one common trait: loyalty to the president-elect and a willingness to back his agenda and policies over the next four years. 

As the U.S. awaits a formal announcement from the president-elect, here are some of the top names being floated for the role of U.S. attorney general.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LOOKING TO WIND DOWN TRUMP CRIMINAL CASES AHEAD OF INAUGURATION

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah

Sen. Mike Lee, R- Utah, is considered to be a more conventional pick to head up the Justice Department. Lee is a high-ranking Republican in the chamber and would face a somewhat easy path to Senate confirmation, at least compared to some of the more controversial names that have surfaced.

But he may not be gunning for the role.

The Utah Republican told reporters last week that while he has been in frequent conversations with Trump's transition team, he plans to focus his sway in the Republican-majority Senate on helping gin up support for Trump's Cabinet nominees and helping select the Senate majority leader, a leadership election in which Lee, as current chair of the Senate Steering Committee, is poised to a play a major role.

"I have the job I want," Lee told the Deseret News in an interview. "And I look forward to working in the next Congress and with President Trump and his team to implement his agenda and the reform agenda that Republicans have offered and campaigned on, and it’s going to be an exciting time. We’ve got a lot of work to do."

John Ratcliffe

Former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe is among the top names being considered to head up the Justice Department. 

Ratcliffe, a former federal prosecutor and a former U.S. representative from Texas, earned the spotlight during Trump’s first term for his outspoken criticism of the FBI and of the special counsel investigation overseen by Robert Mueller.

Trump tapped Ratcliffe in 2019 to replace Dan Coates as the Director of National Intelligence. The following year, he was tapped by the outgoing president to be a member of his impeachment team.

Mark Paoletta 

Former White House attorney Mark Paoletta served during Trump’s first term as counsel to then-Vice President Mike Pence and to the Office of Management and Budget.

Paoletta is also already working on the Trump transition team, including helping steer Justice Department policy in the next Trump administration, making him a potentially natural fit for the role.

Paoletta also made clear Monday that if tapped to head up the Justice Department, he would not tolerate any resistance to Trump’s agenda by career prosecutors and other nonpolitical officials.

In a lengthy post on the social media site, X, Paoletta said career employees are "required to implement the President’s plan" after an election, even ones they may consider unethical or illegal. 

"If these career DOJ employees won’t implement President Trump’s program in good faith, they should leave," Paoletta said, noting that employees who engage in so-called "resistance" to Trump’s agenda would be guilty of "subverting American democracy" and subject to "disciplinary measures, including termination."

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey

Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey is also among the names floated to lead the Department of Justice. Bailey was tapped by Missouri Gov. Mike Parson in 2022 to be the state’s top prosecutor after then-state Attorney General Eric Schmitt was elected to the U.S. Senate.

Since taking over the state AG’s office, Bailey has led dozens of lawsuits against the Biden administration and sought to defend the state on a number of conservative issues as well. 

Those familiar with Bailey’s ascent say his lower-profile career could be an asset as a possible U.S. attorney general, especially since the role requires Senate confirmation. He could be aided here by Sens. Josh Hawley and Eric Schmitt, two Missouri Republicans who also served as state attorney general before their Senate service.

Since neither appear to be seeking the role of the top U.S. prosector, they could play a key role in stumping for Bailey in the Senate if his name does come up for consideration.

TRUMP TO APPOINT FORMER ICE DIRECTOR TOM HOMAN AS NEXT ‘BORDER CZAR’: NOBODY BETTER AT POLICING OUR BORDERS'

Matt Whitaker

Former Acting Attorney General Matt Whitaker temporarily led the Justice Department after Trump fired former Attorney General Jeff Sessions during his first term.

Asked last week in a Fox News interview whether he wants the role, Whitaker declined to answer, saying that the decision is Trump's to make. 

"He's going to want someone who he knows, likes and trusts," Whitaker said. "He's going to want someone who was there from the beginning," he added, and who can help defend against what Whitaker described as "all this lawfare nonsense." 

The Trump transition team did not immediately respond to Fox News's request for comment as to who remains on its list of candidates to lead the Justice Department.

Jordan demands Smith retain all records related to Trump prosecutions as special counsel’s office winds down

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

FIRST ON FOX: The House Judiciary Committee is concerned that special counsel Jack Smith and prosecutors involved in the investigations of now President-elect Donald Trump will "purge" records to skirt oversight and is demanding they produce to Congress all documents related to the probes before the end of the month, Fox News Digital has learned. 

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., penned a letter to Smith on Friday, obtained by Fox News Digital. 

TRUMP VOWS TO LEAD ‘GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICA' IN VICTORY SPEECH: ’FIX EVERYTHING'

"The Committee on the Judiciary is continuing its oversight of the Department of Justice and the Office of Special Counsel. According to recent public reports, prosecutors in your office have been ‘gaming out legal options’ in the event that President Donald Trump won the election," they wrote. "With President Trump’s decisive victory this week, we are concerned that the Office of Special Counsel may attempt to purge relevant records, communications, and documents responsive to our numerous requests for information." 

Jordan and Loudermilk warned that the Office of Special Counsel "is not immune from transparency or above accountability for its actions." 

"We reiterate our requests, which are itemized in the attached appendix and incorporated herein, and ask that you produce the entirety of the requested material as soon as possible but no later than November 22, 2024," they wrote. 

Jordan and Loudermilk are demanding Smith turn over information about the use of FBI personnel on his team — a request first made in June 2023 — and whether any of those FBI employees "previously worked on any other matters concerning President Trump." 

They also renewed their request from August 2023, demanding records relating to Smith and prosecutor Jay Bratt visiting the White House or Executive Office of the President; a request from September 2023 for records related to lawyer Stanley Woodward—who represented Trump aide Walt Nauta; a request from December 2023 for communications between Attorney General Merrick Garland and the special counsel’s team; and more. 

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT LOOKING TO WIND DOWN TRUMP CRIMINAL CASES AHEAD OF INAUGURATION

The Justice Department is looking to wind down two federal criminal cases against President-elect Trump as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in the White House — a decision that upholds a long-standing policy that prevents Justice Department attorneys from prosecuting a sitting president. 

DOJ officials have cited a memo from the Office of Legal Counsel filed in 2000, which upholds a Watergate-era argument that asserts it is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine for the Justice Department to investigate a sitting president. 

It further notes that such proceedings would "unduly interfere in a direct or formal sense with the conduct of the Presidency."  

"In light of the effect that an indictment would have on the operations of the executive branch, ‘an impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a President while in office,’" the memo said in conclusion.

Smith was leading an investigation into the alleged retention of classified records. Trump pleaded not guilty to the charges stemming from that probe. 

The case was eventually tossed completely by a federal judge in Florida, who ruled that Smith was improperly and unlawfully appointed as special counsel. 

Smith also took over an investigation into alleged 2020 election interference. Trump also pleaded not guilty, but his attorneys took the fight to the U.S. Supreme Court to argue on the basis of presidential immunity. 

The high court ruled that Trump was immune from prosecution for official presidential acts, forcing Smith to file a new indictment. Trump pleaded not guilty to those new charges as well. Trump attorneys are now seeking to have the election interference charges dropped in Washington, D.C., similarly alleging that Smith was appointed unlawfully. 

Justice Department looking to wind down Trump criminal cases ahead of inauguration

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The Justice Department is looking to wind down two federal criminal cases against President-elect Trump as he prepares to be sworn in for a second term in the White House — a decision that upholds long-standing policy that prevents Justice Department attorneys from prosecuting a sitting president. 

In making this argument, Justice Department officials cited a memo from the Office of Legal Counsel filed in 2000, which upholds a Watergate-era argument that asserts it is a violation of the separation of powers doctrine for the Justice Department to investigate a sitting president. 

It further notes that such proceedings would "unduly interfere in a direct or formal sense with the conduct of the Presidency."  

"In light of the effect that an indictment would have on the operations of the executive branch, ‘an impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a President while in office,’" the memo said in conclusion.

Former Attorney General Bill Barr also backed this contention Wednesday in an interview with Fox News Digital, noting that after Trump takes office in January, prosecutors will be unable to continue the cases during his term. 

TRUMP VOWS TO LEAD ‘GOLDEN AGE OF AMERICA' IN VICTORY SPEECH: ’FIX EVERYTHING'

Barr told Fox News Digital that a Trump-appointed attorney general could immediately halt all federal cases brought by current Special Counsel Jack Smith in Washington, D.C., and Florida. 

The charges in D.C. stem from Trump's alleged efforts to overturn the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. In Florida, they are centered on Trump's handling of classified documents after leaving the White House in 2020.

And though Trump would be powerless to halt two state cases filed in Georgia and New York, Barr said local prosecutors and judges need to move on from the "spectacle" of prosecuting the president-elect.

"Further maneuvering on these cases in the weeks ahead would serve no legitimate purpose and only distract the country and the incoming administration from the task at hand," Barr said.

He also noted that voters were well aware of the criminal allegations against Trump when they voted to re-elect him for a second term.

"The American people have rendered their verdict on President Trump, and decisively chosen him to lead the country for the next four years," Barr said. 

"They did that with full knowledge of the claims against him by prosecutors around the country and I think Attorney General [Merrick] Garland and the state prosecutors should respect the people’s decision and dismiss the cases against President Trump now."

This is a breaking news story. Check back soon for more developments.

Luna’s bid to force Garland to hand over Biden-Hur tapes fails in House

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

House Democrats and some Republicans joined together to block Rep. Anna Paulina Luna's bid to fine Attorney General Merrick Garland $10,000 per day until he released audio tapes of President Biden's interview with special counsel Robert Hur.

Democrats failed to block the resolution from hitting the floor on Wednesday evening, setting up a vote on the measure for Thursday.

Luna has for weeks threatened to force a vote on holding Garland in "inherent contempt" and appealed to both Republicans and Democrats to support the effort, citing concerns about Biden's mental acuity spurred by his disastrous performance in the CNN Presidential Debate.

Her initial bill would have directed the House sergeant-at-arms to arrest Garland in order for the chamber to hold its own trial. It is a little-known procedure, not invoked since the 1930s, that has never been used on a Cabinet official.

DOJ WON'T PROSECUTE AG GARLAND FOR CONTEMPT FOR REFUSAL TO TURN OVER AUDIO FROM BIDEN, HUR INTERVIEW

Luna agreed to delay forcing the vote until this week after discussing the matter with House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. 

She also modified her bill to fine Garland instead of arresting him.

A Department of Justice (DOJ) spokesperson said in response to the GOP effort, "This is unconstitutional. We are confident our arguments would prevail in court." 

Republicans have been seeking the audio tapes of Biden's interview in Hur's classified documents probe for months as part of their impeachment inquiry into the president. 

ANNA PAULINA LUNA CALLS FOR $10,000 PER DAY FINE ON GARLAND FOR BIDEN-HUR AUDIO TAPE

House GOP lawmakers, some of whom long held that Biden is not mentally fit for office, voted to hold Garland in contempt of Congress last month for his refusal to turn over audio tapes of Hur’s interview with Biden on his handling of classified documents. The DOJ has refused to prosecute, citing Biden’s decision to call for executive privilege over the tapes.

Democrats have also pointed out that the full transcript is already available and have bashed the effort as nakedly partisan.

However, Republicans argue that the tapes would provide necessary context about Biden’s mental acuity that could not be gleaned from the transcript.

EX-REP. CHARLIE RANGEL, 94, QUESTIONS WHETHER BIDEN BELONGS IN NURSING HOME, NOT WHITE HOUSE

Some GOP lawmakers reignited those calls in the wake of Biden's debate performance late last month. 

The 81-year-old president spoke with a hoarse voice, reportedly due to a cold, and stumbled over his own answers several times during the primetime event. Viewers also observed him appearing tired and noticeably less sharp than he looked the last time he faced former President Trump in 2020.

The House GOP also sued Garland last week in order to obtain the tapes, with the lawsuit being led by House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio.

House Judiciary sues Garland for Biden audio that Hur says shows him as ‘elderly man with a poor memory’

Posted on by Latest Political News on Fox News

The House Judiciary Committee is suing Attorney General Merrick Garland to obtain recordings of President Biden’s interview with special counsel Robert Hur.

The committee, as part of the lawsuit filed Monday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, stressed the importance of the "verbal and nonverbal context" of Biden's answers that could be provided by the audio recordings – especially considering that Hur opted against charging Biden after the interview, in part, because he was viewed as "a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory." 

DOJ WON'T PROSECUTE AG GARLAND FOR CONTEMPT FOR REFUSAL TO TURN OVER AUDIO FROM BIDEN, HUR INTERVIEW

The lawsuit comes amid chaos in the Democratic Party as leaders consider whether Biden should continue with his re-election campaign after the president’s widely panned debate performance last week.

The committee, in its lawsuit, says the president’s invocation of executive privilege over the materials "lacks any merit," and it asks the court to overrule that assertion of privilege. 

"This dispute is about a frivolous assertion of executive privilege," the lawsuit states. 

As part of the House impeachment inquiry against the president, the committee issued a subpoena to Garland to obtain records related to Hur’s investigation of Biden’s alleged mishandling of classified records. The committee sought materials related to Hur’s interviews with Biden and Mark Zwonitzer, the ghostwriter of Biden’s 2017 memoir. 

The Justice Department has provided the committee with transcripts of those interviews, but Garland "has refused to produce the audio recordings of the Special Counsel’s interviews with President Biden and Mr. Zwonitzer." 

"Instead, Attorney General Garland asked that President Biden assert executive privilege over those recordings, and President Biden complied with that request," the lawsuit states. 

The committee argues that audio recordings "are better evidence than transcripts of what happened during the Special Counsel’s interviews with President Biden and Mr. Zwonitzer." 

"For example, they contain verbal and nonverbal context that is missing from a cold transcript," the committee states. "That verbal and nonverbal context is quite important here because the Special Counsel relied on the way that President Biden presented himself during their interview – ‘as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory’ – when ultimately recommending that President Biden should not be prosecuted for unlawfully retaining and disclosing classified information."

The committee argued that the audio recordings – not merely the transcripts of them – are "the best available evidence of how President Biden presented himself during the interview." 

SPECIAL COUNSEL CALLS BIDEN 'SYMPATHETIC, WELL-MEANING, ELDERLY MAN WITH A POOR MEMORY,' BRINGS NO CHARGES

"The Committee thus needs those recordings to assess the Special Counsel’s characterization of the President, which he and White House lawyers have forcefully disputed, and ultimate recommendation that President Biden should not be prosecuted," the suit states. 

The committee said Biden’s "self-serving attempt to shield the audio recording" of his interview from the public "represents an astonishing effort to expand the scope of executive privilege from a constitutional privilege safeguarding certain substantive communications to an amorphous privilege that can be molded to protect things like voice, inflection, tone and pace of speech." 

The committee also noted that the transcript of the interview was made public, which essentially "waived" executive privilege." 

"Additionally, the heart of the privilege claim – that Executive Branch employees will be less likely to cooperate with DOJ investigations if they know that audio recordings of their interviews may be released to Congress after DOJ has made transcripts of those same interviews publicly available – is at odds with common sense," the lawsuit states. 

"If the potential for disclosure would chill cooperation, it would be the disclosure of a transcript, which DOJ voluntarily disclosed here, not the disclosure of audio recordings after the transcripts are widely available," the lawsuit states. 

The committee argued that because of this, Biden’s invocation of executive privilege "lacks any merit." 

"The Committee therefore asks this court to overrule the assertion of executive privilege and order that Attorney General Garland produce the audio recordings of the Special Counsel’s interviews with President Biden and Mr. Zwonitzer to the committee," the lawsuit states. 

The lawsuit comes just weeks after the House of Representatives voted to hold Garland in contempt of Congress, referring him for criminal charges over defying the congressional subpoenas for the audio recordings.

The Justice Department, though, said it would not prosecute Garland. 

"Consistent with this longstanding position and uniform practice, the Department has determined that the responses by Attorney General Garland to the subpoenas issued by the committees did not constitute a crime, and accordingly the Department will not bring the congressional contempt citation before a grand jury or take any other action to prosecute the Attorney General," Assistant Attorney General Carlos Felipe Uriarte told House Speaker Mike Johnson in a letter last month. 

Hur, who released his report to the public in February after months of investigation, did not recommend criminal charges against Biden for mishandling and retaining classified documents, and he stated that he would not bring charges against Biden even if he were not in the Oval Office. 

Those records included classified documents about military and foreign policy in Afghanistan and other countries, among other records related to national security and foreign policy, which Hur said implicated "sensitive intelligence sources and methods."