All this
investigation has
been going on for five years.
So why now for a special counsel?
It's unclear.
The Justice Department
will only say that on Tuesday
Weiss asked to be changed
to this designated special counsel.
He is, as you noted, the U.S.
attorney
who is appointed
by former President Trump,
and he's been overseeing
the investigation
to Hunter Biden
for, like you
said, approximately five years.
But there's no official explanation
for why he wanted to change
to a special counsel now.
But we have seen in court filings
that it appears that the talks
between the U.S.
attorney's office and Hunter
Biden's legal team
to resolve the issues
that the judge identified
with that plea deal
that those have fallen apart
and that is likely to go to trial.
That appears to be the impetus,
but it's really unclear.
Now, one of the big differences
now that he's a special
counsel is
that Weiss is going to have to compile
a full report
detailing what he investigated
and his findings
and that to the attorney general
who has vowed to make it public.
Now, I've also learned
that the White House
was not given a heads up about this,
and neither were Hunter
Biden's attorneys.
How much more likely
does it make it
that the president's son
is definitely going to go on trial?
It appears a lot more likely, Jake.
I mean, for a minute
there,
it appeared that
this was going to be resolved
with that plea deal,
even after the judge pushed back
asked for additional briefings,
expressed skepticism.
I think both sides expected that
ultimately it would be approved.
But if there were any modifications,
we got signals
that indeed
the Hunter Biden team
was willing to take this to trial.
So at this point,
the fact that he has gotten
the special counsel designation,
you can now bring cases
in any jurisdiction.
It does appear that
the most likely outcome here
is that this goes to trial.
Lara, are you surprised that there's
now a special counsel
five years into this investigation
after a plea deal
had almost been agreed upon?
I mean, that plea deal
was within the reach of,
of course, Hunter Biden.
I'm sure he is lamenting right now
whatever fiasco actually occurred
in that courtroom
to not have
all the I's dotted,
all the T's crossed to have this already
go through.
Remember, we've heard already from David
Weiss about what the process was like.
He has said
I have the authority to do so.
All the talking points are contrary
to what my experience was.
But now this raises a lot of questions.
Whatever happened on Tuesday is that
Paul is alluding to.
Now, it does make me feel
surprised about, well, why now?
What is happening here?
Remember, he is still the U.S.
attorney in Delaware,
but now the special counsel
allows him to actually go
beyond his own jurisdiction.
You can look at other areas as well.
It's reason
you have Jack
Smith not having to confine
to one particular jurisdiction
can go beyond that.
He can have things in in Florida.
You can have things in Washington, D.C.
It does now go beyond that.
But at its core,
I wonder
what the decision really came down to.
The special counsel
statute says you can have this
if you first looked at figure out
does a matter actually warrant
an investigation? Is it warranted?
He had it concluded. It did.
If you're garlin.
Was there a conflict of interest
at play here?
The talking point you sit on the right
and the left have suggested
talking points around this very notion
that there is a conflict
of being able
to have the president
appoint the attorney general
who would oversee an investigation
into his own son.
But finally, is the idea of
what are you going to do about it now?
And is there a way that you can structure
an investigation
that is in the interest of the public
to have the information?
Garland says all three criteria met.
And so
whatever took place in the plea agreement
and now is anyone's guess.
So, Paula, help me out here.
David Weiss, the U.S.
attorney, now
special counsel,
had previously said in
writing
that he had all the power he needed
he didn't need any more authority.
If he wanted to do charges in D.C.,
he could reach out to the U.S.
attorney in D.C.
If you want to do charges in L.A.,
he can reach out to.
But now he has special counsel powers
that give him that authority in writing.
In between, we should note,
there were
whistleblowers saying
that behind the scenes,
David Weiss was complaining,
I don't have the authority to charge
in this city or that state.
And the Justice Department
saying, no, no, no,
those whistleblowers are wrong.
It looks as though
maybe the whistleblowers were right.
It's messy, right?
It appears that here
they're trying to insulate
the Justice Department
to the attorney general
from what appears to be
a case
that is headed to a likely trial
of the president's son.
And I think they're hoping
that this special counsel designation
will also insulate them
from potential congressional testimony
where there are calls for
Weiss to go on the Hill.
But now they can say,
well, the special counsel, Durham's
special counsel, Mueller, they testified
after they submitted their report.
And there's a lot of emphasis today
at the Justice Department on this report
and how that will offer
some transparency here.
And that may be fair in some respects,
but that is not going to satisfy
Republicans who have a lot of questions
about this investigation.
If that report
and the special counsel designation
are now going to be used to prevent him
from going to the Hill.
Yeah, it's not just Republicans
who have questions. I have questions.
I'm sure you guys have questions.
So many questions. Not getting answers.
But here's another one for you.
Okay. So I'm David Weiss.
Once again, I played this game with me.
I'm the special counsel.
Just a few weeks ago,
I was ready to say
and a diversion and a slap on the wrist.
A misdemeanor.
Really, it was not a big punishment.
And now
I want
special counsel authority to investigate
something that just a few weeks ago,
I was basically saying
this is the most
I can prove in a court of law.
That doesn't make sense to me either.
By the way,
I'm fully
willing to believe that there's
a lot more to investigate
and a lot more to charge him with.
But that wasn't his position
a few weeks ago.
And remember,
go back to that courtroom
where the judge had that same question
when she talked about
have you contemplated
this is actually going to be the three 60
everything solved now
and assume that Hunter Biden's team
had either negotiated
that were well aware
of whether this would actually be
a fully resolved issue.
And that was part of her
consideration of. Well, hold on a second.
You mean this wouldn't
necessarily resolve that issue?
You don't know of
other actual investigations.
It's a problem. Ding, ding, ding.
But it also lends credence now
to not only the point you raised
by the whistleblowers, which, by the way,
part of their claim
was that those who were investigating
akin to, say, a police officer
who arrest someone
and then says the prosecutor,
here's why I arrest the person on.
How dare you diverge from that?
Well, the prosecutor is
the one that has the power
to decide what to bring.
And so
just because
you wanted something different
doesn't mean
that it was a justifiable prosecution.
But now it raises questions
about what else was a part of it
and why would David
Weiss have in writing,
I think it was twice in writing
have already said
no, I actually did have the power.
It seems what he meant was
I had the power in Delaware
and now I want the power
other places,
maybe D.C.,
maybe California,
as well as now a part of it.
So it raises a lot of questions.
But again, it goes back to the point
where, you know,
it was in his hand, the bird in hand.
Now you've got
two jurisdictions in the bush
because the plea agreement fell through.
So and lastly,
so one of the reasons
there are a couple of reasons
why the judge was pushing
at this plea agreement.
One of them was
she didn't think that
the gun charge thing
was was legitimate
and she didn't want to have to supervise
all that.
But then one of the other things was
they weren't on the same page
the question about whether or not Hunter
Biden could be charged in the future.
Right.
Hunter Biden's team thought,
no, no, this is the end of it.
And that was key to them.
They made it clear, look,
if you pull back
and say this is not the end of it,
we're going to trial.
And not only are
they willing to go to trial,
they're confident they're going to win.
But but
what I'm saying
is, if I'm Hunter Biden now I'm playing.
I'm wondering
if I'm Hunter Biden, I'm like, David,
why is he Hunter Biden?
Well, you're Jake Tapper.
There you go.
I'd like to put on lots of hats.
So if I'm Hunter Biden, I'm thinking,
wait a second,
this is going to get much much,
much worse for me
as opposed to a plea deal
where they had the
opportunity if they wanted to
bring future charges.
Now I have it. Now it's even worse.
None of it was good for Hunter Biden.
Sure. But isn't this worse?
It depends what the eventual outcome.
This is a long game.
If he goes to trial,
if his benefactor,
an attorney, pays for that
and he is ultimately acquitted,
that is stressful.
That is an awful things
we both know to go through.
But maybe that is better in the long run.
It's unclear.
The whole thing's
a disaster for everyone.
All right.
Paul and Laura, thanks so much.