Crime

Home Crime

GOP Split Emerges Over Potential Maxwell Pardon In Epstein Investigation

A Divided Republican Conference

Republicans on the House Oversight Committee are facing an internal divide over a sensitive and politically risky question: whether Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted associate of Jeffrey Epstein, should be considered for a presidential pardon in exchange for cooperation with investigators.

The discussion has largely taken place behind closed doors, but it reflects a broader tension between uncovering new information and maintaining public confidence in the justice system.

Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) acknowledged the split, noting that some Republicans believe Maxwell could provide valuable testimony about Epstein’s network if offered clemency. Still, Comer made clear he is not among them.

  • He warned that a pardon “looks bad” politically and ethically
  • He emphasized Maxwell’s central role in the underlying crimes
  • He argued that granting leniency could undermine trust in the investigation

Comer summed up his position bluntly, describing Maxwell as one of the most culpable figures in the case.

Democrats Firmly Opposed

Democrats on the committee are unified in rejecting any potential deal.

Ranking Member Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) strongly criticized the idea, arguing that offering clemency to Maxwell would be offensive to victims and damaging to the integrity of the investigation.

Key concerns raised by Democrats include:

  • The impact on survivors of Epstein’s abuse
  • The credibility of any testimony obtained through a pardon
  • The risk of public perception shifting toward a “cover-up”

Garcia warned that even considering such an arrangement could erode confidence in the process and send the wrong signal about accountability.

Maxwell’s Leverage and Conditions

Maxwell is currently serving a 20-year sentence for her role in Epstein’s trafficking operation. So far, she has declined to cooperate with congressional investigators under existing conditions.

Her legal team, however, has signaled a willingness to engage if circumstances change.

According to her attorney:

  • Maxwell would be willing to testify “fully and honestly”
  • Any cooperation would be contingent on clemency
  • She is positioned as a key source of information about Epstein’s network

Her attorney has also claimed that Maxwell could shed light on the involvement, or lack thereof, of high-profile figures, including former presidents. Those assertions have not eased skepticism among lawmakers.

The Political and Legal Stakes

President Donald Trump has not ruled out the possibility of granting clemency, leaving the issue open and politically charged.

The debate highlights a difficult tradeoff:

  • Potential benefit: New details about Epstein’s network and associates
  • Potential cost: Perceived erosion of justice and accountability

For many lawmakers, the question is not just what Maxwell might reveal, but whether the price of that information is too high.

Why This Matters

At its core, the disagreement reflects a broader challenge facing investigators and policymakers:

  • How far should the government go to obtain critical information?
  • Can justice and transparency be balanced in a case with this level of public scrutiny?

There is no clear consensus, and the path forward remains uncertain.

What are your thoughts? Should a pardon be considered if it leads to new information about Epstein’s network? Share your perspective in the comments below.

READ NEXT: Case Against Leading Trump Opponent Abruptly Dropped

State Prosecutors Hint At Possible New Charges After Trump Commutes Santos Sentence

1
Arrest image via Pixabay

Former New York Republican congressman George Santos walked free on Friday after President Donald Trump commuted his federal sentence — but the move may not end his legal ordeal. A local prosecutor on Long Island appeared to signal that state-level charges could be used to sidestep the president’s act of clemency.

Nassau County District Attorney Anne Donnelly said on the social platform X that her office had been “at the forefront” of the effort to “bring Santos to justice.” Donnelly’s jurisdiction includes part of the district Santos once represented in Congress.

“I am proud of the work my office has done, and the conviction achieved in partnership with the U.S. Attorney’s office,” Donnelly said. “While the office cannot comment on ongoing investigations, suffice it to say that I remain focused on prosecuting political corruption wherever it exists regardless of political affiliation.”

Her statement — vague but pointed — has fueled speculation that prosecutors could seek state charges mirroring the federal case, a move critics say would effectively undermine Trump’s commutation and keep Santos entangled in the court system despite his early release.

A spokesperson for the Nassau County D.A.’s office declined to elaborate when asked whether an investigation was ongoing.

Trump’s Message: “Unequal Justice” and Political Targeting

Announcing the commutation on Truth Social, President Trump praised Santos’s “Courage, Conviction, and Intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN,” suggesting the former lawmaker’s punishment was disproportionate.

“George Santos was somewhat of a ‘rogue,’ but there are many rogues throughout our Country that aren’t forced to serve seven years in prison,” Trump wrote.

Santos had served just 84 days of a seven-year sentence after pleading guilty last summer to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft. Prosecutors had accused him of multiple financial and campaign-related offenses — including money laundering and falsifying records — but supporters argue that he faced harsher treatment because of his party affiliation and outspoken loyalty to Trump.

Possible State Move Seen as Political

Republicans are already warning that a state prosecution would represent another example of “lawfare” — the use of legal mechanisms to target political opponents.

Santos himself, who had initially said he wouldn’t seek clemency before later telling interviewer Piers Morgan he’d accept “whatever the president is willing to give me,” has yet to comment on Donnelly’s remarks.

For now, the former congressman is free — but the signals from Nassau County suggest that the battle between Trump’s justice reform message and New York’s prosecutors may be far from over.

Gabbard Sends Criminal Referrals To DOJ For 2 Officials Linked To Trump Impeachment

1
Tulsi Gabbard via Gage Skidmore Flickr

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has referred two former U.S. officials to the Justice Department for potential criminal investigation, escalating efforts to revisit the events that led to President Donald Trump’s first impeachment.

A spokesperson for Gabbard confirmed that the referrals target a whistleblower and former Intelligence Community Inspector General Michael Atkinson, both of whom played central roles in the 2019 inquiry. The spokesperson did not specify what crimes were alleged, and any decision to pursue charges rests with federal prosecutors.

The move follows Gabbard’s release of newly declassified testimony and documents that she argues show a “coordinated effort” within the intelligence community to “manufacture a conspiracy” used to justify Trump’s impeachment.

Atkinson’s actions were instrumental in advancing a whistleblower complaint that raised concerns about Trump’s July 2019 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. In that call, Trump asked Zelenskyy to investigate then–former Vice President Joe Biden and his son, Hunter Biden.

The whistleblower wrote at the time: “I have received information from multiple U.S. Government officials that the President of the United States is using the power of his office to solicit interference from a foreign country in the 2020 U.S. election.”

Gabbard has sharply disputed the legitimacy of that complaint and Atkinson’s handling of it. Her office said Atkinson relied on “secondhand information” and “politicized, manufactured narratives,” and “did not follow standard IG procedures.”

“In his own words, IC IG Atkinson recognizes that his conclusions were based on a ‘preliminary investigation,’” her office said, quoting testimony in which he acknowledged he had not determined whether the alleged actions “actually took place.”

Under federal law, however, an inspector general’s role at that stage is limited to assessing whether a whistleblower complaint appears credible, not to fully investigate or verify the claims.

In a post on X, Gabbard accused “deep state actors” of constructing “a false narrative that Congress used to usurp the will of the American people and impeach duly-elected President @realDonaldTrump in 2019.”

Atkinson, who was fired by Trump in 2020, previously defended his conduct, saying he had “faithfully discharged” his duties and served “without regard to partisan favor or political fear.”

Democrats quickly condemned the referrals and the broader effort to revisit the impeachment.

Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said the whistleblower “demonstrated courage and principle” in exposing Trump’s “efforts to extort Ukraine and falsely smear his opponent.”

“This apparent criminal referral will amount to nothing because no misconduct occurred,” Himes said. “But what it will do is chill future whistleblowers from coming forward… I suspect that is precisely the point.”

Sen. Mark Warner, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, dismissed the declassified materials as “a nothingburger” and “another sad attempt… to get in Donald Trump’s good graces.”

Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives in December 2019 on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress tied to the Ukraine matter. He was acquitted by the Senate in early 2020 in a largely party-line vote and has consistently denied wrongdoing, calling his conversation with Zelenskyy “perfect.”

The latest referrals come as part of a broader push by Gabbard and other officials to reexamine controversies from Trump’s first term, including intelligence assessments of Russian election interference. While some figures connected to those investigations have been subpoenaed in ongoing probes, no charges have been filed.

At the same time, the effort unfolds against a backdrop of renewed political and legal scrutiny surrounding Trump. While prior impeachment proceedings ended in acquittal and are widely viewed as politically unlikely to result in removal from office, they continue to shape partisan divisions in Washington. Any new impeachment-related efforts would face long odds in Congress, particularly given the high threshold required for conviction in the Senate.

Still, the renewed focus on the 2019 impeachment underscores how the political battles of Trump’s presidency continue to reverberate, with competing narratives over the Ukraine episode remaining central to broader debates about executive power, accountability, and the role of intelligence agencies in U.S. politics.

Former FBI Director Expected To Turn Himself In Today

2
By Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) - Director Provides Update on Orlando Shootings Investigation, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49440123

Former FBI Director James Comey is expected to turn himself in today in the Eastern District of Virginia, according to sources familiar with the matter who spoke to ABC News.

The arrest warrant was issued by a grand jury in the Eastern District of North Carolina, though it remains unclear whether the Justice Department sought the warrant as part of the initial indictment.

The new charges stem from a controversial social media post Comey shared last year—one that President Donald Trump and members of his administration have claimed amounted to a threat against the president.

In a now-deleted Instagram post, Comey shared an image of seashells arranged to display the numbers “86 47,” alongside the caption: “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.”

The post quickly drew backlash from Trump allies, who pointed to the slang meaning of “86” as “to nix” or “get rid of,” arguing it could be interpreted as a veiled threat against Trump, the 47th president.

According to the three-page indictment, Comey faces one count of making threats against the president and successors, and one count of transmitting a threat in interstate commerce.

Prosecutors argue the post rises to the level of a criminal threat, writing that it constitutes a message that any “reasonable recipient who is familiar with the circumstances would interpret as a serious expression of an intent to do harm to the President of the United States.”

Legal experts note prosecutors may face a significant hurdle in court. The Supreme Court ruled in 2023 that proving a “true threat” requires demonstrating that the individual understood their statement would be perceived as threatening. The widespread use of the phrase “86 47” among critics of the Trump administration could complicate that argument and raise broader First Amendment questions.

The latest case comes after a separate indictment last year in which Comey was accused of lying to Congress and obstruction related to his 2020 testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. That case was ultimately dismissed after a judge found issues with the legitimacy of the prosecutor who brought the charges.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche pushed back on suggestions that the case was politically driven.

“Of course not, absolutely, positively not,” Blanche said on “CBS Mornings” when asked whether President Trump directed him to pursue charges against Comey. “This is something that has been investigated for nearly a year now, and the results of that investigation is that a grand jury returned an indictment.”

Comey is expected to appear in federal court following his surrender.

Trump Announces Plan To Seek Death Penalty For D.C. Murders

President Trump said Tuesday the federal government would seek the death penalty for murders committed in Washington, D.C.

“Anybody murders something in the capital, capital punishment,” Trump said during a Cabinet meeting Tuesday. “Capital, capital punishment. If somebody kills somebody in the capital, Washington, D.C., we’re going to be seeking the death penalty. And that’s a very strong preventative.”

The District of Columbia hasn’t executed anyone since 1957, after Robert Carter was convicted of fatally shooting an off-duty police officer.

CBS News reported that previously, D.C. had mandatory death sentences for first-degree murders, a policy the Supreme Court later voided in the 1972 case Furman v. Georgia when it found that the death penalty was being applied in an unconstitutionally arbitrary manner. Four years later, the high court allowed capital punishment to be reinstated with clearer sentencing guidelines. The D.C. City Council, however, abolished the death penalty in 1981. 

Washington went 12 days without a murder during the federal government’s crime crackdown, a streak broken early Tuesday with the killing of a 31-year-old man in Southeast D.C., according to the Metropolitan Police Department. 

Vice President JD Vance, a day earlier, said the capital typically averaged one murder every other day, before commending the president on saving 6-7 lives since deploying the National Guard

On his first day in office, the president signed an executive order directing the attorney general to seek the death penalty in cases involving the murder of a law enforcement officer or “a capital crime committed by an alien illegally present in this country.”

Report: Senator Under Federal Criminal Investigation For Alleged Mortgage Fraud

0
Photo via Gage Skidmoer Flickr

California Senator Adam Schiff (D) is under criminal investigation.

Fox News host Laura Ingraham broke the news on Tuesday night on “The Ingraham Angle,” saying the source said a criminal investigation is being conducted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Maryland on possible charges involving mortgage fraud.

The investigation comes a month after a story broke about the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) sending a criminal referral to the Department of Justice (DOJ) alleging that Schiff, in multiple instances, falsified bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms.

In a 2011 affidavit signed by the then-California congressman, Schiff certified that a property in Montgomery County, Maryland, is his primary residence.

Schiff also owns a condominium in Burbank, California, which he has also claimed as his primary residence as recently as 2023, during his campaign for Senate.

Fox News reports:

Pulte later received a memo from the Fannie Mae financial crimes investigations concluding that Schiff allegedly engaged in “a sustained pattern of possible occupancy misrepresentation” on five Fannie Mae loans.

Schiff and his wife purchased a home in Potomac, Maryland, in 2003 for $870,000, according to the letter. They entered into a Fannie Mae-backed mortgage agreement for $610,000 at a rate of 5.625% over a term of 30 years, asserting the property would be their primary and principal residence. 

The letter said they reaffirmed that the Maryland home was their primary residence in mortgage refinancing filings in 2009, 2011, 2012 and 2013, despite Schiff being an elected official representing the state of California at the same time. 

In 2023, the letter notes, a spokesperson for Schiff asserted that, “Adam’s primary residence is Burbank, California, and will remain so when he wins the Senate seat.”

A spokesperson for Schiff in 2023 told CNN that, “Adam’s California and Maryland addresses have been listed as primary residences for loan purposes because they are both occupied throughout the year and to distinguish them from a vacation property.” 

The federal housing official wrote that he believes Schiff’s alleged misconduct could be violations of federal criminal codes banning wire fraud, mail fraud, bank fraud, and false statements to financial institutions. 

READ NEXT: Trump Demands Intel CEO Resign Amid China Ties

House Panel Uncovers ‘Substantial Evidence’ In Fraud Probe Into Florida Democrat

1

The House Ethics Committee has found “substantial reason to believe” that Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.) violated multiple federal laws, House rules, and ethical standards, according to a report released Thursday.

The bipartisan panel said its investigative subcommittee is formally “bringing the charges” against Cherfilus-McCormick, citing potential violations of campaign finance laws and regulations, criminal statutes tied to campaign finance misconduct, the Ethics in Government Act, the Code of Ethics for Government Service, and several House rules.

The findings come as Cherfilus-McCormick already faces serious legal trouble. In November, a federal grand jury indicted the congresswoman on charges that she stole $5 million in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funds and used a portion of that money to bankroll her political campaign.

Prosecutors allege that in July 2021, Cherfilus-McCormick and her brother received a $5 million overpayment from FEMA while their health care company was working under a FEMA-funded staffing contract related to COVID-19 vaccinations. At the time, Cherfilus-McCormick was serving as the company’s CEO.

Rather than returning the money, federal authorities claim the congresswoman and her brother conspired to keep it, routing the funds through multiple bank accounts in an effort to “disguise” their source.

According to the Ethics Committee report, investigators uncovered evidence that aligns closely with the criminal indictment—and, in some cases, points to broader misconduct.

“The ISC’s [Investigative Subcommittee] investigation has revealed substantial evidence of conduct consistent with the allegations in the indictment, as well as more extensive misconduct as laid out in the following Statement of Facts in Support of Alleged Violations related to violations of federal laws and regulations, as well as ethical standards,” the report said.

Cherfilus-McCormick forcefully denied wrongdoing and criticized the committee’s process.

“Today’s action was taken without giving me a fair opportunity to rebut or defend myself due to the constraints of an ongoing legal process,” she said. “I reject these allegations and remain confident the full facts will make clear I did nothing wrong. Until then, my focus remains where it belongs: delivering for my constituents and continuing the work they sent me to Washington to do.”

The investigative subcommittee detailed the scope of its work, noting it reviewed more than 33,000 documents, conducted 28 witness interviews, sent 30 requests for information, issued 59 subpoenas, and met 12 times across the 118th and 119th Congresses.

The report also highlighted Cherfilus-McCormick’s lack of cooperation in the later stages of the investigation. While she initially produced some records, the congresswoman ultimately invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination after being subpoenaed for documents and testimony.

Epstein Files Threaten Tp Upend Trump Legacy

2
By Ralph Alswang, White House photographer - https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/clinton-epstein-maxwell/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=143417695

Tensions are rising after the Justice Department claimed it had no evidence that notorious sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein had a client list, blackmailed powerful people, or was murdered.

Democrats in Congress say they will introduce measures this week to press for the disclosure of files reported to Epstein, a wealthy financier and convicted sex offender who was found dead at the age of 66 in his New York City jail cell in 2019 after being arrested on sex trafficking charges involving young girls. 

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) is calling on House Republicans to hold a vote demanding the Trump administration release the “FULL Epstein files.”

“Why are the Epstein files still hidden? Who are the rich & powerful being protected?” Khanna said in a post on the social platform X over the weekend.

“On Tuesday, I’m introducing an amendment to force a vote demanding the FULL Epstein files be released to the public,” he continued. “The Speaker must call a vote & put every Congress member on record.”

The Justice Department last week released a memo concluding there was no evidence suggesting the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender kept a “client list” to blackmail high-profile individuals. The memo also found no evidence to suggest foul play in Epstein’s death, which had previously been ruled a suicide.

The memo spurred fierce backlash from many Trump supporters, who had long called on the government to release material on Epstein that they argue would expose wrongdoing at the highest level of elite circles.

Far-right activist Laura Loomer, a staunch ally of President Trump, said Sunday night there should be a special counsel to examine the handling of files related to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.

Loomer, who has bashed Attorney General Pam Bondi for her handling of the Epstein documents, told Politico’s Playbook newsletter that a special counsel should be appointed “so that people can feel like this issue is being investigated, and perhaps take it out of [Bondi’s] hands, because I don’t think that she has been transparent or done a good job handling this issue.”

Much of the frustration from MAGA allies has been directed at Attorney General Pam Bondi, who said earlier this year that files were on her desk but then seemed to suggest they did not exist by releasing the memo last week. Bondi argued she was referring to the case file on Epstein, not a specific “client list.”

Trump has remained adamant in his position and has fiercely defended Bondi against the onslaught of backlash. 

“What’s going on with my ‘boys’ and, in some cases, ‘gals?’ They’re all going after Attorney General Pam Bondi, who is doing a FANTASTIC JOB! We’re on one Team, MAGA, and I don’t like what’s happening. We have a PERFECT Administration, THE TALK OF THE WORLD, and ‘selfish people’ are trying to hurt it, all over a guy who never dies, Jeffrey Epstein,” Trump said in the social media post on Saturday.

Dan Bongino, the Deputy Director of the FBI, reportedly threatened to leave the bureau if Attorney General Pam Bondi remains on the job due to her handling of the Epstein files, a source close to Bongino told The Daily Wire.

One source close to Bongino predicted to Axios, “He ain’t coming back.” Trump administration officials, however, are saying that Bongino remains on the job.

President Donald Trump said on Sunday he believes FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino is “in good shape” following a reported clash with Attorney General Pam Bondi.

“I spoke to him today,” Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews. “Dan Bongino, very good guy. I’ve known him a long time. I’ve done his show many, many times. And he sounded terrific actually. No, I think he’s in good shape.”

Watch:

FBI Director Kash Patel broke his silence on Saturday amid rumors that he might also consider leaving if Bondi stayed, saying in a post to X that the “conspiracy theories” were not true and that he would continue to serve under Trump as long as the president wanted him to be there.

GOP Congressman Wildly Says ‘a Lot of Congressmen Probably Should Be in Jail’

6
Image via Pixabay

Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN) raised eyebrows this week after making blunt remarks about corruption in Washington and the lingering unanswered questions surrounding the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

During a Monday appearance on Newsmax, Burchett argued that the Epstein scandal remains one of the clearest examples of how America’s political and elite class often operates under a different set of rules than everyday citizens.

Burchett’s comments came as discussion continues about potential upcoming depositions tied to the Epstein investigation, including speculation about former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

By Ralph Alswang, White House photographer – https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/clinton-epstein-maxwell/, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=143417695

When asked about the possibility of questioning the Clintons, Burchett did not hold back, calling them an “evil pair” and suggesting they have long avoided accountability because of their political skill and influence.

“There’s a reason that they’re not in prison and a reason that he was in the White House for two terms and she was secretary of state, because they’re very slippery and they’re very smart and I think they’re an evil pair,” Burchett said.

He went on to argue that while many Americans want answers — particularly given Epstein’s high-profile connections — he doubts the Clintons or others in their circle will ever face serious consequences.

“I think she is probably the brains behind the operation, but I don’t think we’ll get much on them,” he continued. “I know a lot of people want us to get them, and it’d be great clickbait, I’m sure, but I think when it comes down to it they’ll either bail or they won’t answer very many questions and be very evasive and be very smug…”

Burchett also expressed frustration with what he described as a two-tiered justice system, where powerful political figures often escape scrutiny while ordinary Americans are held to stricter standards.

“…because in this world there are two forms of justice – those like the Clintons and for the rest of us,” he said.

While some commentators have speculated about dramatic legal consequences for high-profile individuals connected to Epstein, Burchett emphasized that Congress itself cannot directly jail anyone.

“Everybody says we’ll put them in handcuffs, all this stuff. All that’s talk,” he explained. “The law’s gotta back you up on it and, you know, we gotta define what those laws were that they broke, and Congress cannot send somebody to jail.”

In one of his most striking statements, Burchett suggested that Washington’s problems extend far beyond one scandal.

He concluded, “Oddly enough, a lot of congressmen probably should be in jail, but the truth is that we’re not gonna. I don’t think it’ll boil down to anything, and that’s gonna make a lot of people mad, but I believe that’s the truth.”

The Tennessee congressman also weighed in on Epstein’s longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who is currently serving a prison sentence for her role in Epstein’s sex trafficking operation.

Burchett predicted that if Maxwell were ever released early, her fate could mirror the suspicious circumstances many Americans still associate with Epstein’s death.

“I see maybe she gets out early on good behavior and does a humongous book deal and probably ends up committing suicide by getting shot in the back of the head five times because this thing goes very deep and the people involved in it are very powerful,” he said.

Burchett also repeated a belief shared by many skeptics across the country — that Epstein’s death in federal custody left far too many unanswered questions.

“And I’m still one of those that believe Epstein didn’t kill himself, ma’am. I just don’t think he did.”

Trump To Reportedly Pardon Hunter Binden-linked Businessman

6
President Joe Biden hugs his family during the 59th Presidential Inauguration ceremony in Washington, Jan. 20, 2021. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took the oath of office on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol. (DOD Photo by Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Carlos M. Vazquez II)

Hunter Biden’s former business partner Devon Archer is reportedly set to receive a pardon from President Donald Trump.

Archer met with Trump over the weekend at the NCAA wrestling championships in Philadelphia, where he said he received some “very encouraging words.”

“I had gotten word from my attorney earlier that the president was discussing this, and he had acknowledged that he was going to do it,” Archer said of the possible pardon Monday in an interview on “Jesse Watters Primetime.”

Trump told the New York Post Sunday that he would give Archer a “full pardon” because he was “screwed by the Bidens.”

“They destroyed him like they tried to destroy a lot of people,” Trump said, according to the outlet.

Archer, who served on the board of Ukrainian energy company Burisma with Hunter, told the House Oversight Committee in a closed-door hearing in 2023 about the influence of the Biden family “brand.”

He told investigators Hunter put his father — then Vice President Joe Biden — on speakerphone at business meetings between 10 and 20 times, although he noted “nothing of material was discussed.”

“You didn’t think you’d ever need this [pardon] because Joe Biden said he’d take care of you. Isn’t that what he said?” Watters asked. 

“Absolutely. Well, and so did Hunter. I mean, once a Biden, always a Biden.” Archer responded.

“I didn’t think — first of all, I didn’t think I’d need this because I never did anything. I was a victim of financial fraud in which I invested a lot of money and was taken down [by] a whistleblower [who] was blowing the whistle on Hunter.”