Chaos in Congress: AOC's Attack Backfired__ Byron Donalds Shuts Down Democrats in Explosive Hearing

Added: 2026-05-16

[00:00:00]Senate side to give a press conference and Eric Swalwell, a member of the House, helped him get that time on the Senate side to give a press conference.

[00:00:08]That's a flagrant violation of a congressional subpoena. Secondarily, he has the gall to show up here when we're actually discussing contempt. And he didn't stay. He was sitting right over there. He's not here now. He said he wants to talk. He could have stayed through the whole proceeding. He chose to leave. That's his business. But he was subpoenaed to come here back in December. He chose not to of his own volition. He's in violation of that subpoena. A subpoena that was executed with the signature of the clerk of the House of Representatives. That is the document that is binding. That's what we work off of.

[00:00:41]>> This hearing didn't just go off the rails. It exposed the entire double standard in Washington in real time.

[00:00:47]Byron Donalds stepped in and cut straight through the noise with one undeniable point. The law either applies to everyone or it means nothing. And the second he said it, you could feel the room shift. Because here's the truth Democrats don't want to admit. If you're a regular American and you ignore a congressional subpoena, you're done.

[00:01:06]You're held in contempt, no excuses. But if your name is Hunter Biden, suddenly it's press conferences, public stunts, and rewriting the rules on the fly. And when they got called out on it, they didn't defend the law, they ran from it.

[00:01:21]Stay right here because after this clip, I'm breaking down exactly how Byron Donalds dismantled their entire argument piece by piece. Hit like, subscribe, and watch this all the way through. He showed up on the Senate side or showed up at the White House to answer in some fake, phony, lame press conference, not actually going to the House and doing what he was compelled by a subpoena to do. Hunter Biden did that. And then he has the unmitigated gall to show up here when we know that he's we're going through actually the the legislation for contempt with by the way, Mr. Chairman, we should actually get to the legislation of contempt. The speechifying is great, but let's do our business, members. Um he has the gall to come here, show up, and then when the Democrats are saying, "Hey, he wants to speak." He leaves.

[00:02:06]This is a joke. This is a farce.

[00:02:09]The man has been subpoenaed by Congress.

[00:02:11]Oh, and by the way, the January 6th Committee, Mr. Raskin, which you did sit on, by the way, that was not a normally ordered committee of Congress because Nancy Pelosi did not want the Republican members that's that then Leader McCarthy put up.

[00:02:23]>> According to the courts, it was. Ask my time, sir.

[00:02:26]>> Will you yield for a correction?

[00:02:27]>> respectful of your time. I didn't say anything. So, ladies and gentlemen, let's move forward with our business. He should be held in contempt. There was a subpoena. He did not answer it. Any other American would be held in contempt by Congress. Any other. This is Democrat privilege of the highest order. Let's do our jobs. I yield. Gentleman yields.

[00:02:45]Chair now recognizes Ms. Ocasio-Cortez from New York. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm just to address briefly um quickly that that moment about the privilege and and all of this that we're seeing here.

[00:02:59]It was very beautiful speech.

[00:03:02]As also the Republican side had mentioned in their many raisings of the January 6th Committee, that it's not just Hunter Biden, you, me, any individual subject to to equal treatment under the law, to be held up to accountability under the law, but it is also these committees and this committee that is subject to oversight and law. We must comply with the law here as well. Now, I may be one of the very few people that actually believes in Congress, you know, in this country, but I do. And many of us do here.

[00:03:39]And we have an obligation to engage in good faith participation to execute and comply with a subpoena.

[00:03:50]The chairman said in front of the country several times to Hunter Biden, you can show up here in front of the world, in front of the public. Hunter Biden took him up on that offer. He said, I will show up in public. I will show up in public. He showed up here today. He showed up here in the past.

[00:04:11]And Mr. Chairman, I know you do your best with what you've got, but you've got members here that have submitted falsified evidence to the record. You have members here that have submitted and mischaracterized closed-door hearings, and people want to say back and forth at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what party it's happened from.

[00:04:31]You've got members who've engaged in revenge porn in this committee.

[00:04:36]So, it is understandable why Hunter Biden would want to testify in front of the public for the American people to be able to witness that testimony uh it for themselves.

[00:04:50]You've got members who've defied subpoenas. You've got members who we are um 1 year into the term asking what the rules are at the beginning of the committee. The book was given to us on day one.

[00:05:03]And so, what we should do is allow the man to testify. I believe in the power of the Oversight Committee.

[00:05:11]Frankly, I believe in it regardless of whether Republicans or Democrats have the chair because I believe that this committee should have the power of oversight, and we cannot do that on a partisan basis. And so, for that, I implore this committee to allow Hunter Biden to testify publicly. I implore and I ask for that to happen, and we cannot do that by getting engaged in this back and forth on a on a defiance of the subpoena. Let him comply. Let him do it today. Let him do it tomorrow.

[00:05:42]But let the man do it.

[00:05:44]And with that, I yield back to the ranking member.

[00:05:46]>> Thank you, Mr. K- Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. A couple of things. First, it was said in this hearing, uh Mr. Chairman, about you specifically, that you repeatedly said you would give uh Mr. Biden any opportunity. He could choose which one to come and speak in front of this committee. He could do by deposition. He could do it by open hearing. It was up to him.

[00:06:07]The truth of the matter, though, is, members, is that the chairman's words are not binding. Like no other members' words of Congress are really not binding. The binding article >> Point of order. Does the chairman agree with that? Point of order. Does the chairman agree Are you going to restore my Point of order. Just point of order.

[00:06:22]Does the chairman agree that the chairman's words are not binding on the committee? That's not a point of order.

[00:06:27]It has nothing to do with the order of this hearing. Thank you. Uh can I go back to 4 minutes and 34 seconds? That's where I was before I was interrupted by Mr. Raskin. Yes, reset reset the clock.

[00:06:37]>> Thank you.

[00:06:38]What is binding is the actual written document the written language in the subpoena because a subpoena from this committee is also signed off on by the clerk of the House. That is the binding document that matters here. That is what governs. That's number one. Number two, that was said in this hearing. It was said that our witnesses said that there was no basis for an impeachment. But remember, members on the Democrat side of the aisle, what was said by Mr. Turley at the time was that there was plenty of evidence for the continuation of an impeachment inquiry. And the purpose of that hearing was the relevance basis for an impeachment inquiry. The House has now voted for an impeachment inquiry. And one of the first things that the House did after the vote of an impeachment inquiry was to subpoena Hunter Biden to appear.

[00:07:23]Hunter Biden is is is has evaded that subpoena. So flagrantly did he evade it that he decided to show up at the Senate side to give a press conference. And Eric Swalwell, a member of the House, helped him get that time on the Senate side to give a press conference. That's a flagrant violation of a congressional subpoena. Secondarily, he has the gall to show up here when we're actually discussing contempt. And he didn't stay.

[00:07:49]He was sitting right over there. He's not here now. He said he wants to talk.

[00:07:53]He could have stayed through the whole proceeding. He chose to leave. That's his business. But he was subpoenaed to come here back in December. He chose not to of his own volition. He's in violation of that subpoena. A subpoena that was executed with the signature of the clerk of the House of Representatives. That is the document that is binding. That's what we work off of. Mr. Mr. Chairman, I actually want to submit for the record an article from The Hill written by Jonathan Turley and it is titled Eric Swalwell and the politics of contempt. Without objection, so ordered.

[00:08:24]>> Thank you. I'm glad something got admitted to the record.

[00:08:27]Last a couple other points. One quick point I want to make and this is in reference to the minority's report about this $7.8 million.

[00:08:35]I want the minority to understand one very important distinction between Presidents Biden and President Trump.

[00:08:42]President Trump has an international real estate portfolio that he has amassed over decades. I'm quite sure if you go back through all of the hotel receipts before he was President of the United States that you had foreign dignitaries staying at Trump hotels all across the all across the world.

[00:09:01]>> Will the gentleman yield? I'm not going to yield, Mr. Raskin. I'm making a point. Because they're actually very nice hotels. They look good.

[00:09:07]People like staying there.

[00:09:09]Um in the >> President Trump was not running the Trump Organization when he was President of the United States. To my recollection, Eric Trump, the President's son, was actually running the Trump Organization when President Trump was President of the United States. So if he had a portfolio of hotels and people choose, you know, through Expedia, through Kayak, through hotels.com, if they choose to go and stay there, how is that the President being in violation of what the emoluments clause? Is that's what you're citing? Stop. Ladies and gentlemen, America, this is ridiculous.

[00:09:42]The Biden family has no business.

[00:09:45]They've never had a business except for politics. And the one thing that the Oversight Committee in conjunction with the Ways and Means Committee and in conjunction with the Judiciary Committee has always been able to demonstrate is that they shook down foreign nations for millions millions, 26 million at the latest count and growing. Millions.

[00:10:07]And there was never any business entity involved except public corruption and a pay-for-play scheme.

[00:10:14]We have questions for Hunter Biden.

[00:10:17]We issued a subpoena for him to answer said questions. last year under >> Kirstjen Nielsen, but I had to dig further.

[00:10:25]And our staff dug further. But where did this start within the administration?

[00:10:29]She implemented it. And we found a memo.

[00:10:33]Dates back to April 23rd of 2018.

[00:10:38]Where there was an official recommendation to quote pursue prosecution of all amenable adults who cross our border quote illegally, even though this applied to legal asylum seekers in practice.

[00:10:51]Including those presenting with a family unit between ports of entry in coordination with DOJ. Here is the memo that I would like to submit to the congressional record. And so I looked at this memo and it seems like this is the source of it.

[00:11:07]And it seems as though Mr. Homan, that you are the author.

[00:11:13]It says here from yourself Kevin McAleenan and Francis Cissna. Is this correct? Did you sign the memo?

[00:11:26]I'd have to see what you Yeah, let me Give give me a I'd be happy to provide it.

[00:11:31]Um and we'll provide it over, but I would like to note that here it says the official recommendation there were three different options presented. The third included the option for family separation. This initiative would pursue prosecution of all amenable adults including those presenting with a family unit.

[00:11:53]Mr. Homan, your name is on this. Is this correct?

[00:11:57]Yes, I signed that memo. So, you are the author of the family separation policy.

[00:12:01]>> the author of this memo. You're not the author, but you signed the memo. Yes, a zero a zero tolerance memo. So, you provided the official recommendation to Secretary Nielsen on family for the United States to pursue family separation. I gave Secretary Nielsen numerous recommendations on how to secure the border and save lives.

[00:12:21]>> But, it says here that you you gave her numerous options, but the recommendation was option three family separation.

[00:12:27]>> saying this is not the only paper where we giving the secretary numerous options to secure the border and save lives.

[00:12:34]>> rails. It exposed the entire double standard in Washington in real time.

[00:12:39]Byron Donalds stepped in and cut straight through the noise with one undeniable point. The law either applies to everyone or it means nothing. And the second he said it, you could feel the room shift. Because here's the truth Democrats don't want to admit. If you're a regular American and you ignore a congressional subpoena, you're done.

[00:12:58]You're held in contempt. No excuses.

[00:13:00]But, if your name is Hunter Biden, suddenly it's press conferences, public stunts, and rewriting the rules on the fly. And when they got called out on it, they didn't defend the law. They ran from it. Stay right here. Because after this clip, I'm breaking down exactly how Byron Donalds dismantled their entire argument piece by piece. Hit like, subscribe, and watch this all the way through. It only gets worse for them.