We start tonight with this fox news alert. We have major Breaking News aler trump legal saga today. Ga the u. S. Supreme court has just agreed to hear his criminal immunity claim. Now in, the january six trial that would set Arguments Forek O the week of april the 22nd. Now, this is huge. A decision that is likely to come in june, perhaps even late june. Son late will joe bidens weapod Department Of Justice insist on a trial. Lets see. The month that the Republican National convention esidenti to take place that close to a president ial election. Now breaking tonight in illinois, judge has ruled President Trump on the states primary ballot, citing, quote, anar insurrection, ban, Joininge Maine and joining colorado. All right. Weve got a lot to break down tonight. Here to help us is fox news contributotonight. Us, jr turle. Let me start with the Immunity Case. For th i always thought it was the right thing for the court to take upt toup, but i never ho the confidence that they would if and expediting this. Eyr but we expect that, in factsb ,arguments will be made in late april, probably wont get a decision until june, jun perhaps late june. All that puts right upe. Until july, the month, the republican cational conventiocan, i would argue. How do you possibly have a case that close to a president ial election . Well, that is going to beacing the question facing likely de of justice,li assuming just for for the purposes of argument that smith prevails. I mean, trumps claim is Quitep Sweepingclai and there there are likely to be justices that wont sign on to that. But some of the justices clearly have reservations. While trumps argument mightd. Be sweeping, they may view the district, the d. C. Circuit opinioc. N, to be sweeping in itself. That is, theyre unsure of where that line is drawe unw so lets assume for a second that they rule for smithe fo t and send back whats called the mandate to the District Court fodistrir trial to go forward. He if that happens in june,l the trial judge hajudgs to get through pretrial motions. It could take easily a couple of month months. S. Then the trial itself can take three months. Now if you do that, youre getting awfully close to the electioge then. E the Department Of Justice has long had a rule not to have elections within a couple of sorry trials within a couple of months of elections. Smit now, even though jeff smith hase been given a lot of discretioneh that policy rests with main justice. E atto and i think the Attorney General himself really should sign off on departing from that policy. Estion so theres a lot of questions here. But jeff smith seeing a loss of Calendar Space and for him,sn its significant. Every day he loseificant. S, o reduces the likelihood that he can get a triaod getl through bn the election. And it one of his argumentsss was that this has broad implications in terms of the country you talked about and ive heard other attorneys as well make the argument that maybe the president s attorneys were very broa ybe e d. Their their definition of immunity can. They modify those arguments, fine, tuned them, if you will. Yeah, i expect that some i of these justices are as concerned with the lower courts Decisione Lowe Ann Lack of clarity as to when a president can on immunity. So even if they may agree with the resule t, they may not agree with the logic or rationale of ther ra lower. For but the real danger here for jeff smith is once they get into that high grass of president ial immunity, you dont knowimdont kn whereto theyre going to come out. You know, they have to try to creat te some clarity here. Ts and thats what is surprising manyurprisin people felt that t would just want this cup to pass from their lipju wansto and just say, were not going to review it now that theyre going to review itit , have to theyre going to have to lay down some new law heren some ane this could not be more important. You know how they define these n ses a huge impact on our separation of powerspae and the three branches of our government. If donald trump and his attorneys called you and they said, what would the argumentattorns well,ak what arguments would you make in that Immunity Case . What would your arguments be . Let unanell, you know, theres a number of questions that were left unanswered by the Lower Court Decision. For example, lets assume that trump was not assum running forelecti election, but objecting to another person being certified in the election, he was not a candidation he we and would te be outside the scope of the Protecte Thed Speech of the immunity . I think that what youre going to have is a lot of hypotheticalsa like that to better understand what it is about. This that falls outside. Ders now that the d. Ctand. Circuit hd its own sweeping views on this. And i think that many people would say n peoplo. What he was doing on the ellipses in that speech fell outside the of his core responsibilities. If anything, they were part of congresss responsibilities. But the Supreme Court doesnt have the luxury sometime the sus of generalities. They do. They they often retreat to iitt but now that theyve accepted this case, theyre going to have to make some typefo of delineation for future president s of when they can a count on immunity. And i have a feeling that at least for these justices files,d not feel like the Lower Court Decision did that. Sourt how will they come out te on this once they start working . The Problecome Outm is anyonest i still believe that the odds favor jack smith in the in then outcome but this is going to be one interesting oral argument. Its going to take a lots of time. It will be interesting. Goin taklets move on to the otr issue, and that is donald trump being on the ballo tissu in illinois now joininge. The states of colorado and theoe state of maine. And again, in this particular, the word insurrection was used. Last i checkeded, donald trump was never charged t with insurrectiorump wn, even ie jack smith case, the january six case in d. C. H , let alone convicted of insurrection or citing an insurrection. How is it possible that they could cite that as the reaso thn for removal from a ballot . Well, the advocates are arguing that insurrection when Thires Amendment was written, was meant to include a much broader range of conduct, even Something Like a riot. Manyething of us disagree with o what is really odd about this illinois decision is that most judges are waiting to hear from the Supreme Court juhearn of many of us is that the court is going to reject this claim, is going e to reject this theory. And yet this judge Decidedorr Jg to break from the other judges and say, no, no, i want to go on record. Ites no,. Its like paddling furiously to get on the titanic before It Sinkbefore is just so you can bn the list of those lost at sea becaus ae, you know, the suprems courts going to be ruling on this shortly. It doesnt look that good. And this judge basically Justt Replica cited the coloradotoo. Decision and said, me too. I in some ways i dont think thats going to play well with the justices. It reaffirme justics the fear expressed by people like justice alite o and otherslo who said, look, if if we allowt for is justit to allow this sot of for tat type of rulingsvari from various states, the rusouh of this judge to get, in heropio own opinion, To Disqualify Trump Inn , illinois, i think, will only magnify those concerns for the court. All right, jonathan turley, thank you, as always, for your expertise you. Y was we appreciate it. Now. Today was a huge day on capitol hill. Owell, zero experienced hunterh biden finally sat down for his long awaited deposition as part of the ongoing Impeachment Inquiry Intochmently his father after previously defying a subpoena from House Republican defy ags, accog to a copy of his Opening Statement obtained by fox newsti ,he told lawmakers, quote, i did not involve my father in my business, not while i wast a practicing attorney, not in my investments orn my, transactions, domestic or international, not as a board member, and not as an artist. Never really. Then why did devon archer testify that joe biden was on the phone with hunters Business Associates at least 20 times that he recalls ter bide . Why did both archer and Tony Bobulinski claim that the brand hunter was trying to sell was in fact, his father, say joe bi why did joe allegedly meet with, for example, the russian r oligarch, former first lady of moscow . Allan, about arenaussi and othes at cafe milano . Why she in her case, she contributed, what, 3. 5 million to the Family Syndicate and according to devin archer, invested another 100 million plus in their real estate ventures. Now, according to sources familiar with the deposition, hunter downplayed the infamous g i am sitting here with my father Whatsapp Message sayinghe his father was not actually sitting next to him, and that the messageo him and t. To the wrong recipient while he was either high Oither Seemiy contradicting his attorney. Abbe lowells Claimntradict N June that the message was fake. And after his testimony, one reporter shouted this question at hunter. Listen, i think we for ur people, mr. Biden, was the cocaine at the white house. He was. Now, meanwhile, predictably, the left person in complete meltdown mode over hunter testifying today. Take a look at themeltdown hun t Temper Tantrum filed by thk eaw left. What we saw, i think, was a rather embarrassing spectaclee where the republicans continued to believe are completely trivial points. They seem to Btelye Obsessively focused on speaker phones and use of speaker phone. I did Noeaker Phont know that tt the devils technology, but apparently ily it is. What we just witnessed over the last hour was, i think, a deeps i deep Fishing Expediti because the republican case had completely fallen apart over the last several weeks. What we are seeing is is just a complete and inappropriate expedition into the president s son. Theyve got nothing. Thatsson. What we just witnesse for the last hour that hour of this much anticipated testimony was the nail in the coffin to what is a complete bogus and sham Impeachment Inquiry. Okay, mr. Fang. Fang swalwell. Then, of course, youve got jamie raskin jamie, then you goc and the last guy you saw, t the congressman. Wasnt he the guy that actually said, well, when whe guyen joenn to hunters business meetings, what did they talk about i probably the whether it was more on todays deposition in House OversightCommittee Chairman james colmer house judiciary Committee Chairmanan jim jordan. Im house ways and means committee. Jason smith, hes the chairman there. Let all right. s james colmer, lets start with you. Lets get your general of the day. Well, i thought it wa thos a very good deposition for us. We were able to confirm a lot of the Wrongdoings ThroughoingsHunter Bidens testimony. Therthe are many financial crimv that we believe have committed that were Committee Thd by thebt biden family. Hunter was asked about specific transactions for a specific llc that many of whom that i referred to as shell companies. E got his answer on the record. Were going to go back and verify many of thosefy many. But what we also learned today, huhn, was that a lot of what hunter said was contradictornty to what three of at least three of his former associateee said. So i think the next phase now is to bring hunter in for a public hearing and hear froman the other Biden Associatesd hear and lets determine thende who the American People think theyre tellin think ag truth,e weve got the bank records. Bank records dont lie. We kno l. Thw the Bidens Have Tan in Tens Of Millions of dollars from our adversaries around the worlr d. Al and we still dont know after all these depositions, after all the hours of testimony from the biden family, exactly what the biden family to earn, the 30 million from0 our enemies, the world. Well, i think jim jordan, thaty partts the ke of the question here. Now, hunter on his own laptop, those very reae. N hil implicates his father. Half his income goes to pops. Icates hwhat accounts should i r dads home repairs . 10 for the big guy. Then, of course, we have devin archer. Not one,n but 20 phone calls. Ei he testified to that joe called in on with foreign businessen partners. That meeting alan, about arena and others meeting, the cafe mi, the Russian Oligarch foreign business caf. That seems to implicate the father in a major way. And a big part of the testimony from what i read and heard and my sources he are a had to do with the fact that he just wanted to protect his dad under all circumt hi here, in spite of what would be a lot of evidence to the contrary. Te yeah, i mean, sean, the rules of the house prohibitb us in a Deposition Format from talking about specificous of Tht Deposition until the transcript is released. But as chairman kilmer, therehig were lots of things said todayid that evidence weve already got and witnesses weve already talked have to contradict what hunter biden said. So we but sai doid think that t maybe the best takeaway is weve got a lot of good information, i think wouldgogooa good roadmap for when, in fact, we do have a publia puc. But youre right, we alreadypho knew that it was phone calls. Itca lunches, it was dinners, io was rounds of golf from. The same white house who said he had no involvement whatsoever with this busineswhag and any of his Business Associates. But he engaged in all those activities. And wethose knew that from pres witnesses that weve had a chance to deposeve had. And jason smith, hes basically basically saying that all sayiusines Partners Liedg the and hes the one telling the truth. But then then i i back to whatan Congressman Colmer just said. When you look at the bank records, when you look at what youve identified, what youve said oatn this program, and jams colmer, said identifyingt ten biden Family Members that got paid. Okay, well, what did they actually do . What services were rendered, o this massive amount of money of millions and millions mi mil . . S you ascertain that. Did you ascertain what hunter did, how he was capablee of of doing it, considering he mentioned many times todayllu is addiction, can you tell us what is the grandchildren that got Paie Ldren Thd what thr the money they got . Shawn hunter came h up with numerous excuses. He first started out his opening statemenus excust. D you said earlier that his father was not involved in his business i. Well, guess what . Ne his Business Associates have testified differentlyss. The two irs whistleblowers that came before, the ways and means committee, their evidence proves differently. In fact, shawn mmittee, their e, 327 different emails proved differently. That was between joe biden, hunterhunter, biden and his buss associates. Joe biden was not just involved. He was a participant in these activities p. All right. Let me let me i beg your indulgence, james comber for a second. Bear with me. Asr talkedracy about maga motivated Conspiracy Theories and how hes beenrtisan hunted in a partisan political pursuit of his dad p and. And that youve been dealing in innuendo, distortion, sensationalism. N dealme ask you about the case that i think most americans know the most about. And that Wouldask Abou the casee of burisma, the Oil And Gas Giant out of ukraine. They said, well, it was John Solomons reporting, correcngt. In october of 2015. Theyragency decision015, came dn on the Obama Administration that they would that that Notukn Progress had been made regarding corruption in ukraine Loat Warrantede that 1,000,0000 in loan guarantees. Is that truerantees . . I bel in october 2015, i believeie that was from an email. Partme the john kerry state department. Yes. Okay. 2015 questiont sean n, in decemr of that same year, 2015, have you confirmed conphone ca and corroborated that a phone call took place with joe biden an n d when he was in Dubai Befo Burisma executives five days before joe went to ukraine. T to i believe dev