Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, is on trial for allegedly purchasing a firearm while he was addicted to drugs and lying on the background check form about it.

The evidence from the prosecution has been strong but his daughter Naomi provided some contradictory testimony for the defense.

She said that when she and her fiancé visited him in a Los Angeles rehab in 2018 that he was “the clearest he had ever been since my uncle [Beau Biden] died.”

“He seemed really great,” she said to the jury on Friday.

She said that weeks after her dad purchased the firearm, she borrowed his truck to drive from New York to Washington and that the vehicle was in good shape, and she did not notice any drug paraphernalia or evidence that drugs had been used in the truck.

The testimony contradicted that of Hallie Biden, Hunter’s ex-girlfriend and ex-sister-in-law, who said the car was full of drug paraphernalia and trash when she visited him around the same time.

Advertisement

On cross-examination, however, Naomi did admit that she received an unusual text message from her dad around five days after he purchased the weapon, around Oct. 17, 2018, The Washington Times reported:

In the text messages, Hunter Biden asked her if her now-husband could bring the truck to 57th and 5th Ave. in Manhattan to swap cars. 

“Right now?” she responded.

Prosecutor Leo Wise asked if she knew what her father was doing at two o’clock in the morning or why it was so important to swap cars at that moment.

“No,” Naomi Biden replied, adding that her dad still “seemed good” and she was “hopeful.” 

“I’m really sorry dad I can’t take this,” she wrote in a later text to Hunter Biden in October 2018. She was trying to “hang out” with her dad in New York, but he had been unreachable. Hunter Biden later replied, apologizing for not being available.

As the trial began, there was a confrontation near the courthouse that made news.

The wife of Hunter Biden loudly confronted an ally of former President Donald Trump outside the Delaware courtroom where the first son’s trial for allegedly lying on a federal gun background check form is taking place.

Garrett Ziegler, who worked on trade policy in the White House, took part in a plot by Trump allies to make Hunter Biden, the son of Joe Biden, look bad in the final days of the 2020 election.

In response, Hunter Biden sued Ziegler and the company he founded, Marco Polo, in September of last year. The lawsuit claimed that they violated state and federal laws by attempting to create a searchable online database containing 128,000 emails, NBC News reported.

During a break in the trial on Tuesday, Hunter’s wife, Melissa Cohen-Biden, saw Ziegler—who had also attended the previous day during jury selection—and confronted him.

“You have no right to be here, you Nazi piece of s—!” she yelled before walking away. Eventually, she returned to her seat next to First Lady Jill Biden, who had also been attending the trial. Ziegler did not respond to Cohen-Biden’s meltdown.

NBC News noted further:

Both the laptop and the gun charges have served to make public Hunter Biden’s longtime drug addiction and surfaced embarrassing episodes in his life. Trump and his GOP allies have repeatedly used the contents of the laptop to tie President Biden to his son’s shady foreign business deals. The contents of the laptop included one message that appeared to directly implicate the senior Biden — “10 percent for the big guy.”

Former Biden business associate Tony Bobulinski has testified that the reference indeed meant Joe Biden and that Joe Biden was always aware of his son’s business deals, despite his repeated denials. The laptop quickly became the subject of testimony in the trial. FBI agent Erica Jensen testified that the laptop was obtained via subpoena from the Delaware computer shop where it was abandoned in 2019.

Prior to the 2020 election, the New York Post was the first to publish damning excerpts taken from the laptop. Those reports were quickly censored on social media, with the then-Twitter platform locking The Post’s account for weeks. Also, most other media outlets shunned the report, falsely claiming it was “Russian disinformation,” along with some 50 then-current and retired intelligence community officials, some of whom are now paid consultants for some of the same media outlets.