Though Wilmington, Delaware, narrowly dodged a tornado Wednesday night, it did not escape the walking disaster that is Hunter Biden. Day 4 of his trial on federal gun charges proceeded with no shortage of sordid details regarding the First Son’s actions in and around the time of the gun purchase at issue. 


Bob Hoge provided a glimpse into the tragic chapter involving Hunter’s sister-in-law and former lover, Hallie Biden.


Sordid in the Court: Hallie Biden Describes Drug Use, How She Found Hunter’s Gun

And, of course, Townhall’s Mia Cathell provided a thorough recap of Wednesday along with a detailed account of Thursday’s proceedings from inside the courtroom.


LIVE: Day 4 of Hunter Biden’s Gun Trial

Below is a brief overview of what the day brought.

When court ended Wednesday, gun salesman Gordon Cleveland was on the stand being cross-examined by defense attorney Abbe Lowell, who was trying to poke holes in his credibility — without much success. 

The defense tried to paint Cleveland as a shady, slimy sales-hungry salesman who preyed upon the poor president’s son and squeezed a $900 sale out of him. But it turns out that Cleveland is a cool, calm, and collected witness very knowledgeable about firearm safety and sales.

Cleveland retook the stand Thursday morning and Lowell attempted to highlight deficiencies in the form Hunter filled out through his testimony. 

Defense attorney Abbe Lowell compares how questions on the federal form Hunter filled out to obtain the firearm differ from each other in phrasing. For instance, one asks “Have you ever been convicted…?” and another asks “Are you an illegal alien?” Lowell points to the change in tense from past to present on the question about drug use or addiction. That question is similarly phrased in the present tense and it is not accompanied by a provision explaining the questions, as the others are.


On re-direct, prosecutor Derek Hines asked Cleveland about drug users and addicts purchasing firearms. 

Cleveland says it’s dangerous and illegal if anyone under the influence, even a medical marijuana card holder, handles a firearm. 

With that, the prosecution called Hallie to the stand, who detailed not only Hunter’s drug use but her own. 

Hallie says she saw evidence of Hunter’s drug abuse at her home in Delaware and house in Annapolis. “It became more and more frequent,” Hallie says of Hunter doing drugs “daily.” She specifies he took a break from smoking crack to sleep and socialize. 

Hallie recalls visiting Hunter while he was staying at the Roosevelt Hotel and witnessing him smoking crack. Weiss asks if she, too, was partaking. “Yes, I was,” she says. Weiss questions who introduced her to crack cocaine. “Hunter did,” Hallie responds. “It was a terrible experience. I am embarrassed and ashamed and I regret that portion of my life,” she adds. 

After walking through the chronology of her discovery of the gun in Hunter’s truck, her panicked reaction, and her disposal of the gun by wrapping it in a brown leather pouch, placing the pouch in a plastic shopping bag, and tossing it into a dumpster behind a grocery store, the prosecution had Hallie confirm text messages exchanged between the two around the time of the gun purchase. 

The prosecution pulls up Hunter’s texts with Hallie on October 13, 2018, the day after he purchased the firearm, where she asks where he is. “Buy…ing,” he replied, “I guess.” At 10:30 p.m. that night, Hunter sends the text about being with “Bernard who hangs at 7/11…” waiting for the drug dealer named “Mookie.” The next day, Hunter sent the text to Hallie explaining: “I was sleeping on a car smoking crack…”

“I just want to help you get sober, nothing I do or you do is working,” Hallie replied. “I’m sorry.”


Hallie recounted her return to the store and search for the gun (after having tossed it in the dumpster), followed by calling the police to report it missing. 

“Police coming to talk to me now,” she texted Hunter. “I’ll take full blame. I don’t want to live like this anymore. This is too much for me to handle,” she said. 

When Hunter texted about his firearm being in a locked car, Hallie corrected him. “It was open unlocked and windows down and the kids search your car.” She apologized to Hunter for handling the situation “poorly” but then turned it around on Hunter and asked him to own up to his addiction issues.

Lowell’s cross-examination of Hallie consisted largely of him attempting to highlight inconsistencies in her recollection. 

“You decided on your own to put [the gun] in the [leather] pouch?” Lowell asks. “Yes,” Hallie says. Appearing frustrated, Lowell remarks to Hallie: “So, there are some things you remember and then many things you don’t.”

There was a frenzy of calls back and forth between Hunter and Hallie the day she took his firearm. “I don’t recall,” Hallie repeatedly responds as Lowell presses her to remember that morning. 

Following a brief re-direct by Special Counsel David Weiss, Hallie left the stand. Next up was the trooper who interviewed Hunter after the gun was reported missing. 

The prosecution calls Delaware State Police Senior Corporal Joshua Marley, who responded to the firearm incident at Janssen’s Market. Marley recounts his interview with Hunter. At the time, he was believed to be the victim of a firearm theft. 


Marley was followed by Delaware State Police Lt. Millard Greer, who testified regarding his investigation of the incident and the ultimate recovery of the gun. What ensued between Greer’s testimony and the following testimony of Edward Banner, the 80-year-old who retrieved the gun from the dumpster, sounds a bit like a comedy routine. Some snippets from the day’s two last witnesses:

Greer testifies he reviewed surveillance footage of an elderly man, Edward Thomas Banner, rummaging through the store’s trash receptacle for recyclables. Greer tracked him down and asked if he noticed someone dumping something that shouldn’t be there. “Oh yes they did,” Greer quotes Banner saying. The dumper-diving U.S. Navy veteran had taken the .38 Special revolver home with him.

At his house, Banner retrieved a black box from upstairs and took out the gun stuffed inside a pair of socks. He presented the gun and ammunition plus the Speedloader altogether with the leather pouch to the police.

Lowell cross-examines Greer.

Greer says when they arrived at the 80-year-old man’s house, he had accidentally locked himself out. His wife had to wake up from her midday nap to unlock the front door and let them in. Banner scampered up the steps and retrieved what looked like the bottom of a shoe box without a lid, Greer recalls. After pulling the gun out of the rolled-up sock, Banner held everything in his cupped hands to turn the items over to Greer.

“I don’t think everything would have fit in that pouch,” Greer remarks, referring to the soft, square pouch’s small dimensions. “Exactly!” Lowell exclaims.

Banner talks about collecting recyclables so earn a few cents off of his findings. “Saving the environment and making money,” Hines praises. Banner mentions the price of gas in this economy.

4:17 p.m. — the prosecution plays the security footage of Banner dipping out of frame to pick through trash. “That sure looks like me,” Banner comments.

Banner says the two rounds of ammunition were already missing when he found Hunter’s possessions.

“This may be a weird question: Does anyone in your household use cocaine?” Hines asks, adding if he’s come across any cocaine residue at home. “Not that I know of,” the senior citizen replies. He mentions forgetting his wedding anniversary. The courtroom laughs hysterically.

Lowell cross-examines Banner.

There’s a hearing issue as Lowell asks Banner about being spotted at Janssen’s Market, and Banner answers, “No, I don’t work there.”

Banner says he didn’t put in or take out any bullets. Asked about the sock used to store the gun, Banner says, “I don’t know nothing about socks.”


The jury was dismissed, and the prosecution and defense attorneys apprised Judge Maryellen Noreika of their plans regarding witnesses and scheduling. The prosecution indicated they plan to call two more witnesses Friday morning — forensic chemist Dr. Jason Brewer and DEA Supervisory Special Agent Joshua Romig — and then rest. The defense indicated they’re still trying to determine for sure which witnesses they’ll be calling, but they expect the evidence to be wrapped up by Monday. That would likely place the case in the jury’s hands on Tuesday. 

I promised in the prior installment to elaborate on my theories regarding the defense’s strategy — it’s one of three possibilities, in my view: 

  1. They’ve really got zero defense — and know it — but are hoping if they throw up whatever they can, something will stick, and a Biden-friendly jury will either acquit or hang; 
  2. They’re banking on a pardon for Hunter even if he’s found guilty, so they’re throwing all manner of excuses out there to help frame the narrative and justification for such;
  3. Hunter’s the sacrificial lamb, and they all know it — they expect him to be found guilty and get a slap on the wrist (for which his father can later pardon him if need be), but the guilty verdict provides Joe Biden and the Democrats cover for going after Trump. (“See? We said no one is above the law, and we meant it!”)

Otherwise, why go through this embarrassing exercise in silliness? We know the original plan was to plead it out and immunize him from any further prosecution. In the end, it’s the tax charges they’re more concerned about — and for good reason, as that gets into the details of Hunter’s finances. That poses a far greater risk to Joe than Hunter’s dumb drugged-up gun purchase. 


I guess we’ll see how it all shakes out soon enough. 


Money for Nothing and Chicks for Free: Hunter Biden’s Delaware Trial – Day 3

If Your Day Is Gone, and You Want to Ride On: Hunter Biden’s Delaware Trial – Day 2