55 Comments
⭠ Return to thread

You can't state the true information that I asked you to state, so I can't take you seriously. You don't care about the truth. You care about what makes your preferred political party look good.

Expand full comment

Hey, do you have links to any actual proof?

I have links showing that not a single member of the "left wing media" stated that the laptop was Russian Disinfo.

It's not hard to find.

Just look on the "left wing media"

I'll give you 5$ if you can find a single instance of mainstream media stating that the laptop *is* disinformation.

Expand full comment

Washington Post: "We must treat the Hunter Biden leaks as if they were a foreign intelligence operation - even if they probably aren't."

Pretty much sums up the mainstream media's ethos in the entire Trump era, right?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/24/hunter-biden-laptop-disinformation/

Expand full comment

Wow. That's an opinion piece, and not one by WaPo.

You're clearly more interested in preserving your politics than truth. Your choice, it's the common choice.

Expand full comment

"Even though they probably aren't"

Are you fucking stupid?

Expand full comment

Are you? They are justifying censoring true information here!

Expand full comment

ROFL. Yes, you are fucking stupid.

But go ahead with the censorship claims about things that are public, and were public at the time.

Expand full comment

This is an admission that they are intentionally misleading their readership about the nature of the information on that laptop. Even though an American person gave it to another American, who leaked it to an American newspaper, they insist on mentioning - for no apparent reason, and counter to what the FBI knew in advance - that it *might be* foreign disinfo. Probably not. But it might be! Except it wasn't, and all of the people on that list you sent knew it. So they swept it under the rug until after the election, in an affront to the dignity of their very profession.

Expand full comment

No it isn't.

But go ahead with the censorship claims about things that are public, and were public at the time.

Expand full comment

Here's Glenn Greenwald's reporting, at the time, that The Intercept refused to publish ahead of the election. It has all of the proof and sources that I need to stand by everything I've said, although I don't need proof for myself: I lived through this period and was consuming relevant media on this subject as it was happening. I remember it vividly.

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-biden-censored

Expand full comment

You continue to amaze. I gave you a Google link that shows a wide array of coverage of the story before the election. You ignored it and ran away.

Now you admit that something the Intercept did is all the evidence you need.

You believe whatever your politics dictate, with not the slightest interest in truth.

Expand full comment

The links you gave show a bunch of outlets writing false excuses for why they didn't cover the story. It wasn't hacked information. It wasn't foreign influence. It was a legitimate, true, outrageous scandal. It just wasn't as outrageous as anything Trump did on any typical day.

Expand full comment

You continue to make my point, seeing only what fits your politics. The Google results show many articles from the MSM explaining the story including the allegations against the Bidens. It's a myth that the MSM didn't cover the story.

A scandal about someone's son isn't the same as one about that someone, something lost on many.

Expand full comment

Nowhere in that article does it say the laptop is disinfo.

further, this isn't even a primary source. This is an idiot on a blog stating that other media sites specifically did not say it was "russian disinfo", but rather republished and quoted a letter which also did not say the laptop was russion disinfo. (Maybe you should read that letter? Here it is: https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000175-4393-d7aa-af77-579f9b330000 read it. Everyone who whines about this should)

Maybe... seriously, maybe read the article before you link it?

Expand full comment

That's the list of spooks that misled the entire corporate media into thinking that they needed to censor true information for political reasons.

Expand full comment

did you read the letter?

Expand full comment

Yeah, that letter was bullshit. All of the people who signed off on thar letter knew the laptop wasn't foreign disinformation ahead of time. The FBI knew about its legitimacy for over a year prior to that letter being written. The letter is an example of domestic election interference by our own intelligence agencies, who lied on purpose about the nature of the laptop, in order to prevent reporters from covering it before the election.

Expand full comment

Here, since you obviously won't, here's the relevant bit:

"It is for all these reasons that we write to say that the arrival on the US poli<cal scene of emails

purportedly belonging to Vice President Biden’s son Hunter, much of it related to his <me

serving on the Board of the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, has all the classic earmarks of a

Russian informa<on opera<on.

We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by

President Trump’s personal aSorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have

evidence of Russian involvement -- just that our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the

Russian government played a significant role in this case."

Now, re-read your last post, or any previous on the subject really, and tell me how you don't sound like an utter loon.

Since, you know, they explicitly *TELL YOU* that they don't know that it's russia.

Odd that none of your talking heads have ever mentioned that to you.

Maybe ask yourself why.

Expand full comment

https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/testimony-reveals-fbi-employees-who-warned-social-media-companies-about-hack

Those people knew that it wasn't Russia. They knew it was legitimately sourced. They knew that emails weren't hacked by foreigners. But rather than confirming the legitimacy of the emails, they sent out this bullshit memo, insinuating that maybe Russia had something to do with it. They knew Russia had nothing to do with it when they wrote this memo! This is what is normally referred to as "disinformation." But NPR and the rest of the mainstream media bought it, and curtailed their coverage of the story ahead of the election in response. So the CIA and the FBI engaged in a domestic disinformation operation with the purpose of influencing an election outcome. That disinformation campaign was laundered through NPR. But liberals apparently think there's nothing wrong with this.

Expand full comment

Wow. Read beyond the false headline. First, that's not about the people who signed the letter. Second, it shows the opposite of what they claim, that the FBI confirmed to Twitter that the laptop was real.

You see only what fits your politics. And you work hard to keep it that way, truth just doesn't matter nearly as much.

Expand full comment

From the link above:

"Prior to the presidential election on November 3, 2020, the FBI never formally revealed that the laptop was “real” and in the FBI’s possession. As Dehmlow testified to the Committee, had the Hunter Biden story been a product of an actual Russian disinformation campaign, FITF would have been fully authorized to warn the companies of such a campaign: “But if there is a foreign malign influence operation and we’ve got specific details about how those actors are propagating information operations, influence operations on platforms, that’s something we could share the specific details of.” Instead, the refusal of FBI officials—the very officials who knew the laptop was real—to verify the authenticity of the laptop allowed widespread censorship about an otherwise accurate news story."

I'm totally willing to see any evidence that disagrees with my preconceptions. This back and forth can go on indefinitely, as far as I'm concerned. Would you like to?

Expand full comment

Can you tell me what the two quoted paragraphs say?

Did you read them?

Or do you continue to simply ignore evidence you can easily read?

Expand full comment

So, you didn't read the fucking letter.

Seriously.

READ IT YOU FUCKING TWATWAFFLE.

Expand full comment

I've read everything that has been presented. The fact that the letter even mentioned Russia is a travesty. Russia had nothing to do with this, and they knew it. If they were being honest, the memo would have said "this laptop is legitimate, the emails contained within are valid, and no foreign country had anything to do with them."

Expand full comment

So, the letter that says they do not know if it's russian disinformation, is somehow them telling everyone it's russian disinformation.

You realize, you live in a fucking fantasy world right?

My god you're stupid.

Expand full comment

The letter says that they do not know if it's Russian disinformation, which is a lie. They knew that it wasn't Russian disinformation for at least a year ahead of time. You can call me stupid, but it doesn't change the facts of the case. A bunch of spooks disinformed the media ahead of an election for political reasons. They engaged in this domestic disinformation campaign with the explicit purpose of influencing the outcome of the election. Liberals apparently see nothing wrong with this.

Expand full comment

Not even close to reality about the people who wrote the letter.

Expand full comment

Hi puppy.

Expand full comment

You really can't read. Amazing resistance to plain fact.

Expand full comment