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.
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.
"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?
The FBI has a general policy of not commenting on ongoing investigations, as the House GOP knows very well. It's not surprising they didn't comment on this one. The remark to Twitter was no doubt private and off the record, and probably still not in keeping with that policy, though they might have felt they had a good reason. The quote you copy is about disclosure of disinfo, not confirming info.
The FBI didn't have any control over censorship, which was never remotely as much as the GOP pretends.
It remains that none of that is about the people who signed the letter you were complaining about.
The people who signed the letter intentionally misled the American people by insinuating that it was a foreign propaganda effort, even though, at best, they had zero evidence to that effect, and at worst, they knew full well that it was not a foreign propaganda effort. These are spooks. They engaged in a propagandistic and meritless smear campaign against a journalist in an attempt to change the outcome of an election, and they might have even succeeded. The fact that you support this is insane.
No, again, they did not intentionally mislead anyone. They gave their views as outside experts. The story was initially highly suspicious to any objective viewer, given the timing and inflammatory content, and as the letter said, bore the hallmarks of Russian disinfo. That's all true. Turned out the suspicions were unfounded, but they couldn't know that at the time.
Their views as outside experts were entirely wrong. The media outlets that parroted them, and Joe Biden himself, who also did so, therefore, do not deserve to be trusted, until they acknowledge that they were misled, trusted untrustworthy people, and spread disinformation to their audience. Uri Berliner did exactly this, and NPR suspended him. So I will continue to mistrust NPR, especially ahead of an election.
Imagine this, partisan. If Donald Trump was in the establishment, and the Access Hollywood tape was leaked ahead of the 2016 election. Imagine that 150 former intelligence officials who were loyal to Trump made a public statement saying that the tape had "All the hallmarks of a foreign influence effort," even though law enforcement agencies such as the FBI knew exactly where the Access Hollywood tape came from, and knew that it wasn't hacked by foreigners. Imagine that these former intelligence officials issue this statement, and the FBI, who knows that the statement is false, remains silent until after the election. Imagine that every mainstream media organization refuses to report on the Access Hollywood tape until after the election. Imagine that NBC, who reported the Access Hollywood tape, had their social media accounts temporarily banned and subsequently shadowbanned.
This is effectively what happened with the Hunter Biden laptop story. You just can't see the parallel because you're on one side and not the other. I'm on neither side, even though I freely admit that I voted for Biden in 2020 because Trump was so grotesque to me. This behavior by those intelligence officials, the FBI, and the mainstream media, was beyond egregious. It was almost unforgivable. I'll never see them the same way.
Any objective person should have concluded that the laptop contents were legitimate as soon as Hunter Biden refused to deny that the contents were his.
The letter was written before it became clear that Hunter Biden wasn't going to deny the story. But yes, after that became clear, most media and individuals concluded the laptop contents were probably legit.
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.
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.
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.
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?
The FBI has a general policy of not commenting on ongoing investigations, as the House GOP knows very well. It's not surprising they didn't comment on this one. The remark to Twitter was no doubt private and off the record, and probably still not in keeping with that policy, though they might have felt they had a good reason. The quote you copy is about disclosure of disinfo, not confirming info.
The FBI didn't have any control over censorship, which was never remotely as much as the GOP pretends.
It remains that none of that is about the people who signed the letter you were complaining about.
The people who signed the letter intentionally misled the American people by insinuating that it was a foreign propaganda effort, even though, at best, they had zero evidence to that effect, and at worst, they knew full well that it was not a foreign propaganda effort. These are spooks. They engaged in a propagandistic and meritless smear campaign against a journalist in an attempt to change the outcome of an election, and they might have even succeeded. The fact that you support this is insane.
No, again, they did not intentionally mislead anyone. They gave their views as outside experts. The story was initially highly suspicious to any objective viewer, given the timing and inflammatory content, and as the letter said, bore the hallmarks of Russian disinfo. That's all true. Turned out the suspicions were unfounded, but they couldn't know that at the time.
Their views as outside experts were entirely wrong. The media outlets that parroted them, and Joe Biden himself, who also did so, therefore, do not deserve to be trusted, until they acknowledge that they were misled, trusted untrustworthy people, and spread disinformation to their audience. Uri Berliner did exactly this, and NPR suspended him. So I will continue to mistrust NPR, especially ahead of an election.
Imagine this, partisan. If Donald Trump was in the establishment, and the Access Hollywood tape was leaked ahead of the 2016 election. Imagine that 150 former intelligence officials who were loyal to Trump made a public statement saying that the tape had "All the hallmarks of a foreign influence effort," even though law enforcement agencies such as the FBI knew exactly where the Access Hollywood tape came from, and knew that it wasn't hacked by foreigners. Imagine that these former intelligence officials issue this statement, and the FBI, who knows that the statement is false, remains silent until after the election. Imagine that every mainstream media organization refuses to report on the Access Hollywood tape until after the election. Imagine that NBC, who reported the Access Hollywood tape, had their social media accounts temporarily banned and subsequently shadowbanned.
This is effectively what happened with the Hunter Biden laptop story. You just can't see the parallel because you're on one side and not the other. I'm on neither side, even though I freely admit that I voted for Biden in 2020 because Trump was so grotesque to me. This behavior by those intelligence officials, the FBI, and the mainstream media, was beyond egregious. It was almost unforgivable. I'll never see them the same way.
Again, any objective person would have agreed that the story was highly suspicious. The people who signed that letter weren't limited to Dems.
The Access Hollywood tape was immediately verifiable and verified.
You must have your own reasons for wanting to see this as you do, but it's simply not as you portray it.
Any objective person should have concluded that the laptop contents were legitimate as soon as Hunter Biden refused to deny that the contents were his.
The letter was written before it became clear that Hunter Biden wasn't going to deny the story. But yes, after that became clear, most media and individuals concluded the laptop contents were probably legit.
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?