Not sure what you have in mind, but they had the cooperation of the man who had the laptop, and its contents, and did check to see if they matched what facts they could confirm.
Where the NYP fell down was in putting a politically-motivated spin on their coverage, at the least. Whether they should have covered it at all when they did is also questionable.
Not sure what you have in mind, but they had the cooperation of the man who had the laptop, and its contents, and did check to see if they matched what facts they could confirm.
Where the NYP fell down was in putting a politically-motivated spin on their coverage, at the least. Whether they should have covered it at all when they did is also questionable.
At the time NYP wrote that story the FBI had had the laptop for about ten months. NYP did **zero** to check the tale Giuliani was spinning them. They posted screenshots and may not have received any more than that from Giuliani.
They published corroborating facts as well, including as I said corroboration from the person who owned the laptop. They were reported to have the entire contents.
They published two screenshots of emails and quoted Giuliani. That's not corroborating facts. Where were they reported to have "the entire contents"? Further, as I've shown already, the drives being passed around by Giuliani and other rightwing activists included files not copied by Blind Computer Guy.
They published a lot more than two screenshots. They published many, in a whole series of articles. They claimed to be working from a copy of the hard drive that Giuliani gave them.
The first article- which is the only relevant one as that's what the social media companies reacted to- had only two screenshots. You're now misrepresenting the discussion to cover for your misrepresentation of the NYPost's "reporting" (to use the term very loosely).
I'm not making anything up. The only article which Facebook and Twitter took measures against was the first one. It's the only one which is relevant to your claims here. You're reaching for things to justify your statements, and are now dishonestly accusing me. Your link doesn't prove your pretense other articles were suppressed.
You like to tell other people what to do a lot, but the fact is you need to start looking at your own conduct.
Not sure what you have in mind, but they had the cooperation of the man who had the laptop, and its contents, and did check to see if they matched what facts they could confirm.
Where the NYP fell down was in putting a politically-motivated spin on their coverage, at the least. Whether they should have covered it at all when they did is also questionable.
At the time NYP wrote that story the FBI had had the laptop for about ten months. NYP did **zero** to check the tale Giuliani was spinning them. They posted screenshots and may not have received any more than that from Giuliani.
They published corroborating facts as well, including as I said corroboration from the person who owned the laptop. They were reported to have the entire contents.
They published two screenshots of emails and quoted Giuliani. That's not corroborating facts. Where were they reported to have "the entire contents"? Further, as I've shown already, the drives being passed around by Giuliani and other rightwing activists included files not copied by Blind Computer Guy.
They published a lot more than two screenshots. They published many, in a whole series of articles. They claimed to be working from a copy of the hard drive that Giuliani gave them.
The first article- which is the only relevant one as that's what the social media companies reacted to- had only two screenshots. You're now misrepresenting the discussion to cover for your misrepresentation of the NYPost's "reporting" (to use the term very loosely).
You're now making stuff up that was nowhere said or implied above, and which is flatly false in any case. Look inward about misrepresentation.
NYP pushed several articles the first day, and all were subject to the same initial suppression.
https://www.google.com/search?q=hunter+biden+laptop+site%3Anypost.com&sca_esv=725efba4277893af&rls=en&cs=0&biw=946&bih=915&sxsrf=ACQVn0_InYL_jSvQhVhIFEPzmqZ6Pdm4jQ%3A1713562102145&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A10%2F14%2F2020%2Ccd_max%3A10%2F14%2F2020&tbm=
Before you imply someone else is misrepresenting something, you should check yourself.
I'm not making anything up. The only article which Facebook and Twitter took measures against was the first one. It's the only one which is relevant to your claims here. You're reaching for things to justify your statements, and are now dishonestly accusing me. Your link doesn't prove your pretense other articles were suppressed.
You like to tell other people what to do a lot, but the fact is you need to start looking at your own conduct.
Incredible. You learn nothing from you continual string of exposed ignorance. Look it up for yourself, I'm done helping you.
The only thing you've exposed is your dishonesty.