More On: Hunter Biden
Repairman who revealed Hunter Biden's laptop sues House Intelligence Committee head Adam Schiff, CNN, Politico and The Daily Beast
Facebook, Twitter, Politico, and all the others that covered up, denied, and censored our newspaper's genuine and accurate reporting of Hunter Biden's laptop in 2020 deserve eternal, unending, soul-rending shame. You should be flinging yourself at the feet of the American people and pleading for pardon. You should rent billboards that proclaim, 'WE LIE.'
Above all, you should be hauled before Congress and forced to face embarrassing questions.
These and other information providers owe us — not just this newspaper — reparation for what appears to be the most flagrant and purposeful fake-news fraud of our time. In 2020, this paper's scoops on Hunter Biden's laptop were dubbed "Russian propaganda" (Politico), a "hoax" (Steven Brill of "fact-checking" site NewsGuard), debunked by "many, many red flags" (NPR), and a "hack and leak" operation that had to be throttled (Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg).
It was infamously removed from Twitter, as was The Post's account, due to a regulation against hacked materials that only seemed to apply to this one case.
Twitter did not prohibit the New York Times from publishing stories about Donald Trump's tax returns, which could have come from hacked materials and almost certainly were the result of a criminal act (leaking tax returns is illegal), but the Times never told us how it obtained the returns, so we don't know.
The Post was forthright in revealing to readers how it obtained the Laptop from Hell. Furthermore, no one on Team Biden refuted The Washington Post's claim because they knew or suspected it was genuine. At that moment, every news organization in the country should have led with the headline, "Biden team refuses to dispute Hunter Biden laptop story." A few months later, Hunter stated that the laptop "definitely" belonged to him, and the media shrugged instead of apologizing.
Even during the presidential debate, when the issue was raised, Joe Biden's responses were only a deflection, and anyone who reported that he disputed the laptop tale was guilty of spreading fake news all over again. "There are 50 former national intelligence officials who said that what he's accusing me of is a Russian plant," he actually remarked. Five former CIA directors from both parties think what he's saying is nonsense. Except for his close friend Rudy Giuliani, no one believes it."
Joe (who subsequently answered "Yes, yes, yes" when a reporter asked if he "believed" the laptop included Russian disinformation - the question gave him all the wriggle space in the world) was emphatic that he wasn't disputing the laptop belonged to Hunter, or that the stuff on it was authentic. He was referring to the now-famous Politico whitewash of October 19, 2020, which was fake news about fake news: The headline, "Hunter Biden Story Is Russian Disinformation, Dozens of Former Intelligence Officials Say," didn't even adequately describe what was in the story. Those officials simply stated that they were "suspect" about Russian involvement, admitting they had no evidence, and stated (in the 10th paragraph of Politico's piece), "We want to highlight that we do not know if the emails... are real or not."
In other words, the renowned liar James Clapper and others (as far as I can gather, every signatory who expressed an opinion about the election was a Biden backer) were literally peeing in the dark. Their slanderous hypothesis was undeserving of publication.
Yet Politico’s fake headline on this piece of partisan fan fiction gave the media and its Democratic Party enforcers all the cover they needed to treat the whole story like it was a ruse planted by Vladimir Putin.
Say, geniuses, if Putin had simply fabricated the whole thing, don’t you think Hunter Biden would have said, “That’s not my stuff”? And wouldn’t Putin have planted material that would have nuked Joe Biden’s presidential aspirations rather than merely raising questions about his son’s dealings?
All Jen Psaki had to do was retweet Politico’s bullspit headline. Who reads beyond headlines?
The Times and other major papers simply ignored the substance of The Post’s scoop, and now their readers know, or rather have just been re-re-re-reminded, that they’re Democratic Party cheerleaders who even allow presidential candidates to dictate details of how they get covered.
The next time they “fact check,” the next time they cry wolf, who will believe them?