Anybody Remember...

[ghuns]

...Back in the weeks leading up to the election how all that Hunter Biden laptop drama was 'Russian disinformation'? How the NY Post's reporting of it was scrubbed from social media? How Twitter users, including the NY Post, were banned for the mere mention of the story? Remember Leslie Stahl on 60 Minutes schooling Trump about how the laptop 'can't be verified'?

Well...

The NYT Now Admits the Biden Laptop -- Falsely Called "Russian Disinformation" -- is Authentic

[RobertELee]

No, all I remember is mean tweets and January 6, where dozens died and all of DC was burned to the ground.

[Incogneeto]

No, all I remember is mean tweets and January 6, where dozens died and all of DC was burned to the ground.

HEY!!! STOP THAT !!!


They were jus tryin' to Date AOC.

[ghuns]

Why was ALL of mainstream media, the intelligence community, and social media so hellbent on insisting this laptop was a Russian ploy to help Trump win the election when the info on said laptop was easily verifiable?...

The archive's authenticity, as I documented in a video report from September, was clear from the start. Indeed, as I described in that report, I staked my career on its authenticity when I demanded that The Intercept publish my analysis of these revelations, and then resigned when its vehemently anti-Trump editors censored any discussion of those emails precisely because it was indisputable that the archive was authentic (The Intercept's former New York Times reporter James Risen was given the green light by these same editors to spread and endorse the CIA's lie, as he insisted that laptop should be ignored because "a group of former intelligence officials issued a letter saying that the Giuliani laptop story has the classic trademarks of Russian disinformation.") I knew the archive was real because all the relevant journalistic metrics that one evaluates to verify large archives of this type — including the Snowden archive and the Brazil archive which I used to report a series of investigative exposés — left no doubt that it was genuine (that includes documented verification from third parties who were included in the email chains and who showed that the emails they had in their possession matched the ones in the archive word-for-word).

For those not familiar with Glenn Greenwald, he's the guy who broke the Snowden story. He's a gay, left leaning, Pulitzer Prize winning, former 1st Amendment lawyer. He resigned from the media company he founded when the editors wouldn't let him report anything negative about Joe Biden.

It seems clear that the powers that be would stop at nothing to suppress any reporting that could be damaging to the Biden campaign.

[Jeff]

Why was ALL of mainstream media, the intelligence community, and social media so hellbent on insisting this laptop was a Russian ploy to help Trump win the election when the info on said laptop was easily verifiable?...

Because Trump couldn't be bought.
Unlike PedoJoe who has been bought many times over for the last 50 years.

Crackboy was under investigation DURING THE OBUMA ADMINISTRATION!
"The Big Guy" we all know is PedoJoe, making him a felon the moment he ran for POTUS.

[Dan_AKA_ROY23]

Geraldo Rivera radio show (Cleveland, not national) talking about this and the huge ramifications. Polling suggesting had the voters known this truth, it could have swung the vote by as much as 10%. And now Joe Biden is under intense scrutiny (now that the MSM, aka NY Times, has come out and admitted this).

This is huge!

[Shazam/TPP]

   tell me when it becomes huge, the msm will never allow it.

as others on here have said, those conspiracy stories.... well they're all coming true..

now they are pushing the new omicron variant ba.2

don't look behind the curtain it's just a figment of your imagination

[mayday]

Because Trump couldn't be bought.
Unlike PedoJoe who has been bought many times over for the last 50 years.

so true but we are running out of time for the "Save America Again" campaign

[beej]

I have been upset about the state of the media for years (the fact that there is basically a left and a right media which amounts to a left and right propaganda machine rather than news reports) but this is a whole new level, when the tech companies can suppress a story reported on by one or the other side, it will eventually lead to a revolt if left unchecked.

I don't want news stories suppressed even if they reflect negatively on the candidate I vote for.

[Smit]

I have been upset about the state of the media for years (the fact that there is basically a left and a right media which amounts to a left and right propaganda machine rather than news reports) but this is a whole new level, when the tech companies can suppress a story reported on by one or the other side, it will eventually lead to a revolt if left unchecked.

I don't want news stories suppressed even if they reflect negatively on the candidate I vote for.

I want news sites to report real, factual, impartial news to the best of their abilities. They should verify their news to the best of their ability, and they shouldn't repeat "news" (propaganda) from either right or left wing propaganda sites that cannot be verified.

I agree that nonpartisan news organizations also shouldn't suppress real, factual news that reflects poorly on any candidate.

Personally I see a lot of anger from partisans when real news sites don't print propaganda because partisans, of course, interpret that as the news organizations being biased because they don't report manufactured "scandals."

The tech companies are powerful vehicles for both information and disinformation. They should also do their best to make sure their platforms are not used to damage the country by spreading misinformation and propaganda. Yes, that means someone must make the decision on what to allow and what not to allow and some people will end up pissed about it. It appears that's unavoidable.

The bottom line is if you want real information go to real news sites that at least try to provide the truth. If you want propaganda go to the sites that provide your propaganda of choice.

Just sayin. 

[beej]

The bottom line is if you want real information go to real news sites that at least try to provide the truth. If you want propaganda go to the sites that provide your propaganda of choice.

ALL of the outlets that people claim to be unbiased were saying the same thing. that it was Russian propaganda. Glen Greenwald was able to verify the emails as authentic quickly after the New York Post revealed them. The NYTimes had the emails before Greenwald and decided not to run the story, because they supposedly could not be verified.  Facebook changed it's algorithms to suppress the story until fact checkers could verify it, however the fact checkers "conveniently" never got to it and still haven't.

Politico ran the first story disputing it by stating that 12 "unnamed" intelligence people said that "might" be Russian propaganda then CNN and most other outlets used that story to say that it "indeed was" to start an echo chamber, which, in a few days, the media then began to call it "now debunked" or "widely disputed".

so who do you suggest, are the outlets you can trust to tell the truth? The AP? here is a link to their story copying the echo rather than investigating the truth.

https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-russia-024b553e9a4ffb2716286dd134876f8a

Yet Giuliani says foreign sources didn't provide the Hunter Biden emails. He says a laptop containing the emails and intimate photos was simply abandoned in a Delaware repair shop and the shop owner reached out to Giuliani's lawyer.

That hasn't stopped the FBI from investigating whether the emails are part of a foreign influence operation. The emails have surfaced as U.S. officials have been warning that Russia, which backed Trump's 2016 campaign through hacking of Democratic emails and a covert social media campaign, is interfering again this year. The latest episode with Giuliani underscores the risk he poses to a White House that spent years confronted by a federal investigation into whether Trump associates had coordinated with Russia.

Giuliani was central to advancing a discredited theory that Ukraine, not Russia, had interfered in the 2016 election.

A Real Clear Investigation shows it was not discredited at all but, in fact, truth.
https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2022/03/10/how_ukraine_conspired_with_dems_against_trump_to_prevent_the_kind_of_war_happening_now_under_biden_820873.html

In April 2015, the DNC hired Chalupa as a $5,000-a-month consultant, according to a copy of her contract, which ran through the 2016 election cycle. (Years earlier, Chalupa had worked full-time for the DNC as part of the senior leadership team advising Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz.) After Trump threw his hat in the ring in June 2015, Chalupa grew concerned that Manafort was or would be involved with his campaign since Manafort had known Trump for decades and lived in Trump Tower. She expressed her concerns to top DNC officials and "the DNC asked me to do a hit on Trump," according to a transcript of a 2019 interview on her sister's podcast. (Andrea Chalupa, who describes herself as a journalist, boasted in a November 2016 tweet: "My sister led Trump/Russia research at DNC.")

Chalupa began encouraging journalists both in America and Ukraine to dig into Manafort's dealings in Ukraine and expose his alleged Russian connections. She fed unsubstantiated rumors, tips and leads to the Washington Post and New York Times, as well as CNN, speaking to reporters on background so a DNC operative wouldn't be sourced.

"I spent many, many hours working with reporters on background, directing them to contacts and sources, and giving them information," Chalupa said.

But no reporter worked closer with her than Yahoo News correspondent Michael Isikoff. He even accompanied her to the Ukrainian Embassy, where they brainstormed attacks on Manafort and Trump, according to FEC case files.

Chalupa was also sounding alarm bells in the White House. In November 2015, for example, she set up a White House meeting between a Ukrainian delegation including Ukraine Ambassador Valeriy Chaly and NSC advisers – among them Eric Ciaramella, a young CIA analyst on loan to the White House who later would play a significant role as anonymous "whistleblower" in Trump's first impeachment. In addition to Putin's aggression, the group discussed the alleged security threat from Manafort. Chalupa was back in the White House in December. All told, she would visit the Obama White House at least 27 times, Secret Service logs show, including attending at least one event with the president in 2016.

[beej]

The AP has considerably more resources than Real Clear Politics, but had, amazingly, no curiosity about any of this. best to just leave it at "widely discredited", I guess.

And I have to wonder, why is the NYT reporting it as fact now? what is going on behind the scenes that they felt like they should run the story? Is it because they have already accomplished their purpose? what they are doing, whether they want to admit it or not, is feeding the conspiracy theorists by burying and mislabeling the truth.

[ghuns]

It's not conspiracy theory at this point, it's just plain old conspiracy.

The mainstream media, social media, and members of the intelligence community conspired to hide information that might have been damaging to Biden's campaign.

They did this to help make sure Trump lost.

I've never been a Trump fan. Though I would admit I'd prefer him to Biden. Who wouldn't at this point? But this should be bigger than Watergate.

[Incogneeto]

I want news sites to report real, factual, impartial news to the best of their abilities. They should verify their news to the best of their ability, and they shouldn't repeat "news" (propaganda) from either right or left wing propaganda sites that cannot be verified.

I agree that nonpartisan news organizations also shouldn't suppress real, factual news that reflects poorly on any candidate.


Just sayin. 

Ya see?? up to this point I completely agree with you.

And to this point,You would think at least one set of people would figure out a site you could trust....

Not gonna happen.


Too much money to be had,

https://nypost.com/2022/03/09/jeff-zucker-reaches-settlement-in-tens-of-millions-with-warnermedia-cnn-report/?msclkid=f6eeddb0a70211ecb663e613bc8f55ab

[CNCAppsJames]

New York Slimes and the people it employs are steaming piles of bovine excrement deserving to get Charlie Hebdo'd. They literally actively supressed a significant FACT for the sole purpose to sway a presidential election. That deserves the firing squad IMHO.