Hunter Biden's Laptop [Merged]

[+DieChecker]

28 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Even if Joe ended up being the big guy, would there be any point in pursuing it now that Trump has opened the can't impeach a sitting president can of worms? 

Trump was impeached twice. He only wasn't convicted and driven from office because the Senate needs a 2/3 rd vote to convict.

The points to be made are several. This would be evidence Joe lied. It could also show he took foreign money. Neither is a crime, just embarrassing. And third, it illustrates that our own bias media seeks to control the elections, as much as any politician does.

[Golden Duck]

On 3/21/2022 at 11:29 AM, Paranoid Android said:

You remember when people were being banned from social media for even sharing stories about the laptop? 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/oct/14/facebook-twitter-new-york-post-hunter-biden

Then in the immediate aftermath of social media banning the story, a story was put out there that the laptop "bears all the hallmarks of a Russian disinformation campaign". 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276

Go all the way back to October 2020 when the story first broke!

Don't remember it.  Maybe it's Fake News.

[itsnotoutthere]

11 hours ago, OverSword said:

Amazing that so many don't see the very obvious things you stated in your post.  Thank you.

They don't want to see.

[itsnotoutthere]

5 hours ago, psyche101 said:

But he turned everything he had over to the FBI.

Doesn't the lack of further action indicate it really didn't amount to much? 

[Gromdor]

5 hours ago, DieChecker said:

I thought I read the investigation was ongoing. I know he is being investigated for taxes, so maybe the laptop is involved with that. 

I'd imagine of there's email about his overseas financial ventures  that such would be included as evidence in a tax investigation.

Oh, we know now that he is under investigation.  But back then it was quite possible that the FBI was looking into it over Guiliani rather than Hunter himself.  After all they did go through the effort to see if it was Russian made or not.  Only after investigation and being found to be real, did they start investigating Hunter which led to him paying back taxes.

Regarding that- if Guiliani hadn't suppressed evidence of a crime until three weeks before an election, perhaps people would have taken it more seriously.  The timing in releasing the information to the Post made me certainly disregard it as nothing more than a political ploy, especially given the more serious nature of the allegations that were rumored to be on it by certain individuals.

[+DieChecker]

3 hours ago, Gromdor said:

Oh, we know now that he is under investigation.  But back then it was quite possible that the FBI was looking into it over Guiliani rather than Hunter himself.  After all they did go through the effort to see if it was Russian made or not.  Only after investigation and being found to be real, did they start investigating Hunter which led to him paying back taxes.

Regarding that- if Guiliani hadn't suppressed evidence of a crime until three weeks before an election, perhaps people would have taken it more seriously.  The timing in releasing the information to the Post made me certainly disregard it as nothing more than a political ploy, especially given the more serious nature of the allegations that were rumored to be on it by certain individuals.

I've often said, now and at the time, that Guiliani was more of a hindrance then a help. I still wonder why Trump put him in a position of such influence. Like hiring a clown to give a stockholders meeting.

[+OverSword]

13 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

And as far as smears go, did FOX ever retract anything or apologize?

Yes, they did a retraction about election fraud but not until a voting machine manufacturer threatened them with a lawsuit   

[+OverSword]

11 hours ago, psyche101 said:

But he turned everything he had over to the FBI.

When the computer repairman finds illegal items on your computer and hands it over the the FBI that's not you turning it in 

[itsnotoutthere]

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

When the computer repairman finds illegal items on your computer and hands it over the the FBI that's not you turning it in 

'illegal items'  hmm... And what would a laptop repairman deem illegal I wonder?  ....watch this space.

Autochthon1990:- "Okay so he ****ed up his taxes, that doesn't make him a pedophile"  Would a laptop repairman know a dodgy tax return on someones computer??? Would he hand it over to the FBI for that???

Edited March 22, 2022 by itsnotoutthere

[Gromdor]

3 hours ago, OverSword said:

When the computer repairman finds illegal items on your computer and hands it over the the FBI that's not you turning it in 

What do you call it when the computer repairman hands it to the President's lawyer then? Rudy Giuliani gives alleged Hunter Biden laptop to authorities (usatoday.com) 

[+OverSword]

22 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

What do you call it when the computer repairman hands it to the President's lawyer then? Rudy Giuliani gives alleged Hunter Biden laptop to authorities (usatoday.com) 

Turning it in?    Have it your way.  Hunter turned it in. 

Edited March 22, 2022 by OverSword

[el midgetron]

 

 

 

[+Liquid Gardens]

23 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Be honest, if Eric Trump left a laptop at a repair shop that showed him snorting cocaine with prostitutes and containing emails with Ukrainian officials thanking Eric for introducing him to his dad, as well as other emails from Ukrainian companies promising money to "the big guy" (even if "the big guy" is never mentioned by name), do you really think the media would have sat on their hands with that one?

I don't get it, who 'sat on' this?  I realize there seems to be a lot with Hunter to choose from but I see an article about a video with Hunter smoking crack with prostitutes from before the 2020 election; how long was that sat on and by who?

23 hours ago, Paranoid Android said:

Maybe how the media treated this story is how the media SHOULD treat ALL stories. It would avoid messy cases like the Covington Catholic School guy (Nick Sandman). But they don't. They consistently run with stories that favour democrats and demonise republicans, and they suppress any story that runs counter to that narrative. They'll smear the right and issue corrections two days later that virtually no one reads while simultaneously refusing to run any anti-leftist article until its been thoroughly vetted for truth, and by the time they report on it it is so far in the past that it doesn't matter anymore (like Hunter's laptop).

What is this 'the media' you are referring to?  (Psst, guess what the most watched news network is in America?  They don't favor democrats btw...)

[+OverSword]

19 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

(Psst, guess what the most watched news network is in America?  They don't favor democrats btw...)

Most watched because there is only one network catering to conservatives possibly??   All the rest of the networks, news or otherwise, are all pretty Democrat oriented or at least very PC.

[Golden Duck]

3 hours ago, OverSword said:

Turning it in?    Have it your way.  Hunter turned it in. 

What was wrong with the laptop?

[itsnotoutthere]

5 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

What was wrong with the laptop?

Kept slowing down.....too much porn.

[+OverSword]

7 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

What was wrong with the laptop?

I think it just needed to be de-fragged. 

[Golden Duck]

2 minutes ago, itsnotoutthere said:

Kept slowing down.....too much porn.

That's probably as true as the rest of the story.

We're not sure who dropped the laptop off to the shop.  Hunter uses it to back up his text messages, despite the plethora of cloud services. The issue with the laptop requires the repairman to inspect email, text, financials and multimedia.  He finds stuff so bad he hands it over to Giulliani.

[+Paranoid Android]

15 hours ago, Golden Duck said:

Don't remember it.  Maybe it's Fake News.

I checked sources for you. I was misremembering. New York Post was banned, they were unable to post because Twitter declared that they had produced "potentially hacked material" and wouldn't let them post anything unless they removed it. As it wasn't hacked, New York Post refused to remove the article, therefore they remained blocked by Twitter.

Following on from this, everyone was BLOCKED from sharing the article. This is where I was misremembering. New York Post was banned, then everyone was blocked from sharing that story, they weren't "banned". 

The point, however, is virtually the same - a true story was blocked from being shared because people who thought they knew better censored the material from being passed on. 

Quote

The Post’s primary Twitter account was locked as of 2:20 p.m. Wednesday because its articles about the messages obtained from Biden’s laptop broke the social network’s rules against “distribution of hacked material,” according to an email The Post received from Twitter.

https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/facebook-twitter-block-the-post-from-posting/

Quote

In an unprecedented step against a major news publication, Twitter blocked users from posting links to the Post story or photos from the unconfirmed report. Users attempting to share the story were shown a notice saying: “We can’t complete this request because this link has been identified by Twitter or our partners as being potentially harmful.” Users clicking or retweeting a link already posted to Twitter are shown a warning the “link may be unsafe”.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/oct/14/facebook-twitter-new-york-post-hunter-biden

 

[+Liquid Gardens]

1 hour ago, OverSword said:

Most watched because there is only one network catering to conservatives possibly??   All the rest of the networks, news or otherwise, are all pretty Democrat oriented or at least very PC.

Fox has more viewers than MSN and CNN combined, by definition, Fox is 'mainstream', more than any of its competitors.  And of course the claim, " the media is so left-biased', is itself something a story that Fox and the other assorted right-wing outlets push. 

[+OverSword]

3 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Fox has more viewers than MSN and CNN combined, by definition, Fox is 'mainstream', more than any of its competitors.  And of course the claim, " the media is so left-biased', is itself something a story that Fox and the other assorted right-wing outlets push. 

Apparently you do not watch any of the network news shows (I don't have cable).  They all seem very in line with democrats, even the local Fox affiliate, with the exception of the Sunday morning show. Maybe that's just here on the west coast? 

[CrimsonKing]

12 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Fox has more viewers than MSN and CNN combined, by definition, Fox is 'mainstream', more than any of its competitors.  And of course the claim, " the media is so left-biased', is itself something a story that Fox and the other assorted right-wing outlets push. 

I remember seeing a poll taken not to long back that showed a fairly significant amount of Democrats watch Fox News...

I actually already had had a good idea that they did, it's not just coincidence many I have spoken to through the years knew exactly word for word what O'Riley,Beck,Hannity,or Carlson said  the night before...

Heck many know all the hosts names of every show far better than I do 

Edited March 22, 2022 by CrimsonKing

[+Paranoid Android]

1 hour ago, Liquid Gardens said:

I don't get it, who 'sat on' this?  I realize there seems to be a lot with Hunter to choose from but I see an article about a video with Hunter smoking crack with prostitutes from before the 2020 election; how long was that sat on and by who?

Rudy Giuliani sat on it. The guy who sent it to him did so after he sent it to the FBI. I don't understand why there is controversy over anyone "sitting" on this story. 

 

1 hour ago, Liquid Gardens said:

What is this 'the media' you are referring to?  (Psst, guess what the most watched news network is in America?  They don't favor democrats btw...)

I don't watch Fox (not much, anyway). As was mentioned already, Fox is more popular than MSNBC or CNN because Fox is just about the only mainstream news network that caters to conservatives. When half the country only has access to one channel that reflects their values and beliefs, it stands to reason that the market share for that channel would be much higher than any other channel out there. 

But that's not the real issue. In a sense, you've actually highlighted my issue by referring to this. The real issue is that everyone KNOWS that Fox News is a conservative news outlet. They know the biases that such a slant will already have. People call it "Faux News" for that reason. However, that common knowledge is not so common when you apply it to other news networks. Many people still believe (and polls bear this out) that CNN is still "the most trusted name in news", as if it is a non-partisan centrist organistion instead of a democratic mouthpiece. 

THAT is the difference! CNN (and even MSNBC, to a lesser extent) are seen as non-biased and impartial by a much larger group of the population than Fox News will ever be, regardless of the viewership numbers. There's members here on UM who respond to conservative news outlets by pointing out to media bias websites that show them to be conservative outlets (and then the source is dismissed because it is a right wing source).... but these same people cite MSNBC videos as if they are centrist outlets providing balanced news.

When everyone "knows" Fox News is conseravtive/republican leaning, but only some people "know" that CNN/MSNBC are progressive/democrat leaning. And for that reason, CNN and MSNBC will always be better at propaganda than Fox - propaganda spreads faster when people don't realise it's propaganda.  

[+Liquid Gardens]

5 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Apparently you do not watch any of the network news shows (I don't have cable).  They all seem very in line with democrats, even the local Fox affiliate, with the exception of the Sunday morning show. Maybe that's just here on the west coast? 

I do occasionally watch the nightly news, it's a half hour and a good 10 minutes are commercials and the end of broadcast 'feel good' story.  To be honest I've tried to watch for it and if there's bias on the nightly ABC news broadcast, it seems pretty elusive to me, the show is just not long enough.  The network news shows are on channels that fill most of their day showing game shows and soaps and talk shows and primetime drivel, while Fox is filling most of that same time with yet more of their newstainment.  

[Golden Duck]

20 minutes ago, Paranoid Android said:

I checked sources for you. I was misremembering. New York Post was banned, they were unable to post because Twitter declared that they had produced "potentially hacked material" and wouldn't let them post anything unless they removed it. As it wasn't hacked, New York Post refused to remove the article, therefore they remained blocked by Twitter.

Following on from this, everyone was BLOCKED from sharing the article. This is where I was misremembering. New York Post was banned, then everyone was blocked from sharing that story, they weren't "banned". 

The point, however, is virtually the same - a true story was blocked from being shared because people who thought they knew better censored the material from being passed on. 

 

Sorry, WHAT is actually true about this story? Whatever Murdoch says, right?

Twitter suspects a story, from a conglomerate that has been convicted of hacking, might contain hacked material.