91

Yeah… because you don’t want to think about it because if you do then you have to question the veracity of the contents of the laptop and you don’t want to do that.

92

Said the poster that replied to a post documenting that the NYTs admitted they were wrong about Hunter’s laptop by talking about how the DOJ was having a problem with their tax case against Hunter.

2 Likes
93

…

94

Yeah… people should read the NYT article that is causing the uproar.

95

…

96

Copy it then. I am not feeding money to that lying rag.

2 Likes
97

Chief gaslighter.

98

I get it.

Actually reading what the NYT says is too hard.

99

I read it…had to dance around their stupid paywall but yeah I read it yesterday…I have to give the liberal times $$$ to go back again and I’m not doing that.

It does not say what you say it says. It says he borrowed $$ to pay a million dollar tax bill. Says a grand jury is hearing his case…says that just because he paid his taxes doesn’t mean he’s off the hook for tax fraud…the stuff about the laptop is actually more than halfway down. Yes it acknowledges that it’s difficult to prosecute but also highlights the multiple fronts on which that pathetic drugged out porn addict is being investigated…

So surprise surprise your interpretation is less than accurate. I’m shocked I tell you.

The bottom line is big tech and lib media buried that story and banned its distribution before the last election. The NY Post did a good job presenting the story and it was hidden from public view before the election. Trump brought it up in a debate Chris Wallace cut him off. Chuck Todd said something like “I’m sick of hearing about it” when Ron Johnson brought up the story on his Sunday show. To try to suggest that the left did anything but run an unprecedented coordinated attack not just on the content of that story but on the actual ability of anyone to even see it is a damned lie.

For you to argue the contrary is…predictable but is…less than accurate.

I’m shocked…shocked I tell you.

3 Likes
100

Does being a druggie porn addict define him? If not why address him that way?

Just wondering

101

The post couldn’t get their journalists to sign off on the story in October of 2020 and are now blaming the Times. I wonder why.

102

And they are mischaracterizing what the times article said.

103

Not really. The sentence they are referring to refers to the laptop not its content. The sentence in the Times article isn’t damning, but it is an admission that it may very well be Hunters laptop regardless of added content.

104

I may have missed it but I don’t remember seeing the times say the laptop isn’t real.

105

They did beat the heck out of the topic that the physical laptop wasn’t authenticated and all that that implies

106

Do people not know about incognito mode?

So ignored the whole part about how the DOJ is having a hard time bringing a FARA violation and if they do it would likely be resolved by having him pay a fine and retroactively registering which would endanger any money laundering charge because the crime that it would be attached to… which is the FARA violation would be moot.

Missed all of that?

Anyone can go back on this website and see what I have been saying about Hunter Biden… even the report that Sen Johnson put forth where I said that the only thing that looked like it would have teeth is a pretty sketchy thing about some credit cards. That there is likely some financial shenanigans that could endanger him.

What hasn’t been shown in any way other than innuendo is that President Biden has any connection to this.

Seriously… the laptop story is a stinker. The way it came into being seriously questionable and no one who looks at it takes the story seriously.

107

Yeah… the WSJ was going to run it originally but they couldn’t confirm stuff in it because Guiliani was being super squirrelly. The Post had to find a literal nobody to sign their name to thing for them to run with it.

108

They never said that the laptop doesn’t exist.

That is the part that the right wing rage machine is making up.

1 Like
109

You seem to think the important part of this whole discussion is what the times story says.

It’s not…I m sure there are some things that are harder to convict on than others. Face it…little porn star drug addict hunter son of president joe isn’t going to be held accountable for squat as long as daddy is in the White House.

None of that matters…what matters is last October were all selling the soggy laptop Russian disinformation whatever angle. Y’all wetlrevwtobg. Last October big media and big tech all buried the story…a very newsworthy story. One if the easiest ways to get silenced in an interview or kicked off of social media was to simply share honest reporting about that laptop.

I don’t give a ■■■■ what you claim about your personal consistency…yay…you wanna cookie? (By the way I’m sugar coating this is get banned if I shared my real thoughts about you lefties).

The treatment of hunters laptop was a coverup, information significant to the last election was withheld from the American people. We were told the laptop was a fake , a fraud, didn’t exist, now the ole gray lady has admitted that it’s credible. If it’s credible now it was credible then.

I don’t know what pisses me if more, the endless lying or the snarky snooty attitudes with which the lies are presented.

2 Likes
110

It wasn’t.

No one bit on the story.

That is what is most upsetting to all y’all

1 Like