Originally posted by Silent MasterThat's part of the problem isn't it? They want to get a copy of this Hard Drive to verify it independently but they aren't being allowed to.
Those organizations don't have access to the HD, so how can they verify or debunk the rumors?
It also doesn't take a genius to see how some of the claims fall apart slightly under scrutiny of how the events transpired.
We aren't even sure this Hard Drive is Hunter's
Originally posted by Silent Master
Those organizations don't have access to the HD, so how can they verify or debunk the rumors?
True. It has been turned over to the FBI and the state police. So at no point will the entire situation lend itself to "plausible deniability" by the FBI's part or the police's part. Since the data was obtained and copies made before handing it over to the authorities, if they take no action, it would be obvious corruption.
But these news orgs do not have access to the data so they cannot state it is shoddy data. That's completely baseless. What we do know is the FBI confirmed the data is legit and not part of a Russian disinformation scheme meaning the "shoddy data" argument is bullshit.
@Newjak, in case you thought I was being passive aggressive. I'm referring to your post, specifically. I'm being aggressive-aggressive. 🙂
Originally posted by dadudemonCan you please show where the F.B.I. confirmed this?
True. It has been turned over to the FBI and the state police. So at no point will the entire situation lend itself to "plausible deniability" by the FBI's part or the police's part. Since the data was obtained and copies made before handing it over to the authorities, if they take no action, it would be obvious corruption.But these news orgs do not have access to the data so they cannot state it is shoddy data. That's completely baseless. What we do know is the FBI confirmed the data is legit and not part of a Russian disinformation scheme meaning the "shoddy data" argument is bullshit.
@Newjak, in case you thought I was being passive aggressive. I'm referring to your post, specifically. I'm being aggressive-aggressive. 🙂
Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
FACT: Neither Hunter or his father has yet to deny that those emails are actually his.I know it's hard for you anti-Trump snowflakes like Newjack to accept reality. Keep telling yourselves that those emails aren't really Hunter's. Whatever helps you all sleep at night. 😉
dude I'm an anti-trump snowflake too let me get a namedrop
Originally posted by Newjak
Can you please show where the F.B.I. confirmed this?
Did you try searching for it, first, before "citation needed" trolling?
I'll get you started:
Originally posted by dadudemonI did in fact. Which is why I'm asking you for your sources. Because I haven't found one where the F.B.I explicitly confirms they are in possession of Hunter's laptop. 🙄
Did you try searching for it, first, before "citation needed" trolling?I'll get you started:
Originally posted by Newjak
I did in fact. Which is why I'm asking you for your sources. Because I haven't found one where the F.B.I explicitly confirms they are in possession of Hunter's laptop. 🙄
Seems the FBI has remained overall quiet on subjects concerning the alleged Hunter Biden hard-drive.
"The FBI has declined to comment, refusing to either confirm or deny the existence of an investigation." -snip
Originally posted by NewjakAre you saying DDM is gaslighting Newjak? If so, I no long need to continue my fact checking of DDM. I will kindly hand over DDM fact checking duty to you. At present the Washington Post has Trump at 20,000 plus lies. Whirly has DDM a meagre 150,000,000, or was that Goku's power level fighting Frieza. When it gets to the volume of DDM's untruths my scouter generally explodes.
I did in fact. Which is why I'm asking you for your sources. Because I haven't found one where the F.B.I explicitly confirms they are in possession of Hunter's laptop. 🙄
Originally posted by Newjak
I did in fact. Which is why I'm asking you for your sources. Because I haven't found one where the F.B.I explicitly confirms they are in possession of Hunter's laptop. 🙄
1. I found it with the link I shared with you. It's VERY easy to find and you're just citation trolling, like I said.
2. I never once said they were in possession of Hunter Biden's laptop. This is a strawman and a goalpost move at the same time. Stop and think about it: how could they turn over 1 laptop to multiple authorities? Is this Schrodinger's laptop? I'll give you a hint. Start's with a "c" and it doesn't rhyme with runt.
Originally posted by Silent Master
Those organizations don't have access to the HD, so how can they verify or debunk the rumors?
With their feelings. Even the "25 former intel experts" politico busted out in a different article to say this was russia admitted they had no evidence and it was just a "suspicion".
Originally posted by Newjak
That's part of the problem isn't it? They want to get a copy of this Hard Drive to verify it independently but they aren't being allowed to.It also doesn't take a genius to see how some of the claims fall apart slightly under scrutiny of how the events transpired.
We aren't even sure this Hard Drive is Hunter's
The other issue is that suddenly now stories need to be thoroughly verified, but only if they make Biden look bad.
I find it odd people didn't use similar standards for the story about Russian bounties, but then again that isn't a story that would hurt Joe Biden so why would they?
Originally posted by SurturI fact check DDM all the time Surt!
The other issue is that suddenly now stories need to be thoroughly verified, but only if they make Biden look bad.I find it odd people didn't use similar standards for the story about Russian bounties, but then again that isn't a story that would hurt Joe Biden so why would they?
Originally posted by SurturActually I and all other Democrats I know wanted it to be thoroughly verified.
The other issue is that suddenly now stories need to be thoroughly verified, but only if they make Biden look bad.I find it odd people didn't use similar standards for the story about Russian bounties, but then again that isn't a story that would hurt Joe Biden so why would they?
I wanted it then and I want it now. The problem is that the verification process here has been shoddy at best from the right.
Originally posted by Newjak
Actually I and all other Democrats I know wanted it to be thoroughly verified.I wanted it then and I want it now. The problem is that the verification process here has been shoddy at best from the right.
The verification process is shady from the left too. The russian bounties story still has not been verified lol. Still. And don't even make me bring up Bret Kavanaugh.
Maybe you personally wanted more verification and that is cool but a lot of high profile people with way more power than you...did not.
And Big Tech did not suppress that unverified bounties story at all. Didn't suppress the unverified Kavanaugh stories. Didn't suppress the unverified dossier.
You see a pattern bro?
Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
I fact check DDM all the time Surt!
You yourself took the russian bounties story as truth without any verification lol.
And then weeks later when I pointed out the pentagon was saying still not verified you and your pals took the weasel route of "haa well it means it still could be verified!" completely missing the point that you had already behaved as if it had been verified.
But you do you 🙂