I Shrugged wrote: ↑Thu Sep 01, 2022 7:47 pm
vnatale wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 7:03 pm
I Shrugged wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 2:30 pm
vnatale wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 1:15 pm
I Shrugged wrote: ↑Wed Aug 31, 2022 12:36 pm
Well, what is on the laptop spells out big time influence peddling by Hunter, with a cut going to Joe. Maybe this will get investigated eventually.
But yeah, it’s just Russian disinformation, nothing to see here. Move along.
As much as I dislike Joe Biden .... he and his son are two different people.
Has anything been proven that he did this with his father's knowledge? If not, then how should it affect how someone evaluates his father?
It will take investigations to prove it. But on the surface the email evidence looks damning. If you haven't looked at it all, there isn't much use in me trying to tell you about it, really. Not trying to be mean, just that if you are interested, the laptop info is out there for review.
I did start looking into it but the extremely extensive Wikipedia article I was reading but it was far too long for my interest to read it all.
The article was extremely well documented. I find it far more convincing than all the right wing media outlets with their slants and positions not based upon evidence.
If you only read left leaning sites such as Wikipedia, you’ll only see what they want you to see. You seem unwilling to consider “right wing” information. You are just doing the confirmation bias thing. I read lefty sites all the time.
The NY Post broke the story. Why not read it there and actually see it unfiltered?
1. I've not detected when I read Wikipedia that it is left-leaning. Most of what I use it for has no political content to it at all and the information I find on those topics are extremely well documented. I'd never be able to find that level of detail if I spent hours and hours and hours doing my own searching on the internet.
2. I'm not unwilling to consider "right wing" information. I'm unwilling to accept biased "right wing" information. I admired Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday because while he was a definite conservative he treated his liberal and conservative guests the same way. He was hard on both of them in that he did not allow them to get away with non-answers.
3. Here are the problems with reading the NY Post story and I'll let you refute any of what the Wikipedia documented article has to say:
a. PolitiFact wrote in June 2021: "Over time, there has been less doubt that the laptop did in fact belong to Hunter Biden", concluding that the laptop "was real in the sense that it exists, but it didn't prove much", as "[n]othing from the laptop has revealed illegal or unethical behavior by Joe Biden as vice president with regard to his son's tenure as a director for Burisma..."[4] PolitiFact states that it is possible that "copies of a laptop" were obtained, instead of the actual laptop.[4]
b. On October 14, 2020, the New York Post published an article based on an email from the laptop about a purported meeting between then vice president Joe Biden and the Burisma advisor Vadym Pozharskyi. The Biden campaign denied Joe Biden had any meeting with Pozharskyi and said that if they had ever met, it would have been a brief encounter.[6] Witnesses at the dinner where they allegedly met said Biden briefly passed by to see an old friend. The Post reported in its story that Pozharskyi declined to comment, and he did not comment to a Politico journalist who reported extensively on the story a year later.[7]
c. The veracity of the Post's reporting was strongly questioned by most mainstream media outlets,
analysts, and
intelligence officials due to the unknown origin and chain of custody of the laptop and the provenance of its contents and due to suspicion that it may have been used as part of a disinformation campaign by Russian intelligence or its proxies.[10][11][12]
d. On October 14, 2020, the New York Post published articles containing purported emails of unknown authorship which suggested that Hunter Biden provided an "opportunity" to Vadym Pozharskyi, an advisor to the board of Burisma, to meet his father, then-Vice President Joe Biden.[15][16][17] Joe Biden stated in September 2019 that he had never spoken to his son about his foreign business dealings.[18] His presidential campaign denied such a meeting took place and stated the New York Post had never contacted them "about the critical elements of this story".[19] Michael Carpenter, Vice President Biden's foreign policy adviser in 2015, told The Washington Post that he had accompanied Biden during all of his meetings about Ukraine and that, "He never met with [Pozharskyi]." He added, "In fact, I had never heard of this guy until the New York Post story broke."[20] One of the purported emails showed Pozharskyi saying he would share information with Amos Hochstein, a State Department advisor close to Vice President Biden, though Hochstein stated,
"The Republican Senate investigation subpoenaed all my records, including emails and calendars and found no mention of this man. I led the US energy efforts in Ukraine and never even heard of him before yesterday."[21] The New York Post published images and PDF copies of the alleged emails, but their authenticity and origin have not been determined.[22] According to an investigation by The New York Times,
editors at the New York Post "pressed staff members to add their bylines to the story", and at least one refused, in addition to the original author, reportedly because of a lack of confidence in its credibility. Of the two writers eventually credited on the article,
the second did not know her name was attached to it until after The Post published it.[23] In its opening sentence, the New York Post story misleadingly asserted "the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor who was investigating" Burisma,
despite the fact that Shokin had not pursued an investigation into Burisma's founder.[20] The opening sentence also misleadingly stated that Hunter Biden introduced his father to Pozharskyi,
but the purported email from Pozharskyi only mentioned an invitation and "opportunity" for the men to meet.[24][25]
I could go on and on and on quoting from the highly detailed, documented Wikipedia article but tell me again why I should read that NY Post article?
If I wrote an article about you full of inaccuracies, would you want anyone recommending to someone else to read that article? Like it has truth just because it was written?