What are your thoughts that intelligence officers lied about Hunter's laptop?

[Turbo_Interceptor]

Several months ago, the DOJ confirmed Hunter's laptop was legit.

Turley goes into a bit more detail here.

Question, what are your thoughts that our top, former "intelligence" officials lied/were so stupid about that laptop being 100% real but kept, and even STILL keep, pushing the bogus "it's Russian propaganda" lie?

My crystal balls says some of the replies will be....

"Turley is a republican hack."

"Those websites are known for dis-info and are backed by Russia."

"Those former intelligence officials were just going off publicly available information and knew as much as anyone else. I believe it was Russian propaganda (and still do) and so what, they made an honest mistake, big deal."
(I guess you could say that conspiracy theorists were right about the laptop and are smarter than all of those former "intelligence" officials?)

Bonus question, what are your thoughts on the inappropriate showers with Joe Biden that Ashley Biden wrote about in her infamous diary? (Is the media and former "intelligence" officials still saying it's fake? So fake they raided people over it.

My crystal balls says the replies will be, ......

"Ashley didn't write that, it's Russian propaganda!"

"Who HASN'T taken an inappropriate with their daughter? Big deal."

"Orange man bad."

For the record, I think both political parties are corrupt to the core and don't vote because it's pointless. To me, it's just interesting that liberals, BY FAR, defend their side, no_matter_what evidence they are presented with, way more than conservatives when presented with evidence of their party doing something shady/disgusted/illegal. It's as if you all have some collective head injury that prevents you from seeing reality.

 

[AdenTheThird]

Fiddle-dee-dee. I smell a political bias.

It is true that both political parties have deep-seated corruption and skeletons in their closets. However, a good indicator of what party a particular person is sympathetic towards is which party they see as more honest. Like your excerpt here:

To me, it's just interesting that liberals, BY FAR, defend their side, no_matter_what evidence they are presented with, way more than conservatives when presented with evidence of their party doing something shady/disgusted/illegal. It's as if you all have some collective head injury that prevents you from seeing reality.

In this paragraph, we have:
1. An almost certain right-wing bias (user sees Republicans as far more honest than Democrats)
2. An unprovable claim (Republicans are more honest about shady dealings than Democrats, which really can't be definitively proven)
3. Dehumanization (Associating liberalism with a "collective head injury" and suggesting that no Democrat is capable of rational thought).

Of course, you aren't the only person saying things like this--it happens often here, but usually the other way around (Liberal posters making snide comments about Republicans in a very similar format). I just wanted to point that out.

You've also created an extremely pointed frame for replies, dismissing potential talking points/opposing views in a snarky and rude manner. This is not helpful for fruitful discourse and only serves to polarize yourself and others. Keep in mind that, in my experience, there are many more left-wing users here than right-wing (that post on political threads like this one, at least).

All that being said, from an observational standpoint, Hunter Biden's laptop has been used predominantly as a gotcha by political opponents of Joe Biden in an attempt to undermine his support from Americans. The laptop being Biden's has been known for a while, and the contents of said laptop have been over-speculated and blown entirely out of proportion. Most of the fringe conspiracy theories surrounding the laptop's contents have been either debunked or weren't reliable to begin with. Of course, if wrongdoing has been committed, then a person should be held accountable for that, but there's a strong emphasis on the if in this case. Hunter's struggles with drug use were known before any of this controversy came to be (as he himself has even emphasized).

The entire argument comes off as tired and worn-out to most politically neutral or left leaning people today. The laptop will be entered as evidence in Hunter's trial and there's no reason to doubt the thoroughness of the digital forensic analysis. Until then, this theory hardly has any tangible merit--especially when attempting to connect the laptop to Joe Biden.

Accusations surrounding the Bidens pale especially when juxtaposed with former President Trump, who is currently facing several cases of both civil and criminal charges. Unlike this tangent, the accusations surrounding Trump have verifiable and traceable backing, hence their prevalence to become actual trials and not dismissals. As a side effect of this, and how massive Trump's legal problems have become, attempts to redirect attention ("But what about Hunter Biden's laptop???") come off as little more than last-shot desperation.

I, personally, am not left or right leaning and strive to be as objective and neutral as possible. My above statements reflect this philosophy.

 

[Smoker1]

Way I see it, both sides will claim their "Leader" can do no wrong, Sites that have negative items about them are Fake, not Legit, you name it. Even when it is backed up with Evidence and proof, there will be those claiming it is made up, doctored, you name it. Well hell, with the way Technology is these Days, then how can we believe anything unless you actually see it yourself????? I guess nothing happens, no matter how horrific, and everyone is just Actors??????? Besides, unless you can prove beyond the shadow of a doubt something is fake, dont go off of what some off the wall Site says. News Organizations can not just make something up and run with it, without actual proof. Otherwise, they can be held liable for damages.

 

[AdenTheThird]

Edit to add context for the Ashley Biden diary:

This is another tired talking point. The diary, which was meant as an emotional healing support tool for Ashley, was stolen and peddled to a conservative group without her consent or knowledge. The people who stole the diary have been tried and sentenced for theft, and the actual contents of the diary have not been confirmed by the Department of Justice. The accusations against Joe Biden are largely speculative (taken out off context, at the very least). Ashley is an adult and more than capable of bringing any potential concerns to law enforcement. That's her decision and responsibility, and definitely not the responsibility of political opponents who could gain off of exaggeration and speculation of what I imagine was a horrific experience for Ashley (who has publicly commented her distress at her personal diary being publicly viewable).

Like the laptop controversy, this story is often spun as a desperate attempt to undermine President Biden's integrity, and comes off as such. There isn't much more to say on this manner.

Post automatically merged: May 27, 2024

Well hell, with the way Technology is these Days, then how can we believe anything unless you actually see it yourself?????

This primarily implies a fundamental misunderstanding of news, media, and technology, which isn't helpful and purely speculative. Technology, like any other media, is susceptible to corruption, bias, and misinformation, but that does not automatically dismiss all technology as corrupt. There's a crucial distinction there.

Besides, unless you can prove beyond the shadow of a doubt something is fake, dont go off of what some off the wall Site says. News Organizations can not just make something up and run with it, without actual proof. Otherwise, they can be held liable for damages.

This is correct and verifiable, most frequently with fringe news sites (more often far-right than far-left, such as Alex Jones). Media bias checkers are a good way to check the truthfulness of a website or news network as well. And if a particular source strays too far from the truth (and, importantly, gains enough momentum while doing so), they can be held liable legally for spreading misinformation. This has happened in the past.