Zuckerberg: Yes, Facebook kept Hunter Biden's laptop under wraps Facebook limited the visibility of the New York Post's story about Hunter Biden's laptop on the social media platform while it was being fact-checked after receiving warnings from the FBI of disinformation campaigns, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg told the Joe Rogan Experience on Thursday. Zuckerberg took to the former Fear Factor …
Yeah, it was an attempt to recapture the magic of 'But Her Emails!' for 2020. Mishandling of official communication matters a lot, unless it's a Republican doing it.
In all probability they'll be back in charge of the House as of next January so expect endless investigations and committees on Hunter Biden's laptop, along with plenty of hearings in which the committee members take turns to give twenty-minute non-fact-checked discourses with a nominal question mark at the end.
> Yeah, it was an attempt to recapture the magic of 'But Her Emails!' for 2020. Mishandling of official communication matters a lot, unless it's a Republican doing it.
The inverse is also true for the other side. Just as if Republicans had got Facebook to suppress a story around voting time you'd probably be mentioning that right now.
The rules need to be the same for both parties. They are football teams to support in spite of all the facts.
The GQP want to prosecute Hunter and Joe Biden for what was supposedly contained on that laptop.
I have to ask how many hands has it been through already and was a chain of custody maintained?
Then there is the US thing called 'Statute of Limitations' If these crimes were allegedly committed then No 46 was Veep then the cut-off date must be close to happening.
I'd like to see some actual policies from the GQP and not just a plan to spend the next two years on a plethora of witchhunt, fire the entirety of the DOJ, IRS, EPA and a dozen other agencies.
Oh, and carry on banning things that 99.99% people don't have an issue with all while praying homage to No 45 as Mar-a-Lago
"Because we loathe corruption, self-advancement and the misuse of power, and we will do all in our power to root it out.Hunter Biden & his Laptop — America's Biggest Threat."
Am I the only one who can see he's "quoting" a "typical" republican here, not actually making a statement?
Well, it's only a saying. And as such sayings go, whether Dutch or not, that doesn't mean it is always true, or always untrue, but only that it might be true-ish in a general sense, ... but mainly the relevance is not an absolute true/false thing, but that the sort of thing indicated by the saying might be worth keeping in mind as a possibility.
Oh! I didn't realise it was a "Dutch saying" in the same way we have "Dutch uncle", "double Dutch", "Dutch oven", "Dutch courage", and various other things, where for rather cobwebby historical reasons involving an Anglo-Dutch war or whatever, "Dutch" was pre- or post-pended to various then-contemporaneous English terminology in order to imply it was intrinsically bad or to cast baseless doubt. I just thought the subject of our conversation was a saying sometime used by our (now) very great fiends in the Netherlands.
On the whole, it's probably not considered very suitable to use "Dutch" in that way any more. So it's just as well you use the less-problematic "slimy" instead.
:-)
Versions of that saying you probably find in every language.
For instance, "don't judge others by your own standards".
And in Swedish and German. "genom sig själv känner man andra", and "man soll nicht von sich auf andere schließen".
And for a Finnish, a more interesting one , Ryssä on Ryssä vaikka voissa paistaisi".
Apparently the story was explosive enough for Greenwald (Of Snowden, Citizen 4 fame) to resign from the organisation (The Intercept) he helped setup:
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/my-resignation-from-the-intercept
"Publication of that initial New York Post story provoked a highly unusual censorship campaign by Facebook and Twitter. Facebook, through a long-time former Democratic Party operative, vowed to suppress the story pending its “fact-check,” one that has as of yet produced no public conclusions. And while Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey apologized for Twitter’s handling of the censorship and reversed the policy that led to the blocking of all links the story, the New York Post, the nation’s fourth-largest newspaper, continues to be locked out of its Twitter account, unable to post as the election approaches, for almost two weeks."
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-biden-censored
You just quoted Greenwald himself. How about: https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/greenwald-intercept-feud/2021/05/20/34732c92-b727-11eb-a5fe-bb49dc89a248_story.html
This was all just before Greenwald revealed himself as a vindictive right wing conspiracy nut.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/is-glenn-greenwald-the-new-master-of-right-wing-media
Nice hatchet job.
Perhaps it's time to consider, just consider, the possibility that left-leaning media, including the Intercept, aren't as fair and openminded as they'd like you to believe? And a journalist of real integrity might be repulsed by the level of partisanship he sees around him? At which point, what other platform does he have?
Perhaps it's time to consider, just consider, the possibility that I've been following this is detail for many years, and I posted 2 links because I didn't feel like posting a thesis as my response?
Everything here is easily verifiable.
Still kudos to you for attempting to argue that supporting and following right wing nut-jobs shows that all the other left wing journalists are partisan hacks. Of course, Fox would be the bastion of bi-partisanship, right?
Thanks for the kudos.
Whatever you think of them, it's demonstrably true that a large number of journalists are partisan hacks, and a large number of those are left-leaning. Natural auto-filtering ensures that the most mindlessly partisan are those who make the most noise. That applies on both sides.
Fox isn't a bastion of anything. Since I don't watch it, I'm not really qualified to comment on what, if anything, it's good for. (But since I spent more than ten years working as a journalist, I do feel qualified to comment in general terms on that profession.)
If you've been following the subject in detail for years, you should know I'm absolutely going to judge your position by the quality of the links you choose to represent it.
"he does ultimately see the value of in-person interaction, and feels that will never be entirely replaced with technology
That's nice to know seeing how 'influential' he is, and he's right in at least one critical respect. Were in-person interaction to be entirely replaced with technology of the metaverse kind, the human species would become extinct.
That's exactly what journalists already spend practically all their time doing.
If they'd just report facts, every news article would be a great deal shorter. (The only exception being those that reproduce whole speeches.)
The trouble is, nobody - for statistical values of "nobody" - wants facts at all. They want to be told a story. And so news reporting has become a game of who can tell the most compelling story. Which is inherently biased, because different stories appeal to different people.
Hunter Biden's laptop shows that his father was setting up his son jobs in China, Ukraine, US, etc, and taking massive kickbacks as a result of that. The other stuff (Hunter's crack addiction and pay-for-sex and racism just show us the quality of the Biden family). There there is the rape allegations against Joe Biden, all suppressed by the MSM. Joe Biden is easily the most incompetent President in US history, with vast evidence to show that. It's amazing how people on here (Labour voters no doubt) will bend over backwards to ignore all of the vast corruption in the Biden family, all of the lies and misinformation from Biden and the Biden administration and continue to froth at the mouth due to their Trump Derangement Syndrome. I don't care if you don't like Trump, that's irrelevant, he's a narcissist, but you are an incompetent fool and lacking in intellect if you do the "but but but Trump!" whataboutism when it comes to the *massive* corruption of the currently sitting President of the USA.
> Hunter Biden's laptop shows that his father was setting up his son jobs in China, Ukraine, US, etc, and taking massive kickbacks as a result of that.
No, it doesn't; it shows that, at some point before October 2020, files alleging that were stored on a laptop that Hunter Biden had until April 2019. The agent of delivery was Rudy Giuliani, whom the New York State Bar Association is currently evaluating for disbarment based on his willingness to lie and mislead.
> I don't care if you don't like Trump
It's pretty clear that you do.
The important part that is missing is that:
1) Biden's haven't been able to point anything that is untrue
2) Multiple reporters from Washington Post, to NY Times verified the veracity of the emails by contacting others in the email chain. One even verified that the "big guy" in the email chain was referring to Joe Biden.
There is no need for "Trump whataboutism", it is possible for both Hunter Biden and Donald Trump to be crooks.
In fact, if Hunter Biden has committed crimes then the idea that both have done so is absolutely certain because we already know about many many crimes Trump committed and learn of more every week.
This isn't about Hunter Biden's crimes, it's about Joe Biden's crimes. There's far more evidence of Joe Biden running an expensive pay-for-play scheme than what was found on Hunter's laptop. Hunter's laptop has never been refuted, everything in it has so far stood the test, and in a court of law, that laptop would absolutely be allowed into evidence.
The fact remains, Joe Biden is a criminal who was disqualified from the office of the President before he was ever elected for the first time simply by what came out of his mouth. Everything he did since then was to benefit Joe Biden and he ran these schemes from the minute he made the Senate, he doubled down when he became VP.
> There's far more evidence of Joe Biden running an expensive pay-for-play scheme than what was found on Hunter's laptop. Hunter's laptop has never been refuted
From the school of "if Fox, OAN, and my crazy uncle on Facebook repeat it enough to one another, it becomes plenty of evidence".
There is zero evidence of that, except in the fever dreams of idiots like Hannity.
There is 100000000000x more evidence of Trump crimes than Joe Biden crimes, so I'm all for prosecuting them both to the fullest extent of the law for any crimes there is sufficient actual factual evidence they may have committed. How about you?
Or are you going to whine and complain that all the investigations against Trump are politically founded like his apologists keep doing despite the Mt. Everest sized pile of evidence?
"There is zero evidence of that, except in the fever dreams of idiots like Hannity.
There is 100000000000x more evidence of Trump crimes than Joe Biden crimes"
So, you want to prosecute Trumpf on zero evidence?
Edited because I remembered people usually disconect their brains when it comes to anything political, so please let me remind you what happens when you multiply by zero.
No I want to prosecute Trump on the vast amount of evidence that does exist about his crimes. Only a blind follower of the orange idiot could have listened to the Jan. 6 evidence and believe there is no evidence he has committed huge crimes against the United States by trying to overthrow the results of a lawful election, using his false claims about fraud to incite his supporters to riot at the capitol as a way of preventing certification of the election and putting the country into chaos.
Or listened to the tape of the call where he pleaded and obliquely threatened Georgia's secretary of state to "find 11,780 votes", which was one more than was required to swing the election, and not conclude there's enough suspicion he was asking for that official to commit fraud to benefit him.
Now there's all the evidence he deliberately withheld presidential records that are the property of the United States, including highly classified material, that he kept despite months of efforts to get him to return until a search warrant to forcibly take it back was the only option left.
He's been a crook all his life, but always skated by with consent decrees and slaps on the wrist, so he thought was above the law. He will eventually learn otherwise. Whether there is enough to convict him and imprison him remains to be seen, but there's certainly enough to put him on trial.
Nothing in the constitution disbars a criminal from being president. Trump "should" have been disqualified from the moment in the first nomination debate, back in 2015, when he was the only person who refused to affirm that he would respect the final outcome of the election.
But he wasn't, and today millions of people around the world are paying for that.
Are you THAT clueless? Trump’s whole persona, his entire identity, is predicated on his skill in telling lies, spewing bullshit, and convincing others he has integrity. Anyone with more than two brain cells can’t help but realise he is unfit to hold any position of civic authority. He has fuck all ability, and less interest, in doing anything other than furthering his own selfish agenda, making money and venerating himself above his competitors.
However, in projecting this misguided fantasy he demonstrates just what a muppet he really is. Results matter my friend, so with that in mind, can you please demonstrate where and how Trump has contributed to international cooperation, understanding, and reduced tensions among the major powers? I’d be interested to read your response.
Trump is especially good at telling others just how bad they are compared to him. So, please show me where Biden has called international partners childish and insulting names. Show me where he has shared classified images on Twitter. Show me where Biden has expressed warmth and support for dictatorial leaders of anti-democratic countries. Show me where he has made a positive impact upon international relations. Show me another idiot, trump-like president who promised that his opponent would experience fire and fury like the world had never seen. I could go on, but your point is lame, silly, and obtuse.
If you are even slightly persuaded that Trump has anything but the most base of personal motivations, you are wrong. Absolutely, and categorically wrong. He’s a twat, and from reading your comment, I’m convinced you have neither the brains nor the education to understand just how bad he really is.
First off, before I get to my main point, let's get one thing clear. Trump is an utterly amoral, vicious, sadistic, completely selfish, lying, cheating, murderous cunt. If America had the ghost of basic common sense, he'd have been in jail years ago.
Having said that - as president, he wasn't particularly bad.
His nominations to the Supreme Court were a disaster, but they were a disaster of the Republican party's making, not specifically of Trump's. His treatment of international allies was shocking, in the technical sense that it shocked people, but it got results, which is partly why countries like Germany, after decades of dragging their feet, have finally started to ramp up their defence spending. His negotiated withdrawal from Afghanistan was shameful, but then Biden didn't have to follow through with it the way he did. His policy towards China, which was seen as dangerously radical before his election, is now perfectly mainstream.
And then there were the Abraham Accords. They're not much, of course - treaties between Israel and a handful of Arab countries that have never really cared much about it anyway - but even so, it's more than any American president has achieved in the past 50 years.
Trump is odious, brutal, corrupt, utterly selfish and evil. He debased his office and corrupted his country to the best of his ability, which fortunately turned out to much more limited than he thought. But his presidency? Could have been a lot worse. (Probably will be, if he gets a second chance.)
Trump thinking that Germany owed the US money because they weren't spending 2% of their GDP on defence? Germany started to ramp up its defence spending when Russia invaded Ukraine, rather than just rises to cover inflation.
Trumps attitude to China? You mean slapping tariffs on imports and thinking the US is squeezing money out of China, when in reality the US was getting extra revenue from US citizens who had to pay the tariffs?
God save us from such a financial "genius".
"His treatment of international allies was shocking, in the technical sense that it shocked people, but it got results, which is partly why countries like Germany, after decades of dragging their feet, have finally started to ramp up their defence spending."
This might be difficult, but try to ask yourself: "Do you REALLY want Germany to ramp up their defence spending?"
Then again, we taught them a lesson in 1918, and they hardly bothered us since then.
Trump did nothing to help the situation in NATO. He effeth up, as he did everything else.
"I see people everyday"
More Spockerberg than robot. The Eternal Quest For The Legendary Laptop eventually caught my attention enough to learn more about what seems to be an obsessive conspiracy theory for very many deranged nuts. My favourite bit was seeing a photo of an angry protester on a street corner holding up a big sign with just the words "Hunter's Laptop" on it, like some kind of in-person incoherent social media post. It's not quite on the level of the QAnon garbage, but both are really proof that modern conspiracy theorists are not very imaginative, and can only come up with quite mediocre stuff. Personally, if your theory doesn't involve flying saucers zooming out of pyramids at the very least, I'm not interested.
Hunter Biden's main purpose in life is to be an embarrassment for his father. Fellow parents will know that you're generally reluctant to abandon your children, no matter what, even if their behavior is inappropriate. Hunter has been mooching off his father's name and reputation, hawking himself as some kind of inside track to the corridors of US power, and he'll have plenty of enablers to encourage him. Joe Biden can only discourage this, he can't stop it.
Meanwhile the uber-right is constantly searching for smoking guns. Its still going on about Hilary's email server even though the typical pundit has no idea what such a thing is (as we all know, its a box with flashing lights on it and a label saying "email server"). Hunter Biden's a godsend, a ready made diversion that can be blown up to endless investigations, commissions and leaked news stories, a ready made right wing smoke machine. However, since 2016 we've been exposed to real, honest to goodness, corruption and abuse of power. We've seen the Devil and we know what it looks like. Attempts to spread disinformation are now so routine that except for the Fox type echo chambers we tend to be a bit skeptical of 'breaking news' or 'revelations'. Joe might not be my favorite politician but we've seen the alternative and its not pretty!
Except there's evidence that Joe benefited from Hunter being placed into ludicrously impossible positions, positions he would never attain if he didn't kick back to his father. There's evidence Joe spoke with Hunter about Hunter's business dealings on many occasions. Joe has even admitted so.
And the email server was absolutely evidence of crimes, crimes hosting that information, crimes hosting it insecurity, crimes transmitting that information and crimes deleting it when subpoenas arrived.
So basically, this pretty much proves that the FBI is part of the deep state? Or does anyone really believe that the US three-letter-agencies where *not* in the know regarding Hunter Biden's financial entanglement with Ukraine officials? (Who of course now are all good and uncorrupt people, because Putin.)
Does anyone really believe that the US three-letter-agencies were *not* in the know regarding Trump's predilection for wearing a scarf as socks and running around the White House shouting "Here comes Professor Lancaster!!!"?
We're just stating random non-illegal things as facts, regardless of evidence, right?
Sigh. Sure, anyone could have made those deals. It has of course nothing to do with gaining access to power - also called soft corruption.
'In particular, there are verified emails illuminating a deal Hunter Biden developed with a fast-growing Chinese energy conglomerate, CEFC China Energy, for which he was paid nearly $5 million, and other business relationships. Those business dealings are the subject of a separate Washington Post story published at the same time as this one on the forensic examinations of the drive.
The drive also includes some verified emails from Hunter Biden’s work with Burisma, the Ukrainian energy company for which he was a board member. President Donald Trump’s efforts to tie Joe Biden to the removal of a Ukrainian prosecutor investigating Burisma led to Trump’s first impeachment trial, which ended in acquittal in February 2020.'
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/hunter-biden-laptop-data-examined/
> > Sigh. Sure, anyone could have made those deals. It has of course nothing to do with gaining access to power - also called soft corruption.
You seem to be accusing Hunter Biden of actions that, although deeply unethical, weren't illegal — then they'd be corruption, not soft corruption? So you're arguing:
1. Hunter Biden used his surname to obtain access to deals that he would not otherwise have been able to achieve; and
2. because the FBI (or the CIA, or whomever) didn't investigate something that isn't illegal, they must be part of a shadowy unelected cabal that undercuts whichever person the US people actually elect?
Treating your allegations as if they were true:
I don't see the logic, and I also don't see why that would be a partisan issue. I'd also have expected fans of small government to be happy if agencies don't spend time and money on things that aren't crimes.
Alternatively, if it were a partisan issue then I'd be curious as to why the FBI reopened its investigation into Clinton's illegal mishandling of official communications immediately before the 2016 election, but is failing to act now. Did four years of Trump turn the deep state from red to blue?
So, yeah: nonsensical conspiracy theory.
Hmm. I basically agree with what you said last, even if it's a teeny bit worded in a slightly arrogant, but of course deeply knowledgeable lefty intellectual tone. But you are, in my opinion, deviating from what this was about to begin with: A medio-political power structure stopping information from coming out that could influence voters in a way not desired. It is well known that the owners of the big Californian social media companies overwhelmingly backed Biden, and hated Trump.
I was responding to the conversation as already digressed.
That said, if there’s one thing I thought the left was against then it’s undue power accumulating in private hands so for me it is a concern that Twitter, Facebook et al can go so far in deciding what propagates and what doesn’t, without any sort of oversight.
I don’t agree with you about the net bias, but that’s orthogonal.
The guy that was sacked was supposed to be investigating corruption, but turned out to be one of the most corrupt himself. Various entities (including the US and EU) had pledged financial help to the Ukraine, but only if the endemic corruption was tackled, so no financial help untill this guy was replaced.
Trump, with Barr and Giuliani's collaboration privately refused to send $400M worth of US Congress approved military aid unless Ukraine dug up some dirt on the Bidens, untill a whistleblower let the cat out of the bag.
And while we're at it, how about a constitutional amendment that no president, vice president, congressman, senator, or federal judge can serve after their 70th birthday.
Time to say no to old farts like Trump, Biden, McConnell, Pelosi, Grassley, Sanders, Thomas, Alito et al and put them out to pasture with their pensions instead of letting them run the country.
And while we're at it, how about a constitutional amendment that no president, vice president, congressman, senator, or federal judge can serve after their 70th birthday.
Agreed. Neither of those senile gits should stand for election again, in my opinion.
Maybe doubIe standards a little considering how we all hate IBM for their ageism, but IBM isn't in charge of the world's most powerful military.
The Democratic Party is saving Zuckerberg from at least disgrace and ruin, from letting the American public know about his role in sabotage and the double theft of Artificial Intelligence. Therefore, Zuckerberg is holding on to the only protection that saved him earlier and is saving him now. The proof is PA Advisors v Google and the fact that AI was discovered and patented by me, Ilya Geller. And also the fact that you've never heard of me, while Zuckerberg has been making money on it for years.
I am engaged in science: the present artificial intelligence is a proof of Internal Relations theory of Analytical Philosophy. Another proof of this Internal is my continuation of Einstein's theory of relativity based on quantity, Avogadro number, Set Theory, which is confirmed by the double slit, Lebedev light pressure and many other experiments. I rewrote Newton's laws on quantity, his law for gravity on accumulation points, I proved by an experiment String Theory. The same I did for Maxwell and Schroedinger static equations, putting them in quantity. I published everything in Russian segment, but cannot anywhere in English.
After these scoundrels robbed they block my all attempts. I stand alone against all IT industry which doesn't want me become known, because I patented. They already stole my $300 billion! Now they steal $10 trillion... This is the conspiracy and politics at the highest level of power. Look who the Judge Rader was and what happened to him?
This post has been deleted by its author
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
