World

Hunter Biden's computer lays bare deep institutional corruption of the American elite

Hunter Biden segura seu filho Beau durante o Natal oficial da Casa Branca em Washington, DC, EUA, 22 de novembro de 2021.
Hunter Biden holds his son Beau during the official White House Christmas in Washington, DC, USA, 22 of November

.

| Photo: EFE/EPA/JIM LO SCALZO

The most powerful elite institutions in the United States are cooperating to misinform the public and suppress dissent. It’s hard not to think so in light of the development of the Hunter Biden laptop case, which turned out to be true.

Last week, reporters from the New York Times reported having authenticated an email “obtained by the New York Times from a cache of files that appear to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden at a Delaware service shop.”

This refers to an article published by the New York Post in 2020, just before the presidential election, regarding emails sent from the laptop of Hunter, the president’s son. The emails suggest that Hunter was using his father’s name and title to enrich himself. They raised serious doubts as to whether current President Joe Biden was involved in any way.

But let’s not be too quick to celebrate the New York Times’ sudden commitment to the truth and the correctness of the facts. The newspaper buried the hook and only recognized the authenticity of the emails from 10 th paragraph of the news.

Don’t do any mea culpa, just a small acknowledgment that you were wrong, too late.

When the case exploded, the Times and most of the mainstream press decided to ignore it entirely. They said it wasn’t news and promoted the idea that it was probably Russian disinformation.

NPR [Rádio Pública Nacional] explained that it could not cover the case because “the assertions do not represent much”.

It’s the same publicly funded media network that took the time to run a story about “decolonizing fitness” and what exercises are white supremacist or something.

It wasn’t just the mainstream press that was silent about the case, refusing even to investigate the matter. A Big Tech

took action to ruthlessly suppress the dissemination of what was investigated by the Post. Twitter directly blocked people from posting the news and Facebook used its internal algorithm to block people from seeing it.

Jack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter when the Hunter laptop case was suppressed, said the blocking of the news was “completely wrong” but never really explained it. that way the mistake was made, and he was soon replaced by a man who likes freedom of expression even less.

As my colleague Katrina Trinko has suggested, the Hunter Biden case certainly demonstrates the fraud of the Big Tech

against “disinformation”.

THE Big Tech

is making an authentic effort to stop misinformation or is this just a smokescreen to justify the suppression of information or ideas that interfere with the Democratic Party project?

To complete this mess, when the Post published the news of Hunter’s laptop, a group of former “intelligence experts” agents signed a statement that the if Hunter Biden would have all the “classic signs of a Russian disinformation operation”.

They had no evidence to support it other than their appeal to their

expertise.

Let’s trust the experts! Isn’t that what we’re told all the time lately?

“If we are right, this is Russia trying to influence the American vote in this election, and we firmly believe that Americans need to be aware of this,” the former intelligence agents said.

Biden even used this letter in a debate with former President Donald Trump in the presidential campaign of 2020 to prove that it was all disinformation from the Republicans.

Well, they were wrong. It appears that they were actually politicized ex-intelligence agents who were trying to influence our elections. Americans need to be aware of this.

All did those people and institutions that made a mistake have to answer for it? Of course not.

Of the 10 former agents, so far none have apologized or shown any kind responsibility for what they did. Some even doubled down.

James Clapper , former Director of National Intelligence, said only that he still defends the statement they made “at the time”. No explanation as to whether it was false or regret for having led the American people astray.

Andy Liepman, former deputy director of the National Counter-Terrorism Center, said in a statement to the Post that “As far as I know, I do [defendo a declaração], but I’m kind of busy now”.

It seems that some people from our intelligence services have forgotten that they serve us and not the other way around.

The ex-intelligence agents not only misinterpreted the facts, as the New York Post indicated. They actively tried to turn a story about potential corruption of the Biden family into a story about the Bidens being victims of Russian interference in the elections.

[defendo a declaração] They used their positions, or former positions, as a pedestal of authority from which to engage in what now appears to be politicking.

When you put it all together, the Hunter Biden laptop case is all about much more than media negligence or politics in the intelligence services.

It’s even more than censorship from Big Tech

.

The bigger picture concerns how all of these factors above, in unison, work together to suppress information that hurts the ideological and political cause they value most and to amplify their favorite narratives, no matter their merit.

Now they march together to promote the “narrative” above the truth.

Elite institutions that were once considered nonpartisan, bipartisan or at least to some extent objective are becoming blatantly ideological and relentlessly willing to use their power to crush dissent.

In the Hunter Biden case there are clear implications for the decided presidential election apparently by a very narrow margin.

A A Media Research Center survey of Biden voters in key undecided states in 2020 found that not only did many didn’t know about the Hunter Biden case, but that about 10% also said that if they had known about the case, they would have changed their vote.

Let’s think about it a bit. For years, this same nexus of institutions has promoted the case about Russia being in league with Trump. The New York Times and Washington Post won the Pulitzer Prize for this coverage, which indirectly led to an impeachment process against Trump.

As the Russian conspiracy case ran out of steam, the laptop report surfaced and was brutally suppressed on the eve of the presidential election. The case was dismissed as being based on nothing but ridiculous and pernicious Russian disinformation. And it was true.

If they were wrong so crass and were willing to use all their power to promote ultimately false information to the public, where did they go wrong and what else are they willing to suppress to produce favorable political outcomes?

Once again, there was no acknowledgment of the failure of the institutions themselves, there was no explanation for the what happened.

The editor of Wall Street Journal Gerard Baker called the issue a crisis of US responsibility. He said that it is at the polls that people in power answer for what they do.

“But how can that work when the people we want to hold accountable decide what information voters can see?” asks Baker.

This is a fair and terrifying question. That’s why the Hunter Biden case is so important.

The possibility that the president’s son used his father’s official position to get rich is bad enough. But it’s not nearly as threatening to our free society as the institutional corruption that suppressed and manipulated the case for its own political ends from the start.

This case, at its core, concerns the willful distortion and suppression of truth and reality by those who believe they will never be held accountable.

Jarrett Stepman is a contributor to the Daily Signal and co-host of The Right Side of History podcast.

©2022 The Daily Signal. Published with permission. Original in English.

)

Back to top button