Seventeen months after the New York Post published the first of its bombshell reports revealing the Biden family’s long history of influence peddling, The New York Times quietly admitted that the emails found on Hunter Biden’s laptop — the source of those reports — are real.
The admission came in the 24th paragraph of an article whose title, “Hunter Biden Paid Tax Bill, but Broad Federal Investigation Continues,” provided no clue of the Grand Canyon-sized truth the outlet was finally acknowledging.
On Wednesday, two weeks after the Times came clean, The Washington Post followed suit. Sort of.
The Post’s admission was carefully phrased and — for lack of a better word — compartmentalized. It came in an article headlined “Inside Hunter Biden’s multimillion-dollar deals with a Chinese energy company” and a companion piece titled “Here’s how The Post analyzed Hunter Biden’s laptop.”
After reading its articles, one is left with the distinct feeling that the newspaper was positioning itself to protect the president from the accusations it knows are coming: President Joe Biden has benefited financially from his son’s overseas business deals, he was aware of his son’s activities and he has been compromised by foreign governments.
In the 3,000-word main article, the outlet reported that last June, it obtained a portable hard drive that “purportedly” — a word repeated relentlessly throughout the piece — contained the data found on the laptop Hunter Biden had dropped off at a Wilmington, Delaware, computer repair shop in April 2019 and failed to retrieve.
The Post said it hired two security experts who determined that 22,000 emails “are authentic communications that can be verified through cryptographic signatures from Google and other technology companies.”
However, the report said, the “verifiable emails are a small fraction of 217 gigabytes of data” the hard drive contained.
According to the Post, “The vast majority of the data — and most of the nearly 129,000 emails it contained — could not be verified by either of the two security experts who reviewed the data for The Post. Neither found clear evidence of tampering in their examinations, but some of the records that might have helped verify contents were not available for analysis, they said. The Post was able in some instances to find documents from other sources that matched content on the laptop that the experts were not able to assess.”
Specifically, the report said, “The Post did not find evidence that Joe Biden personally benefited from or knew details about the transactions with [Chinese energy company] CEFC, which took place after he had left the vice presidency and before he announced his intentions to run for the White House in 2020.”
So, we are to believe that the Post’s “experts” could verify only 22,000, or 17 percent, of the 129,000 emails on the hard drive. That conveys the distinct impression that they were unable to verify the other 107,000, or 83 percent, of the emails.
The writers tell us that neither of the experts found “clear evidence of tampering” in their examinations. Well, did they find any evidence of tampering, clear or unclear?
Probably not. If they had detected any evidence at all that the laptop had been hacked and its content altered, which is the message they’re trying to send, they would have reported it.
Deeper down in the article, we’re told that “sloppy handling of the data” had “damaged some records.”
“The experts found the data had been repeatedly accessed and copied by people other than Hunter Biden over nearly three years,” the Post reported.
This makes sense. The Post obtained its copy from a former researcher for Steve Bannon’s “War Room” podcast. Bannon’s data was nearly certainly a copy. And so on.
The Post, in turn, made two copies of its copy for each of their experts to examine separately.
There must be hundreds, if not thousands, of copies of the hard drive out there, and there’s no telling how far removed from the original any of them is.
The Post said its experts would need access to “the original computer and its hard drive” to conduct a proper forensic examination.
So, why not explain that to readers from the start rather than insinuating there was a sinister reason that only 17 percent of the emails could be verified?
Anyway, the biggest elephant in the room, of course, is the email referring to “the big guy” who stood to receive a 10 percent share of future profits in a planned business deal with CEFC, which is affiliated with the CCP, according to the New York Post’s reporting. Hunter Biden was known to refer to his father as “the big guy.” And Tony Bobulinski, Hunter’s former business partner, has confirmed publicly (and privately to Senate investigators) that Joe Biden was indeed “the big guy.”
This incendiary revelation alone should have derailed Biden’s 2020 campaign.
The Washington Post is trying to strike a balance between two conflicting objectives: It wants to be perceived as a serious journalistic enterprise that is digging deep to bring the truth to the American people, but it also wants to protect the Democratic president. The latter apparently is the most critical.
One final point: Neither the White House nor Hunter Biden has disputed most of the revelations from the emails.
Then-candidate Joe Biden dismissed the reports as coming from a “Russian plant” and pointed to the letter from “50 former national security folks” as validation during an October 2020 debate with then-President Donald Trump.
The New York Post reported that far from denying the laptop belonged to Hunter Biden or that it had been hacked, a spokesman from the Biden campaign said only that there was nothing on Biden’s “official schedules” about a 2015 meeting with a Ukrainian energy executive.
No one said, “Biden is not the big guy.”
Why are the New York Times, the Washington Post and left-leaning networks such as ABC, NBC and CNN finally covering this story?
These were all deliberate editorial decisions.
First, it will enable them to say, “See, we reported the emails are real.”
But there might be a greater purpose. Although this is pure speculation on my part, knowing how they operate, but I have to wonder if they’re trying to get ahead of new developments in the Department of Justice’s case against Hunter Biden.
Fox News’ Jesse Watters gave a similar take on the Wednesday edition of his show.
“Hunter could be on the verge of being indicted for tax fraud and maybe money laundering and illegal lobbying,” he said.
Should Hunter Biden be indicted?
Yes: 100% (42 Votes)
No: 0% (0 Votes)
“We’re witnessing today one of the biggest containment operations in American history, a censorship campaign to cover up for one of the most corrupt first families in American history and to sway an election,” Watters added.
I’ll leave you with an interesting bit of election trivia from former Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway, who appeared on “Jesse Watters Primetime” on Wednesday night.
She noted that 31 House Democrats have announced their retirement and said that if the Republicans pick up 32 seats in November, which is entirely possible, they will have the largest majority in 100 years.