film...@gmail.com <filmbydon@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thursday, May 19, 2022 at 5:06:15 PM UTC-7, George.Anthony wrote:
>> Technobarbarian <technobarbar...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 5/19/2022 7:01 AM, "Jerry Osage"@osage.com wrote:
>>>>
>>>> More than 120,000 emails from the notorious Hunter Biden laptop have
>>>> been published on a searchable online database anyone can access.
>>>>
>>>> The site, called https://bidenlaptopemails.com/, allows users the option
>>>> to download all 128,00 plus emails from Hunter’s hard drive onto their
>>>> own computer.
>>>>
>>>> I'm sure that in a few days all the best ones will be published online.
>>>>
>>>> What I'm waiting for is next January. I wonder if Brandon's impeachment
>>>> trial will be televised live and if any of the emails will come into
>>>> play? Or, will he retire for medical reasons before then?
>>>
>>> Yeah, that will probably happen right after the orange idiot
>>> finally comes up with some faint wiff of proof that the election was
>>> stolen and they finally lock Hillary up, after how many years and and
>>> how many investigations? Enjoy the show, because that's about all you're
>>> going to get. More performances for the boob tube.
>>>
>>> "Why Hunter Biden’s Laptop Will Never Go Away
>>> Could anything that happens with this laptop bring us closure?
>>>
>>> By Kaitlyn Tiffany
>>> A stylized image of a laptop with Hunter Biden’s face on the front. A
>>> cigarette is in his mouth.
>>> The Atlantic
>>> APRIL 28, 2022
>>>
>>> A year and a half ago, less than three weeks before the presidential
>>> election, the New York Post published a story about the recovery of a
>>> laptop that allegedly belonged to Hunter Biden, and a trove of personal
>>> emails and photographs allegedly found on it. Many were embarrassing; a
>>> few were interesting enough to become memes. (The most indelible—the
>>> authenticity of which I have not personally verified—is of Hunter
>>> smoking a cigarette in a bathtub.) The meat of the article was the claim
>>> that the younger Biden had traded inappropriately on his family name, up
>>> to the point of arranging meetings between his Ukrainian business
>>> associates and his father, while the latter was vice president.
>>>
>>> President Donald Trump’s camp made the story out to be more than it
>>> was—Hunter Biden was already well known for invoking his family’s
>>> political fame to help him make money, and he denied the specific
>>> allegations of wrongdoing (though a broader investigation into his
>>> affairs has been ongoing for years, led by federal prosecutors in
>>> Delaware, working with the FBI and the IRS). The story’s claims about
>>> Joe Biden’s participation were weak (at best). It quickly came out that
>>> some of the Post’s own staff did not think that the paper had done
>>> enough to confirm the authenticity of the laptop. But the story was a
>>> lit match, and the national mood at the time was kerosene.
>>>
>>> Trump was actively undermining democracy and pushing his supporters
>>> toward hysteria about online censorship. His party was gripped by QAnon,
>>> which holds at the center of its belief system the idea that the
>>> Democratic elite are sleazy and corrupt. The laptop was a gift to the
>>> paranoid and the disingenuous. Meanwhile, the other half of the country
>>> was gripped by the memory of 2016. What if voters were faced with an
>>> eleventh-hour red herring, another disaster like the James Comey letter?
>>> What if reporters fell for another trick from zany upstart “citizen
>>> journalists” with enormous follower counts—or, worse, Russia? And
>>> journalists who had spent four years telling themselves that they were
>>> the nation’s last defense against tyranny were, to put it as politely as
>>> I can, starting to appear a bit hysterical. By the way, there was still
>>> a pandemic. Enter flames.
>>>
>>> To many members of the media and tech industries, the timing of the
>>> story felt suspicious, as did the fact that it came from Rudy Giuliani,
>>> a MAGA operative and one of the oddest people alive. Reporters recoiled
>>> from the story; columnists blasted the Post for publishing personally
>>> embarrassing information that was of tenuous public interest.
>>> Social-media companies also reacted instantly. Facebook limited the
>>> spread of the story while third-party fact-checkers reviewed it (but
>>> removed the limitation after a week). Twitter took the more dramatic
>>> action of blocking new shares of the link altogether, arguing that the
>>> story, which contained screenshots with unobscured email addresses and
>>> phone numbers, constituted a violation of its policy on doxxing (it
>>> reversed course after two days).
>>>
>>> Some of the story turned out to be true, but not right away. The New
>>> York Times and The Washington Post were only recently able to verify
>>> many of the emails. And in the intervening months, many of the details
>>> about why journalists and tech companies acted the way they did have
>>> been forgotten, leaving behind only the impression, mostly on the right,
>>> that they “colluded” to keep Americans away from an authentic news story
>>> with political implications. The truth was more boring and possibly grimmer.
>>>
>>> If it wasn’t clear before, it is now: This single water-damaged laptop
>>> represented an end point. Americans no longer had a method for coming to
>>> agreement about what was—in the most basic sense—going on. Eighteen
>>> months later, there’s nothing anyone could ever say about this laptop
>>> that would bring Americans into alignment about its significance and
>>> meaning, or about the culpability and agendas of those who have
>>> previously expressed opinions on it. In fact, if anything, things have
>>> gotten worse.
>>>
>>> Earlier this month, The Atlantic co-hosted a conference with the
>>> University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics, called “Disinformation
>>> and the Erosion of Democracy,” at which Hunter Biden’s laptop was a star
>>> of the show.
>>>
>>> It came up in the very first Q&A session of the conference. A University
>>> of Chicago freshman and a senior editor of the campus’s right-wing
>>> publication (tagline: “Outthink the mob”) asked my colleague Anne
>>> Applebaum whether “the media acted inappropriately when they instantly
>>> dismissed Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation.” The student
>>> was unsatisfied with Applebaum’s answer—that she didn’t think the laptop
>>> qualified as a major news story, disinformation or no—and later appeared
>>> on Fox News to say so. His tweet about the exchange, which incorrectly
>>> stated that Appelebaum had failed to answer the question, went viral.
>>> This kicked off a vitriolic and widespread campaign against Applebaum
>>> from the right, pushed by influencers including Jack Posobiec, Mike
>>> Cernovich, and multiple Fox News hosts; she was subjected to weeks of
>>> personal threats.
>>>
>>> The laptop came up again the next day, first thing in the morning. A
>>> panel discussion titled “Politics as Usual or an Insidious Attack on Our
>>> Democracy?” took its premise from a November 2021 column by Ben Smith,
>>> then of The New York Times, in which he used the Biden laptop story to
>>> demonstrate how confusing the conversation about misinformation and
>>> disinformation had become. In dealing with the laptop, reporters were
>>> understandably wary of repeating the mistakes made regarding the
>>> WikiLeaks hack-and-dump operation before the 2016 election, which led to
>>> over-coverage of the Hillary Clinton email scandal, which was ultimately
>>> inconsequential. That’s why many of them dismissed the story, or labeled
>>> it a new front in the information war. But many presidential election
>>> cycles have unearthed confusing, scandalous revelations requiring
>>> investigative journalism to verify or debunk them, Smith argued.
>>> Labeling this a problem of the social-media age, and focusing on mis- or
>>> disinformation as phenomena that can be corrected, hidden, or blocked at
>>> the platform level, is “a technocratic solution to a problem that’s as
>>> much about politics as technology,” he wrote. He reiterated much of this
>>> during the panel, saying that the laptop story had been mishandled by
>>> reporters and, “most disturbingly,” by social-media companies.
>>>
>>> I heard this opinion repeatedly in casual conversations and from the
>>> speakers onstage. Jonah Goldberg, the editor in chief of The Dispatch,
>>> argued during the panel that the “disinformation” label can backfire by
>>> feeding into the idea that the “powers that be” are forbidding people
>>> from looking at information that they consider illegitimate. He
>>> illustrated his point with Biden’s laptop too. Twitter and Facebook
>>> treated it like disinformation before the truth could be determined.
>>> “Whether you think that was smart in the heat of the moment or not, [it]
>>> has backfired enormously,” he said. “Because now it seems like it was
>>> all conspiratorial.”
>>>
>>> I was a little surprised by how often the laptop came up, but I
>>> shouldn’t have been. Its aura has grown ever more powerful as the story
>>> around it has cohered. After a short period during which Fox News also
>>> considered the laptop story suspect, the network has been covering it
>>> even more intensely than it did the leaked Democratic National Committee
>>> emails in 2016. In December 2020, when I was interviewing users of the
>>> alternative social-media platform Parler, almost everybody I spoke with
>>> brought it up. A cool, anonymous Substack writer beloved by New York
>>> City’s art set has also made frequent disapproving reference to
>>> Twitter’s and Facebook’s actions around the laptop story. Angry online
>>> chatter about it never truly went away, but now it’s back with a
>>> vengeance. All of my friends know that something went wrong with the
>>> laptop. Many of them do not care, but they still know. This week, hours
>>> after the news broke that Elon Musk would be acquiring Twitter, he
>>> replied to a tweet in which Twitter’s chief legal officer and general
>>> counsel Vijaya Gadde was referred to as the company’s top “censorship
>>> advocate,” writing, “Suspending the Twitter account of a major news
>>> organization for publishing a truthful story was obviously incredibly
>>> inappropriate.”
>>>
>>> That cursed computer, otherwise known as “the laptop from hell,” as
>>> Donald Trump has called it, is an icon of our information ecosystem’s
>>> dysfunction. Some journalists relied prematurely and too much on popular
>>> frameworks when covering it. The story really was suppressed by tech
>>> giants. But it also really was complicated, and required time and
>>> resources to investigate. Finding the truth takes time and effort and a
>>> willingness to be surprised. It also requires some grace on the part of
>>> the public—journalists need to be able to publish facts bit by bit, as
>>> they learn them, doing their work in front of an audience that is
>>> receptive to the idea that knowledge shifts and that coherent drama that
>>> blazes forth all at once is rare. This is, the laptop makes clear, no
>>> longer possible. By the time reporters put in the work to verify parts
>>> of the story, it was too late—the corrupt “media” was a monolith with an
>>> agenda.
>>>
>>> Facebook and Twitter really did make sloppy decisions. They and other
>>> tech platforms had spent the past several years struggling with how to
>>> fact-check a pandemic and when to interfere with election interference;
>>> the laptop undermined that work by illustrating just how bizarre—and
>>> dangerous—it would be to centralize the responsibility for discerning
>>> truth. Twitter has apologized for its handling of the story and made
>>> changes to its policy on the distribution of hacked materials. Facebook
>>> has elaborated on its decision-making process, which was informed by the
>>> FBI’s warning to watch for hack-and-leak operations carried out by
>>> foreign actors. And if federal prosecutors indict Hunter Biden for
>>> possible financial crimes, it will not be solely on the basis of the
>>> man’s laptop, so the case could be made that the thing doesn’t matter
>>> much anymore. Yet it isn’t going anywhere. Why would it? It’s perfect!
>>>
>>> “This is arguably the most well-known story the New York Post has ever
>>> published and it endures as a story because it was initially suppressed
>>> by social media companies and jeered by politicians and pundits alike,”
>>> Joan Donovan, the research director of the Shorenstein Center on Media,
>>> Politics, and Public Policy and a speaker at the conference, told me in
>>> an email. The laptop is now shorthand, and it makes an easy point. For
>>> example, after another panel at the conference, a University of Chicago
>>> student asked CNN’s Brian Stelter a question to which there was
>>> undoubtedly no satisfying answer: Invoking the Biden laptop, he asked,
>>> “With mainstream corporate journalists becoming little more than
>>> apologists and cheerleaders for the regime, is it time to finally
>>> declare that the canon of journalistic ethics is dead or no longer
>>> operative?” Stelter’s response was polite, if a bit meandering, and he
>>> offered to speak with the student one-on-one after the event, which he
>>> apparently did.
>>>
>>> Even though this sequence of events was a bit dry, it was useful all the
>>> same. A video of the exchange was viewed millions of times on Twitter
>>> that Thursday, under the caption “Brian Stelter just got destroyed by a
>>> college freshman!” It was featured two days later on Tucker Carlson’s
>>> Fox News show, and Carlson was giddy while describing it. “There are
>>> still a couple of kids at the University of Chicago who are awake enough
>>> to say, ‘Wait a second, what are you talking about? Disinformation?’”
>>> After playing the video, he cracked himself up.
>>>
>>> Kaitlyn Tiffany is a staff writer at The Atlantic."
>>>
>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2022/04/tech-companies-suppressed-biden-laptop/629680/
>>>
>>>
>>> Because Americans in general have absolutely no real idea of their
>>> own history, we are, of course, doomed to repeat it. Only now we're
>>> repeating our history at warp speed.
>>>
>>> TB
>>>
>> As hard as it may be to believe, your posts are getting more ridiculous by
>> the day.
>>
>> --
>
> And, "As hard as it may be to believe," your posts are excelling at
> revealing how stupid you are getting to be, by the day... I suspect that
> you are envious of TB's abilities, to C&P, explaining the POV he
> makes... Pee Wee Herman has a far better repartee, than you do.......
>
> A frequent TB Booster
>

I could agree with you but then we’d both be wrong.

--