Hunter Biden's laptop

What Did Zuckerberg Just Admit? - Part Of The Problem 900
On this episode of Part Of The Problem, Dave and Robbie react to Mark Zuckerberg's admission on The Joe Rogan Podcast that the FBI asked Facebook to "throttle down" access to the Hunter Biden laptop leak. We then go on to listen to the White House professional liar Karrine Jean Pierre accuse "MAGA Republicans" of being Semi Facists and what that means for regular people. This Episode Was Recorded On 8.30.22
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK-2LrKFXA8


//
 
So, about that laptop...

Anything?

Just wondering.

Nope. Not according to the corporate press.

Move along now, nothing to see here.

As far as I'm concerned, the scandal was the media's deliberately torpid and sanctimonious response - especially after years of their incessant and unhinged "Russiagate" bullshit. All the rest (taxes, kickbacks, influence peddling, hookers & blow, whatever) is secondary by comparison.

Bump, because this is literally the most important and potentially red-pilling story happening today. That Greenwald video is Must See TV. Frankly, it deserves it's own thread.

You want to prove the existence of "the Deep State"? This is the video that does it.

Agreed.

And done: Hunter Biden's Laptop and the Ministry of Propaganda: A Case Study

Here's a whole damn pharmacy's worth of red pills:

https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1587132144039694337
7ftIulm.png


The Hunter Biden laptop thing is just one of them:

TRUTH COPS: Leaked Documents Outline DHS's Plans to Police Disinformation
[...]

In retrospect, the New York Post reporting on the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election provides an elucidating case study of how this works in an increasingly partisan environment.

Much of the public ignored the reporting or assumed it was false, as over 50 former intelligence officials charged that the laptop story was a creation of a “Russian disinformation” campaign. The mainstream media was primed by allegations of election interference in 2016 — and, to be sure, Trump did attempt to use the laptop to disrupt the Biden campaign. Twitter ended up banning links to the New York Post’s report on the contents of the laptop during the crucial weeks leading up to the election. Facebook also throttled users’ ability to view the story.

In recent months, a clearer picture of the government’s influence has emerged.

In an appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast in August, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg revealed that Facebook had limited sharing of the New York Post’s reporting after a conversation with the FBI. “The background here is that the FBI came to us — some folks on our team — and was like, ‘Hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election,’” Zuckerberg told Rogan. The FBI told them, Zuckerberg said, that “‘We have it on notice that basically there’s about to be some kind of dump.’” When the Post’s story came out in October 2020, Facebook thought it “fit that pattern” the FBI had told them to look out for.

Zuckerberg said he regretted the decision, as did Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter at the time. Despite claims that the laptop’s contents were forged, the Washington Post confirmed that at least some of the emails on the laptop were authentic. The New York Times authenticated emails from the laptop — many of which were cited in the original New York Post reporting from October 2020 — that prosecutors have examined as part of the Justice Department’s probe into whether the president’s son violated the law on a range of issues, including money laundering, tax-related offenses, and foreign lobbying registration.

Documents filed in federal court as part of a lawsuit by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana add a layer of new detail to Zuckerberg’s anecdote, revealing that officials leading the push to expand the government’s reach into disinformation also played a quiet role in shaping the decisions of social media giants around the New York Post story.

According to records filed in federal court, two previously unnamed FBI agents — Elvis Chan, an FBI special agent in the San Francisco field office, and Dehmlow, the section chief of the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force — were involved in high-level communications that allegedly “led to Facebook’s suppression” of the Post’s reporting.

The Hunter Biden laptop story was only the most high-profile example of law enforcement agencies pressuring technology firms. In many cases, the Facebook and Twitter accounts flagged by DHS or its partners as dangerous forms of disinformation or potential foreign influence were clearly parody accounts or accounts with virtually no followers or influence.

[...]
 
Last edited:

https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1587132144039694337
7ftIulm.png


TRUTH COPS: Leaked Documents Outline DHS's Plans to Police Disinformation
[...]

In retrospect, the New York Post reporting on the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop ahead of the 2020 election provides an elucidating case study of how this works in an increasingly partisan environment.

Much of the public ignored the reporting or assumed it was false, as over 50 former intelligence officials charged that the laptop story was a creation of a “Russian disinformation” campaign. The mainstream media was primed by allegations of election interference in 2016 — and, to be sure, Trump did attempt to use the laptop to disrupt the Biden campaign. Twitter ended up banning links to the New York Post’s report on the contents of the laptop during the crucial weeks leading up to the election. Facebook also throttled users’ ability to view the story.

In recent months, a clearer picture of the government’s influence has emerged.

In an appearance on Joe Rogan’s podcast in August, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg revealed that Facebook had limited sharing of the New York Post’s reporting after a conversation with the FBI. “The background here is that the FBI came to us — some folks on our team — and was like, ‘Hey, just so you know, you should be on high alert that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election,’” Zuckerberg told Rogan. The FBI told them, Zuckerberg said, that “‘We have it on notice that basically there’s about to be some kind of dump.’” When the Post’s story came out in October 2020, Facebook thought it “fit that pattern” the FBI had told them to look out for.

Zuckerberg said he regretted the decision, as did Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter at the time. Despite claims that the laptop’s contents were forged, the Washington Post confirmed that at least some of the emails on the laptop were authentic. The New York Times authenticated emails from the laptop — many of which were cited in the original New York Post reporting from October 2020 — that prosecutors have examined as part of the Justice Department’s probe into whether the president’s son violated the law on a range of issues, including money laundering, tax-related offenses, and foreign lobbying registration.

Documents filed in federal court as part of a lawsuit by the attorneys general of Missouri and Louisiana add a layer of new detail to Zuckerberg’s anecdote, revealing that officials leading the push to expand the government’s reach into disinformation also played a quiet role in shaping the decisions of social media giants around the New York Post story.

According to records filed in federal court, two previously unnamed FBI agents — Elvis Chan, an FBI special agent in the San Francisco field office, and Dehmlow, the section chief of the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force — were involved in high-level communications that allegedly “led to Facebook’s suppression” of the Post’s reporting.

The Hunter Biden laptop story was only the most high-profile example of law enforcement agencies pressuring technology firms. In many cases, the Facebook and Twitter accounts flagged by DHS or its partners as dangerous forms of disinformation or potential foreign influence were clearly parody accounts or accounts with virtually no followers or influence.

[...]
 
This thread did not age well for The Count, did it now?

:tears:

By the way, no disrepect to Phil Collins but we all have our tastes in music. That song hit the radio when I was but a wee lad, during a particularly tumultuous and dark period of my childhood. So, for me, the original has darker connotations than even the lyrics. But it is a classic, to be sure.
 
:tears:

By the way, no disrepect to Phil Collins but we all have our tastes in music. That song hit the radio when I was but a wee lad, during a particularly tumultuous and dark period of my childhood. So, for me, the original has darker connotations than even the lyrics. But it is a classic, to be sure.

Oh My,

You are a youngster. no offense..

age is not relevant with text.
 
This is what I imagine NIN would sound like if Trent Reznor had a vagina

Yeah, Brinks has covered NIN's Closer, too. Her voice is in a class of its own. Her whistle register is as high as Mariah Carey's.
 
Will 450 gb of Hunter's child porn be released in two more weeks?

Don't know. Don't care.

As far as I'm concerned, the scandal was the media's deliberately torpid and sanctimonious response - especially after years of their incessant and unhinged "Russiagate" bullshit. All the rest (taxes, kickbacks, influence peddling, hookers & blow, whatever) is secondary by comparison.
 
Will 450 gb of Hunter's child porn be released in two more weeks?

I suppose that question has the same answer as this question: Will we ever tire of watching the slow-motion trainwreck of the Biden laptop?

First, it didn't exist...
Then, it existed

First, Resident Biden had no knowledge of his son's business dealings...
Now, the Big Guy had extensive recorded conversations regarding the particular details

First, Hunter's laptop had no evidence of criminal activity...
Now, it has evidence of crimes but still not CP

On and on the circus goes. So yes, the popcorn is popped and steaming hot, and I'll continue munching away watching this train continue to hurtle off the cliff into the abyss in slow-motion. Slowing it down can't change its final destination...
 
I might have respected a modest admission that your initial comments were off... but this stubborn adherence to an obviously wrong take is really, really embarrassing for you...

What take?

He was talking about Q's claim years ago that it was all going to come out within a matter of weeks.
 
Back
Top