Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
There is literally no evidence provided that this is a Russian hack and dump ploy, yet that's all we heard for three days on every news outlet. Consistent my ###. The lengths the media will go to protect Biden from even an obvious non-story is repugnant.
You dont find the timing of this suspect? I mean literally a week out from the electionIm sure this is nothing. I've been assured by well meaning libs that ol' sleepy joe is squeeky clean......
Didn't Bobulinski admit that Joe turned down the alleged offer? That would seem pretty clean to me.Im sure this is nothing. I've been assured by well meaning libs that ol' sleepy joe is squeeky clean......
Literally no evidence? It came from Rudy. I haven't followed this story, but I know that much.
Like I said, I do think there's a conversation to be had around media coverage but this ain't it - for me, at least. However, I will point out that Trump has brought this on himself with the media. Should they do it (if, in fact, that is what goes on with some stories)? No, they shouldn't. But I also can recognize that people are human and after being called Fake News and the enemy for so long they may be willing to turn a blind eye. It would be like one of the mods in the PSF handing out different punishment to posters based on whether the posters have complained about them. Ideally it wouldn't happen but to be outraged when it does seems at least slightly disingenuous.
We heard from legitmate ex intelligence people that it sounded like a Russian disinformation campaign. Did they report any different than that?
![[scooter]](/data/avatars/m/22/22287.jpg?1659477690){kind=avatar}
There is a difference between "the media is calling this a Russian hack and dump ploy" and "the media is reporting that 60 former intelligence officials have signed off on a letter claiming that this would be consistent with a Russian hack and dump ploy".
Literally no evidence. The DNI made clear that there was no evidence. No one from any side is claiming that these are fake emails. No one is claiming that the content is made up. A group of former intelligence people, with no evidence, claimed it "had the earmarks of Russian disinformation". That's the standard? Its ridiculous.
Which again...all seems to be legitimate reporting. Reporting unverified crap fed from Rudy and Bannon...yeah, that seems to be why the only ones really reporting it are the places that are highly questionable sources.
The standard -- in terms of journalism -- is not based on what is said, but who said it. If 60 former intelligence officers issue a press release saying "it has the earmarks of purple monkey dishwasher", then it will be reported. By the same token, if a homeless guy issues a press release saying "Joe Biden killed five hookers", it would not be reported.
If DNI Ratcliffe says it, it must be true? Ratcliffe also said that the Russian interference in the 2016 election may have helped Hillary more than Trump. He also claimed that the Mueller report was not written by Mueller, but by "Hillary Clinton's de facto legal team." He is a partisan hack who is not a credible source of information, unfortunately.
For argument's sake, let's say all the texts and emails are real. What do they show? The WSJ and Fox News went through the cache of Bobulinski data and information and concluded there is no evidence that Joe Biden was involved, no evidence that a crime was committed, no evidence the deal being discussed went anywhere, and no evidence that Joe Biden collected any money. In fact, there is evidence that Joe Biden REJECTED the deal and did not accept any money (which all happened AFTER he was out of office). And Bobulinski admitted that Joe did not play an active role in anything in his interview. The FBI and Rudy have had all this stuff in their possession since December (if not earlier).
My initial post said specifically that I thought it was an obvious non-story and that is still my take.
Yep. Biden's name not being mentioned specifically even though Bobulinski says that is who the big guy is= no proof.
It seems like something Russia would do......because they already did something similar, in 2016.
Tony B. has a little write up under the Hunter Biden entry.Thank you!
(It doesn't mention Bobulinski at all, though.)
