Hunter is playing offense.

They couldn't verify the contents because Rudy Giuliani had complete control over the data and refused to allow others to examine it.

That itself was quite the red flag, if you ask me.

Link
The FBI had possession of the laptop back in 2019. You're really going to try and argue that these high-ranking intel officers couldn't get a hold of a colleague within the FBI and had a look at the laptop and its contents? How do you think that the NYT, WaPo and other media outlets that later showed that the laptop got the information? You think they all asked Rudy for the data?
 
berg80 a felon? if you say so. but i'm beginning to like hunter. all of this international diplomatic experience and oil and gas expertise should qualify him as a "senior advisor to the president" in 2024.
Is that a prediction Biden will be re-elected? If he does, we already know he's not in to nepotism like Trump.

 
Link
The FBI had possession of the laptop back in 2019. You're really going to try and argue that these high-ranking intel officers couldn't get a hold of a colleague within the FBI and had a look at the laptop and its contents? How do you think that the NYT, WaPo and other media outlets that later showed that the laptop got the information? You think they all asked Rudy for the data?
That would be inappropriate behavior on both sides. Your argument is that these former officials should have violated numerous rules and potentially gotten current DoJ employees in trouble.

People with access to the laptop eventually gave NYT and WaPo access to the laptop, but that certainly wasn't the case in 2020.
 
So “10% to the big guy“ legitimately is Hunter’s email.

Sounds like evidence of corruption to me.
Or just part of Hunters fraud to shake down clueless foreigners.
Remember, Devon Archer testified to Comer and congress that Hunter was selling the "illusion of influence".

Kinda like in grade school, when you stood up to the bully, telling him if he tried anything, "I'll have my dad, beat up your dad"
 
That would be inappropriate behavior on both sides. Your argument is that these former officials should have violated numerous rules and potentially gotten current DoJ employees in trouble.

People with access to the laptop eventually gave NYT and WaPo access to the laptop, but that certainly wasn't the case in 2020.

It's clearly apparent that you don't know what the rules actually are. I used to be in the security/intel community in the military and once I got out. As long as someone from the FBI "read them on", there would be no rules broken for giving them access to the laptop. These officials likely had some of the highest levels of security clearances a person could have in the US government.

Ask yourself this question? What people had access to the laptop to give to the NYT and WaPo for them to verify the information if the FBI had possession of it since 2019? It's got to be either Rudy or someone in the FBI. Since the media said they got it through "independent sources", that would eliminate Rudy. So, they got it from the FBI. So, how's it legal for them to let the media see the information from the laptop, but not legal to show it to current or former high-ranking intelligence officials?
 
Hunter Biden sued former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani and another attorney over alleged violations of computer fraud and data access related to a laptop computer Biden is said to have left at a Delaware repair shop.

Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, has for several years been the target of attacks by Giuliani and other right-wing figures over the alleged contents of that computer.


Hunter Biden’s lawsuit also names
as defendants Giuliani’s companies and Robert Costello, an attorney who previously represented Giuliani.

Suing Rudy is like trying to get blood out of the proverbial stone. The man is broke.

You guys said the laptop didn't belong to Hunter and that it was Russian disinformation.
 
It's clearly apparent that you don't know what the rules actually are. I used to be in the security/intel community in the military and once I got out. As long as someone from the FBI "read them on", there would be no rules broken for giving them access to the laptop. These officials likely had some of the highest levels of security clearances a person could have in the US government.

Ask yourself this question? What people had access to the laptop to give to the NYT and WaPo for them to verify the information if the FBI had possession of it since 2019? It's got to be either Rudy or someone in the FBI. Since the media said they got it through "independent sources", that would eliminate Rudy. So, they got it from the FBI. So, how's it legal for them to let the media see the information from the laptop, but not legal to show it to current or former high-ranking intelligence officials?
These are former intelligence officials with no need to know anything about the DoJ investigation. This isn't an issue about security clearance (the laptop isn't classified, obviously), it's an issue about individual privacy and the DoJ rules against disclsoing any information about an ongoing investigation to people who don't need to know. People in the DoJ would face professional accountability for leaking this information.

I don't need to "ask myself" anything since I can read the report from the Washington Post who answers the questions you pose. If you were truly interested in the answer to these questions, you would have easily found the answer. From the Washington Post:
After the New York Post began publishing reports on the contents of the laptop in October 2020, The Washington Post repeatedly asked Giuliani and Republican strategist Stephen K. Bannon for a copy of the data to review, but the requests were rebuffed or ignored.
In June 2021, Maxey, who previously worked as a researcher for Bannon’s “War Room” podcast, delivered to The Washington Post a portable hard drive that he said contained the data. He said he had obtained it from Giuliani.

It seems you're less interested in finding the truth and more interested in a narrative.
 
He didn't do that.

So what led them to this conclusion?

1695825170122.png
 
From the link:
In the letter, reported at the time by Politico, former intelligence officials holding impressive national security credentials wrote that they believed that the contents of the laptop — full of evidence of drug use, prostitution and foreign business deals — could be part of a Russian campaign aimed at influencing the election, though they emphasized that they had no knowledge that was true.
"
NATIONAL SECURITY

Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say​

More than 50 former intelligence officials signed a letter casting doubt on the provenance of a New York Post story on the former vice president’s son.

More than 50 former senior intelligence officials have signed on to a letter outlining their belief that the recent disclosure of emails allegedly belonging to Joe Biden’s son “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”
 
He fooled "over 50 senior intelligence officials" into thinking his laptop was "Russian disinformation".

Can a crackhead really fool our so-called "senior intelligence officials" so easily? Scary thought, right?
Really? Explain to me what role Hunter played in influencing the official's opinions.

“We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement,” the letter reads. But, it continues, “there are a number of factors that make us suspicious of Russian involvement.”

“Such an operation would be consistent with Russian objectives, as outlined publicly and recently by the Intelligence Community, to create political chaos in the United States and to deepen political divisions here but also to undermine the candidacy of former Vice President Biden and thereby help the candidacy of President Trump,” the letter reads.

 
Really? Explain to me what role Hunter played in influencing the official's opinions.

“We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement,” the letter reads. But, it continues, “there are a number of factors that make us suspicious of Russian involvement.”

“Such an operation would be consistent with Russian objectives, as outlined publicly and recently by the Intelligence Community, to create political chaos in the United States and to deepen political divisions here but also to undermine the candidacy of former Vice President Biden and thereby help the candidacy of President Trump,” the letter reads.


Remember, Hunter said the laptop wasn't his. What else were they to believe? It's not like a crack addict would ever lie about anything, right?

lol
 
Remember, Hunter said the laptop wasn't his. What else were they to believe? It's not like a crack addict would ever lie about anything, right?

lol
You just undercut your own argument by pointing out what Hunter said was not to be trusted.
 
You keep dodging the question. What led "over 50 senior intelligence officials" to conclude the laptop was Russian disinformation?
The claims made by in the news story and a pattern by disinformation from Russians dating back to the 1960s.

But they didn't conclude it was disinformation. That's a lie.
 

Forum List

Back
Top