We’re working on a deeper dig into the latest about Hunter Biden’s laptop, but until then, here’s a round-up of the New York Post’s great commentary and follow-up on the New York Times FINALLY admitting, a year-and-a-half too late, that the Post's scoop about the laptop and the incriminating information on it was true and not “Russian disinformation.”
First, the Post editors’ op-ed blasting their dishonest, biased, Democrat campaign mouthpiece competitor, the Times:
Columnist Michael Goodwin on how the Times and other Big Media and Big Tech companies continue to try to hide their successful efforts to tilt the 2020 election by preventing voters from knowing the truth about Biden family corruption:
Kyle Smith has more on the actual “collusion to rig an election” that the Times eagerly took part in:
White House press secretary Jen Psaki keeps spinning and deflecting to keep from answering questions about Hunter Biden and his influence peddling deals.
Finally, today’s MUST-READ: The New York Post’s front page story about the 51 alleged “intelligence experts” who signed a letter suggesting that the laptop story was Russian disinformation. This was used as an excuse by the media to ignore the story and by social media giants like Twitter to censor any mention of it and to suspend accounts of people who dared to share it.
The Post attempted to contact all 51 of these lying spies to see if they wanted to apologize for their false claim misleading the voters. Most ignored their ringing shoe phones and didn’t respond.
Of the handful who did, none apologized. All lamely pointed to some weasel words in the 5th paragraph of the letter that admitted they didn’t know if the emails were genuine or not, but that it “has the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” If they were honest (and we’re getting deep into hypotheticals here), they would have said they “didn’t know” and let it go at that. The claim that it might be Russian disinformation was all the media outlets needed, and the signers never issued a clarification when that was treated as solid fact.
It should be pointed out that one of the chief instigators of this letter, and one of the few who responded to defend it, was former DNI director and professional liar James Clapper. I don’t use that term “professional liar” lightly or as a pejorative, but as an accurate title. Clapper is now a CNN pundit (a pretty good indication all by itself), he has a history of perjuring himself before Congress…
…And he spent years on CNN calling Trump a “Russian asset” as he pushed the “collusion hoax” drummed up by Hillary Clinton and her campaign.
These days, he and his CNN cohorts spend a lot of their time pushing the idea that a few unarmed nuts commandeering Nancy Pelosi’s podium for 10 minutes was a serious attempt at “insurrection.” I would argue that if Clapper and his fellow “intelligence experts” and “reputable journalists” want to see true insurrectionists who misused their positions of power to try to undermine and overthrow the duly elected President of the United States, they might try looking into the nearest mirror.