Bill Barr and his October Surprise

shuttlt said:
It would be a little bit shocking if they hadn't done that months ago, wouldn't it? My assumption was that they already knew who it was registered to, where it was purchased from etc....
Click to expand...

Probably. And what is it that they're investigating? Whether the dissemination of this information was part of a Russian disinformation campaign.
 
Suddenly said:
It appears a purposeful technique of this sort of stuff is to make the mechanism of how the information came to light convoluted and dubious as to shift the discussion towards that and away from the substantive issue that this wouldn't be in the top 100 political scandals of the past year...
Click to expand...

Politics is starting to learn that semantic discussions about the discussion is where the meat of the discussion is and where both "sides" think they win and earn the most points.

When Trump claims, with zero evidence, that Hunter Biden beat a hooker to death with a bottle of champagne, he knows that the "Is it Champagne or is it just sparkling wine?" debate will occur and both sides will claim victory over it even if the whole setup original question is laughably false.

The talking heads know we as a society will nitpick the nuance of a pointless question.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Probably. And what is it that they're investigating? Whether the dissemination of this information was part of a Russian disinformation campaign.
Click to expand...
Terrific. If they have been investigating the laptop all these months, then they will have cleared up most of the uncertainty on the case already and it's just a question of what the appropriate way of getting the information out there is.

If they don't make a statement, then we would have the FBI knowing for nearly a year that a phoney laptop full of faked documents designed to implicate a candidate for the Presidency was kicking around and they'll have done nothing to mitigate the damage. Is that how they are supposed to operate?
 
JoeMorgue said:
Politics is starting to learn that semantic discussions about the discussion is where the meat of the discussion is and where both "sides" think they win and earn the most points.

When Trump claims, with zero evidence, that Hunter Biden beat a hooker to death with a bottle of champagne, he knows that the "Is it Champagne or is it just sparkling wine?" debate will occur and both sides will claim victory over it even if the whole setup original question is laughably false.

The talking heads know we as a society will nitpick the nuance of a pointless question.
Click to expand...

Right. It is a slightly more complex version of the sales technique of asking a potential buyer "what color car do you want" rather than "would you buy this car?"
 
Segnosaur said:
Did they even have access to the original? Or an electronic version or copy of the original (so they could verify if it was an actual signature and not Photoshop.)

Sent from my LM-X320 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

A journalist posted a scan of the receipt and a different signature of Biden on twitter.
here :
https://twitter.com/ScottMStedman/status/1318384991525502977

Comparing them upside down is interesting, my completely amateur analysis is these are very much not from the same person.
 

Attachments

  • Ekvq2quXIAAzLol.png
    Ekvq2quXIAAzLol.png
    82.7 KB · Views: 4
jadebox said:

Common practice in these operations is to load the bait files with plenty of genuine hacked/stolen documents, photos, etc., then salt them with some forgeries.
Click to expand...

He isn't claiming any of them aren't real.
 
Suddenly said:
Right. It is a slightly more complex version of the sales technique of asking a potential buyer "what color car do you want" rather than "would you buy this car?"
Click to expand...

I've mentioned before how... not new all of this is to anyone he's been arguing with Woo Slingers. The only novelty is seeing it in politics. The fringe has been the test bed for arguing in a post-facts environment for decades.

Trump is just the political equivalent to every Woo Slinger that tries to start the discussion at a level of assumption that they are already right without the intellectual framework to get there.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
What makes you think he has seen them all?
In violation of all journalistic practice, the NYP hasn't even contacted any of the Bidens before publication.
Click to expand...
The original NYP article said they contacted Hunter Biden's lawyer for comment and Biden's campaign didn't return requests for comment.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
It's funny that you'll dismiss the testimony of several anonymous sources in a reputable newspaper because they're unnamed, yet you seem prepared to take a single repair shop guy at his word, despite him also being unnamed and the conduit for his information (which matches a current Russian disinformation campaign) being noted-liar-who-has-openly-been-getting-information-from-an-active-Russian-intelligence-agent-and-who-the-US-intelligence-agencies-warned-the-White-House-was-likely-pushing-Russian-disinformation Rudy Giuliani, and also being unnamed.

It's almost like the actual credibility of the information isn't the primary consideration, and you're just making excuses to dismiss information you don't like and to amplify information you do.
Click to expand...

Actually it's not funny at all. In case you missed it. The "Russian collusion" investigation was filled with leaks from anonymous sources that didn't pan out. Which only showed that leaks and "anonymous" sources speak to "reputable" news sources to push an agenda.

The repair shop owner's name is John Paul Mac Isaac, not sure why you think "single repair shop guy at his word, despite him also being unnamed " because that is clearly wrong.

We have 50 former intel and military people coming out on the "Russian disinformation" side. All these ex officials were in charge when Biden was doing his shady deals, and many have known ties to Chinese money, gov't, and orgs. I wouldn't take their word for it, they have no more information than you or I. They don't want to disrupt the gravy train. It's in their interest to push this line given much of the purported info in the emails is China related.
 
varwoche said:
Those idiots need to read townhall. Amiright?
Click to expand...


Why would the guys who were on duty when all these deals happened, most of who have ties to China want the truth given much of the material on Biden's email is China related? These former guys have no more information on the case than you or I.
 
The Moog said:
A journalist posted a scan of the receipt and a different signature of Biden on twitter.
here :
https://twitter.com/ScottMStedman/status/1318384991525502977

Comparing them upside down is interesting, my completely amateur analysis is these are very much not from the same person.
Click to expand...

I believe the repair guy said Biden was drunk when he came in. I'll check for a cite on that. To my amateur opinion, the first half looks like a match, second half seems different, but we don't go with amateur analysis. Hell, even in court I'm sure you'd get 2 experts to say the opposite of one another anyway.
 
shuttlt said:
The original NYP article said they contacted Hunter Biden's lawyer for comment and Biden's campaign didn't return requests for comment.
Click to expand...

That was not my information.

If any of the Bidens had seen the material, they certainly would have insisted that the Post refrain from publishing personal information like phone numbers.

So maybe the Post asked for comments, but I would need an actual quote that they showed what they had in advance.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
Even that wouldn't be a smoking gun. Say Biden did manage to get a meeting between one person and his dad - and that's the worst thing alleged here - how does that in any way compare to even a tiny fraction of the ways that Trump has used his power to enrich himself and his family? Jared Kushner, for example, passed classified information on to MBS who used that information to purge political enemies - arresting, and even torturing and murdering some.

So let's assume that absolutely everything about this story is true. If that's the worst dirt Biden has, then he's still infinitely less corrupt as a candidate than Trump.
Click to expand...

No sure why you say that's the worst thing here. The "Pop" and "Big guy" are money related, not about meetings.
 
Suddenly said:
It appears a purposeful technique of this sort of stuff is to make the mechanism of how the information came to light convoluted and dubious as to shift the discussion towards that and away from the substantive issue that this wouldn't be in the top 100 political scandals of the past year...
Click to expand...


Biden taking half of his son's salary would be a scandal. Not sure what makes you think not. Biden getting a portion of money to be held by Hunter on a deal would be a scandal. Not sure why you think it would not.
 
We've mentioned that Hunter has money and so would probably never enter some rando's repair shop, let alone leave his PC there and never come back for it. I don't think anyone's brought up that an Apple user would probably go straight to Apple. Their service is one of the good reasons for buying their PCs...

But, of course, Hunter's been a substance abuser and that makes one forget everything. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom