Commentary
Seemingly forgotten in all the reporting on the Hunter Biden trial amidst testimony of his drug-addicted, lascivious lifestyle is any discussion on issues that voters should be really concerned about. The lies that helped his father get elected and the providing of White House access.
A review of the facts; test to follow
On October 14, 2020, just weeks before the 2020 presidential election, the New York Post broke its first story about Hunter Biden’s laptop, left in a computer repair shop, that contained photos and dubious e-mails appearing to show the Biden family was illicitly profiting from shady international dealings.
The Post reported that an FBI form showed that the bureau seized the laptop in December 2019, but they made it known there was widespread doubt about its legitimacy until long after the election.
It wasn’t learned until after the election that the FBI and other intelligence operatives met with social media outlets to caution them that the subject laptop content was Russian disinformation. In other words, to suppress the facts.
Complying, Twitter blocked users from sharing the story, and blocked the Post out of its accounts for refusing to delete initial links to the story.
Then, on October 20, 2020, 51 former intelligence officers, including five former CIA directors or acting directors and deputies, signed a letter suggesting that the laptop material had all the classic earmarks of Russian disinformation.
Two of the most notorious Deep State liars, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and former CIA Director John Brennan, signed the letter and went on to analyst positions on MSNBC and CNN.
Recent testimony revealed that Anthony Blinken, who was then advising Biden’s campaign, inspired former CIA acting director Michael Morell to draft the letter. The timing of the letter enabled Biden to cite it in a debate two days later. Of course, Blinken was since named Secretary of State.
Morell later acknowledged that there were two goals behind the letter. It was to share a concern of Russian interference, knowing their letter was a fabrication, and to help Biden win. Clearly election interference.
The New York Times and Washington Post, the so-called papers of record, dismissed the laptop findings of the New York Post prior to the election.
On October 25, 2020, appearing on CBS’ 60 Minutes, President Trump spoke of the laptop, saying, “I think it’s one of the biggest scandals I’ve ever seen,” telling host Lesley Stahl, “and you don’t cover it … you want to talk about insignificant things.”
I’ll never forget how she calmly interjected, “Because it can’t be verified,” Trump pushed back, “Of course, it can be verified. Why do you say that? She would not allow the discussion to continue. In November 2022, the network of journalists – Edward R. Morrow and Walter Cronkite, finally revealed that it had authenticated the laptop,
Matt Vespa, writing in Townhall.com writes, “CBS News’ Lesley Stahl owes Trump a massive apology.” I agree, as do the 51 Deep Staters who signed the letter claiming Russian misinformation.
In March 2022, the New York Times finally authenticated the laptop, giving the Washington Post an excuse to fall in line.
Miranda Devine, who broke the story for the New York Post, continues to aggressively cover the story, has earned a Pulitzer, but don’t hold your breath.
There are a number of leftist legislators, like California’s Rep. Adam Schiff, who has been out to get Trump for years through Russia, Russia, Russia and New York’s Rep. Dan Goldman, who claimed the laptop could not be authenticated even though it had been.
The Deep State’s October Surprise
Regular readers may recall that I believe the FBI meetings with the social media techies and the Russian disinformation letter signed by 51 former intelligence officers was clearly election interference. The Deep State had an agenda to keep Trump from winning and helping Biden win.
How Could This Happen?
Whenever I ask myself how this could happen in an era of 24/7 news, I am reminded of Rush Limbaugh, who often referred to the interpolation of one of the most controversial tenets of political science and campaign strategy – the low information voter theory – the concept that a segment of the electorate approaches elections without adequate information to make an informed decision.
He used to talk about how “ignorance,” “stupidity,” “misinformation,” “inattentiveness,” “miseducation” were all to blame for permitting voter suppression.
The “What If” Factor
After the 2020 election, I recall telling you about a Media Research Center, reporting about a small survey that revealed that one of six voters, or 17 per cent would not have voted for Biden had they been aware of the laptop suppression.
Overall, 79 percent said it was “very” or “somewhat” likely that a “truthful interpretation of the laptop “ would have resulted in the reelection of Trump instead of the election of Biden.
The survey showed that 45.1 percent of Biden voters were unaware of the financial scandals of Hunter Biden and how his business had been wrapped up in Biden’s work in foreign affairs while vice president.
It further showed 35.4 percent of Biden voters were unaware of the allegation of sexual assault by former aide Tara Reade, and 25.3 percent were unaware that his running mate Kamala Harris was ranked America’s most “progressive’ senator in 2019.
You should also know that those same low information voters were equally unknowledgeable about Trump. Fifty percent didn’t know the U.S. had become a net exporter of oil for the first time under Trump in 2019. Forty-five percent were unaware of Trump’s historic agreement, the Abraham Accord
So, What About 2024?
Four New York Times reporters talked with swing state voters, 14 percent of whom said they voted for Biden in 2020, and were not backing him now. Here are a few tidbits from their piece.
“Frederick Westbrook, a retired Las Vegas hotel worker, voted for President Biden in 2020 – as a vote to get Donald J. Trump out of office. He now calls that ‘the biggest mistake of my life.’”
“Jaredd Johnson, 25, who works in marketing in Atlanta, said he supported Mr. Biden in 2020 because he hoped he would return the country to a prepandemic normal, but he doesn’t think he has. Though Mr. Johnson has reservations about Mr. Trump, he plans to vote for him.”
“Virginia Farris, 54, who lives in Wisconsin, is very satisfied with how things are going for her. But her four young adult children art struggling financially. She blames ‘Biden’s policies of overspending and printing money,’ and plans to vote for Trump.”
“Amelia Earwood, 47, a safety trainer with the U.S. Postal Service in Georgia, said ‘All of our core values are gone, gone, and I’m not pleased at all.’” She called Mr. Trump ‘ a horrible human being,’ but added, I’m voting on his policies, and I think that he could straighten this country out, while Biden made a ginormous mess out of it.”
Back to Hunter Biden Trial
In an interview with ABC’s David Muir, President Biden said he would accept the verdict in his son’s trial and clearly stated that he would not consider a pardon of his son. Does he know something?
If anything, the trial will be a test of the rule of law Biden likes to remind us, but I have a feeling the Delaware “hometown” flavor is going to result in a hung jury or in a soft verdict. The first lady didn’t sit in the front row of the courtroom every day, even flying back from France for the last day last week, for appearances only.
The test I promised? I just wanted you to be an informed voter.
May God continue to bless the United States of America.
