Posted by Curt on 24 March, 2022 at 4:35 pm. 11 comments already!


By Revolver

Rookie reporters at most outlets are taught to use the “inverted pyramid” model to write their stories: Open with the central conclusion of the story first, then give the most important evidence and details first, and finally deliver more general information and background at the bottom.
But for the “reporters” at The New York Times, a very different model prevails. If one wants to get the most important information from a Times piece, it behooves oneself to start at the bottom and read up. Holocaust survivor got butchered in the streets of Paris? The Times won’t mention a migrant was responsible until the 12th paragraph. Democratic lawmaker is accusing a random citizen of racism? 
And so it was on Wednesday, when near the end of a 1,700-word article on Hunter Biden’s possible legal troubles, the Times admitted what all honest reporters have known for a year and a half: The contents of the Hunter Biden laptop are real, and the press simply ignored it for political reasons:

People familiar with the investigation said prosecutors had examined emails between Mr. Biden, Mr. Archer and others about Burisma and other foreign business activity. Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.

That the Times finally came out to awkwardly admit the truth almost a year and a half later points toward a very obvious conclusion: Things might very soon become even more embarrassing for Hunter Biden, and the Times‘s editors have decided they cannot credibly remain silent until the hammer drops.
The Times’s controlled admission also allows them to try and keep public focus on relatively boring matters of tax payments and FARA compliance, rather than other salacious and still-relevant parts of the laptop, such as Hunter apparently buying prostitutes with his father’s credit card.
Still, the Times’ admission is good news. But this belated shift cannot for one moment be treated as improving or restoring the Times’ credibility. Americans will remember, for all time, how totally and completely the press lied in order to throw the 2020 election to Joe Biden by any means necessary.
There is another lesson that must be learned as well: That “Russian disinformation” has displaced “white supremacy” and even “racism” as the elite’s preferred vehicle for mass censorship.
Washington Post writer Greg Sargent, author of the Plum Line blog, set the party line in the critical month of October 2020. According to Sargent, the story was completely fake “disinformation,” and the mere act of reporting on it was to be avoided as much as possible, because any coverage at all served to substantiate the Trump campaign’s “lies.” This line was repeated more or less verbatim by every other “mainstream” outlet in the weeks to follow.
The same day that Sargent published the marching orders, another Post article baselessly insinuated that President Trump was complicit in a Russian espionage plot.

U.S. intelligence agencies warned the White House last year that President Trump’s personal lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani was the target of an influence operation by Russian intelligence, according to four former officials familiar with the matter.
The warnings were based on multiple sources, including intercepted communications, that showed Giuliani was interacting with people tied to Russian intelligence during a December 2019 trip to Ukraine, where he was gathering information that he thought would expose corrupt acts by former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
The intelligence raised concerns that Giuliani was being used to feed Russian misinformation to the president, the former officials said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information and conversations.
Officials’ warnings about Giuliani underscore the concern in the U.S. intelligence community that Russia not only is seeking to reprise the disinformation campaign it waged in 2016, but also may now be aided, unwittingly or otherwise, by individuals close to the president. Those warnings have gained fresh urgency in recent days. The information that Giuliani sought in Ukraine is similar to what is contained in emails and other correspondence published this week by the New York Post, which the paper said came from the laptop of Hunter Biden and were provided by Giuliani and Stephen K. Bannon, Trump’s former top political adviser at the White House. The Washington Post was unable to verify the authenticity of the alleged communications, which concern Hunter Biden’s business dealings in Ukraine and China.

The media’s claims about being unable to “verifying the authenticity” of the emails was always a lie, as Glenn Greenwald chronicled on Rumble last year:

From the Washington Post, the story instantly spread to The New York Times, and then to the cable news airwaves:

When confronted by a Washington Times politics reporter, obese CNN personality Brian Stelter claimed a special obligation never to present “unvetted” information to the public.

Despite supposedly being a “media reporter,” Stelter has entirely ignored the New York Times’ revelation that CNN and the entire media apparatus had been wrong (apparently deliberately) about the contents of the laptop.
CNN’s suppression of the Biden laptop was so aggressive that hosts would intervene if guests attempted to even mention it (with the zeal of Fox hosts trying to stop discussion of George Soros):

Taxpayer-funded NPR repulsively dispatched its public editor to write a smug explanation for why the prole masses should not hear about the story:

“We don’t want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions,” NPR Managing Editor for News Terence Samuel told me. “And quite frankly, that’s where we ended up, this was … a politically driven event and we decided to treat it that way.”

Of course, NPR once famously dedicated a lengthy segment to the problem of racist bird names.

And so it unfolded that American journalists, as a class, boasted that they would not cover the story, and nobody could make them. Instead of pursuing the truth, they became the defenders and celebrators of silence and censorship.



Vanity Fair, which believed in the Trump piss tape, deigned to lecture Americans on how fishy an obviously-real laptop was.

Almost every other publication of note was apparently as credulous as Vanity Fair when it came to the mythical pee tape.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x