Hunter Biden makes front page...

Post Reply New Topic

So getting back to the developing story - the owner of the computer store, John Paul MacIsaac should be sued by Hunter Biden for a breach of privacy. I am not aware the client (Hunter Biden) consented to having his hard drive information being disseminated and shared with third parties - that certainly was not MacIsaac's right.

Is this the information Facebook tried to hide/censor?

Facebook and Twitter's frantic attempts to stop the spread of the New York Post's Hunter Biden story didn't prevent the article from becoming the top story about the election on those platforms last week, according to data from NewsWhip.

Why it matters: The data shows that even swift, aggressive content suppression may not be swift or aggressive enough to keep down a story with as much White House backing and partisan fuel as this one.

By the numbers: The Post's story generated 2.59m interactions (likes, comments, shares) on Facebook and Twitter last week — more than double the next biggest story about Trump or Biden.

* 5 of the 10 biggest stories were about the Hunter Biden story, the fallout, or how Facebook and Twitter reacted.
* It was the 6th-most engaged article this month, trailing pieces like Trump testing positive for COVID-19 and Eddie Van Halen's death.
* 83% of the interactions happened on Facebook, with the other 17% on Twitter.

Between the lines: Critics worried that Twitter's move to disable sharing of the article (it also suspended the New York Post's account) and Facebook's decision to limit its reach may have inadvertently brought it even more attention.

* Behind the Biden story itself, Facebook and Twitter's response to the report was the second biggest topic last week. The backlash largely came from the right, which accused the tech platforms of meddling in the election through inappropriate censorship.
* After hearing from critics, Twitter on Friday said it would modify its hacked materials rules to no longer remove hacked content unless it is directly shared by hackers or those acting in concert with them and to instead label tweets to provide context.

Be smart: "This gets at the fundamental question that we're facing in 2020 of what is truth, what is information and how does a platform like Twitter or Facebook evaluate truth?" Bryce Webster-Jacobsen of cyber intelligence firm GroupSense tells Axios. "Nudity and terrorism and violence — those are pretty objective measures. Truth is much more subjective."

Our thought bubble: We can't know how much higher the numbers for the Post story might have been if Facebook and Twitter hadn't taken action.

What's next: The platforms have said that they are still working to determine the most effective policies for limiting the spread of misinformation in breaking news without infringing on free speech.

Here is a comparison between the alleged signature at the Delaware MAC repair shop and 2 actual signatures by Hunter Biden.



And another (probably digitally signed):


https://twitter.com/ScottMStedman/statu ... 1525502977

I am not a forensic expert, but the Delaware signature does not look similar to the 2 other signatures to me.

Is this the information Facebook tried to hide/censor?

I'm sure we'll soon hear from Hunter, his family, or their lawyers, if it isn't his, which should help clarify some of the questions about the laptop and its contents.

I find it a bit hard to believe that anyone - - Hunter Biden or not - - would just leave a laptop with a repairman and forget all about it if such incriminating things were on it. This is just the Trump crew's feeble attempt at manufacturing an October Surprise in my humble opinion.

In the first pair, the initial half of the signatures do look quite similar, but the latter half is different (at least that's how they appear to me).

With the latter, being a digital signature, there is no indication of when the original was done (people's signatures change over time) and it appears to be in a different format (extended "surname", rather than short version of it), so it's not really the best (The "H" in the middle does look similar, though).

I'm sure we'll soon hear from Hunter, his family, or their lawyers, if it isn't his, which should help clarify some of the questions about the laptop and its contents.

And everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Although it certainly shows a high degree of planning by "Trump's crew", being the laptop was left there 18 months ago, and the FBI have reportedly had it in their possesion for 10. It was also left around 2 weeks before Joe Biden announced he would be running, so if they could do this for one un-announced candidate, it would reasonably follow that they must have done something similar for other likely nominees (Hillary Clinton, Berrnie Sanders, for example).

Edit: There's also the curious lack of denial from any of the Bidens or their lawyers about the circumstances (or previous ownership) of the laptop, which does seem to contradict it being a "Trump crew's feeble attempt at manufacturing an October Surprise". Were it not to have been previously owned (or left) by Hunter Biden, I would have expected a statement to that effect shortly after the initial story regarding it broke, rather than the silence from them for almost a week.