You do remember back in October 2020, when the NY Post published an explosive story about a laptop abandoned at a Delaware computer repair shop. The Post reported the laptop belonged to Hunter Biden, son of then-Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, and explained the FBI had seized it in December 2019.
Emails recovered from that laptop suggested corrupt activity involving the Bidens and Burisma Holdings, a large natural gas company in Ukraine.
But why the big effort to squash the story, basically try to cover it up?
When the story broke just weeks before the 2020 presidential election, the media, including the NY Times and Washington Post immediately ran interference for Biden, working overtime to cast doubt on the story. Twitter and Facebook even actively suppressed and censured the story on their platforms.
This week, the NY Times published an innocuous story about the ongoing investigation into Hunter Biden with admissions — albeit buried deep in the story — verifying key elements of the story the paper once tried to cover up. The Times authenticated the laptop emails and admitted that then-Vice President Biden attended a meeting in 2015 that a Burisma executive was slated to attend.
The New York Times called the Hunter Biden laptop story “unsubstantiated” as recently as September 2021 — a description the paper stealth-edited from its online story — but according to the New York Post, the Times also promoted claims that the story was Russian disinformation.
The Times now says, “No concrete evidence has emerged that the laptop contains Russian disinformation.”
The New York Post reacted to the admissions by writing in an editorial, “Forgive the profanity, but you have got to be s**tting us.”
Regarding the Times’ authentication of the emails, the Post mocked, “Authenticated!!! You don’t say. You mean, when a newspaper actually does reporting on a topic and doesn’t just try to whitewash coverage for Joe Biden, it discovers it’s actually true?”
And for admitting that Biden attended the April 2015 meeting, the Post said, “Funny how this works when you don’t just take someone’s word for it.”
Describing the Times as a “perfect stenographer” for Biden, the Post also criticized its rival for not explaining how they authenticated the emails, something the Post explained.
“The Times does a hand wave to anonymous sources. No facts have changed since fall 2020. They knew the laptop was real from the start. They just didn’t want to say so,” the Post editorial board wrote. “There’s never any shame with these 180s. Sorry that we wrote a ‘fact check’ that turned out to be bull! Sorry we wrote a piece claiming something wasn’t a story and you were stupid for thinking so!
“Twitter banned us for supposedly publishing ‘hacked materials’ that weren’t hacked. The company’s CEO apologized, but by that point they had accomplished what they wanted,” the editorial continued. “Like The Times, they cast enough doubt to avoid making their preferred candidate look bad.”