Word from the Wise? Former Intelligence Official Admits That They Always Assumed the Hunter Biden Emails Were Genuine

Douglas Wise, a former Defense Intelligence Agency deputy director and former senior CIA operations officer, is back in the news this week. In an interview with The Australian, Wise admits that he and others always knew that the emails on the Hunter Biden laptop were likely genuine. It was a remarkable admission from one of more than 50 former intelligence officials who signed a letter dismissing the Hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 presidential election as likely “Russian disinformation.” Yet, Wise still maintains that, while true, he and the other officials were right to call it out as likely “disinformation.”  Arguing that something is true, but still constitutes disinformation sounds a lot like . . . well . . . disinformation.

The infamous letter from the former intel officials (including such Democratic figures like John Brennan, James Clapper, Leon Panetta and Jeremy Bash) was used by the media to assure the public that there was nothing to see in the scandal. It was the perfect deflection in giving a cooperative media cover to bury the story of how the Biden family engaged in influence peddling worth millions with foreign figures, including some with foreign intelligence connections.

It worked beautifully. It was not until two years later that NPR, the New York Times, and other media outlets got around to telling the public the truth.

Now some of the signatories are trying to rehabilitate themselves. It is not hard. Figures like Bash have been rewarded for their loyalty. Others like Brennan and Clapper have become regulars on CNN to continue to give their takes on intelligence.

Wise, however, has tried to find some redeemable role in the letter. He told The Australian that “All of us figured that a significant portion of that content had to be real to make any Russian disinformation credible.” So the emails and photos showing criminal acts with prostitutes and thousands of emails on influence peddling was likely true, but that truth only made them more dangerous forms of Russian disinformation.

It is that easy. True or not, the story was dangerous in detailing the corruption of the Biden family before the election. Done and done.

It also means that, under this dubious logic, you can spike any true story that is embarrassing to the President or the party as presumptive disinformation.

Indeed, Wise says that it was “no surprise” to learn that the emails that he helped spike were actually genuine.

He is not alone. Washington Post columnist Thomas Rid wrote that  “We must treat the Hunter Biden leaks as if they were a foreign intelligence operation — even if they probably aren’t.

Let that sink in for a second. It does not matter if these are real emails and not Russian disinformation. They probably are real but should be treated as disinformation even though American intelligence has repeatedly rebutted that claim.  It does not even matter that the computer was seized as evidence in a criminal fraud investigation or that a Biden confidant is now giving his allegations to the FBI under threat of criminal charges if he lies to investigators.

Yet, they still wanted the media to treat the story before the election as part of “Russian overt and covert activities that undermine US national security” as a story with “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

Keep in mind that these “experts” literally had nothing beyond a potentially damaging story against the Bidens before an election. That was all that it took for these experts to rush out their letter.

Wise does not address that American intelligence reached the exact opposite conclusion and found no evidence — none — of Russian involvement or some foreign disinformation conspiracy.

Wise and the other signatories did not want to wait for any facts to support their claim. They rushed out the letter to an eagerly awaiting media to spike the story before the election. Now, they are seeking plausible deniability that they were political operatives sent on a political hit job. It is as implausible as calling a presumed true story “disinformation.”

 

151 thoughts on “Word from the Wise? Former Intelligence Official Admits That They Always Assumed the Hunter Biden Emails Were Genuine”

  1. Let’s face the facts: a ‘letter’ by former….from let’s say a dozen outfit former peolple. is like…only half of the current expert employees.. 51′ former’ people? So a letter from former people Is like two times less than the current poeople. ?? Or 50-50 the current then people… ? I dunno but a math guy can do the math and whose who. I think it’s dubious this guy….one of the 51…..had any weight. Oh he was the deputy director of the dia under obama…..from 2014 to 2016…..after Hillary’s reset button with russia. He has no expertise or credibility about “Russia’s disinformation! At all. Definitely no more than Flynn or kissinger! But know one routed that letter. Thing is people who just use their rank….as rank can be prosecuted. And here I think anyone who go just used their rank…And job discriotion…ought to be prosecuted for obstruction…..is his use of rank! or the corollary the value they contributed to a campaign! Fec!!

    1. But it’s also our problem….for not obviously discerning shennanigans. Voters of Obama should have known Hillary’s reset button…red with russia meant something. It either meant then a reset of relations….if so russia wasn’t and is not an enemy. an enemy….latter maybe the reset button means more to them. None the less I am fairly certain….neither the Russian people not the Americans will succumb to Schwab we f “reset”..because.the enemy of my enemy is my friend! And we on this planet are united against you self appointed like the lurch kerry….Lanes 86 545499a!

      1. I used to listen to a wealthy guy from canada…..he preached the future for people was to have multiple “passports”…..that’s s!I’m people.! Who get that! But russia and it’s orthodox church could make it. Give us Christians pass portals at el. They’d make out like bandits! By reverse pilgrims….in sight of religious freedom! There is a natural affinity to Russia for a reason. No one can peg it clearly or definitiiveky…..because it is by God! And I believe it is absolutely by God. And so does anyone who benefited from “lajes 86 545499a!

    1. The “intelligence “ community has been a dismal failure in recent years. The leadership have acted against the best interests of America. Brennen, Clapper, and Comey have allegiance to America’s enemies it seems rather than to our security. Lying under oath and blatant ineptitude are the hallmarks of those who signed the letter. They now admit such malevolence. A horrible segment of our government.

  2. “Word from the Wise? Former Intelligence Official Admits That They Always Assumed the Hunter Biden Emails Were Genuine”

    – Professor Turley
    ______________

    Douglas Wise et al. “fixed” the 2020 election by quashing evidence of criminal behavior by the Biden Family.

    If the Hunter Biden e-mails are genuine, Douglas Wise et al. must be prosecuted for egregious criminal dereliction, corruption, subversion, abuse of power by omission, voter fraud, voter corruption, vote tampering, election fraud, criminal conspiracy, treason, etc.

    1. If he were to bother answering you, I believe Professor Turley would answer that Wise has 1st Amendment protection for his lying. The counterweight against his lying is other people telling the truth, not criminalizing his lying.

      On this particular matter, Wise and 50 others lied explicitly and dozens of media outlets lied implicitly. Yet everyone knew the truth because other media reported it. It’s simply that this issue of Biden family corruption is trivial. We all believe all politicians are corrupt: Biden is corrupt, Trump is corrupt (his company has been found guilty of it after its CFO plead guilty to it without even going to trial), Clinton is corrupt, etc. So we simply have to make up our minds who to vote for based on other issues.

      So in 2020, most people in the United States ignored all this corruption on both sides and voted…
      1. …to stop exploring for and drilling for oil and gas in the one place in the world — the United States — that has the most of both of those commodities (driving up costs all along the supply chain)
      2. …to stop optimally cultivating and growing many key foodstuffs (which further increases costs in addition to the effect of oil prices on the foodstuffs’ supply chain)
      3. …to spend Federal government money like drunken sailors, money the government had to print (which devalues the dollar increasing prices)
      4. … to open the southern border to 5,000,000 people not lawfully allowed to live here This has a two fer effect on the situation
      — increases demand on the supply chain.
      — drives down the wages of those lawfully allowed to live here making the effects of price inflation even worse

      Even in the 2022 election, many but not most people voted for these ridiculous positions. But after the vote, we move on… elections have consequences

      1. “Trump is corrupt (his company has been found guilty of it after its CFO plead guilty to it without even going to trial”

        Are you saying all large businessmen are corrupt because someone down the chain may have erred? Did Trump break the law? No. Was he prosecuted? No. Is the fine up for appeal? Yes.

        I agree with you on the broader issues, but the business world might be more complex than you believe.

        1. Do you mean Trump is a large businessman in the sense that he is tall and a little porky.
          Because he does not run a large business. He runs a family candy store made up of a few hotel/golf courses, a few buildings he was smart enough to build in a prime location 40 years ago and umpteen hundred (thousand?) outer borough apartments (part of an inheritance). He failed at attempts to branch that lucrative but pretty easy to manage (pick up checks monthly) base out to casinos (who freaking loses money running a casino?), an airline (to get people to the casino I guess), food/wine, and a few other losing ventures.
          He is doing very well selling baseball hats at $50 and up I’m told like the ones you can buy alongside a parade route for $10

          1. Thank you, Dennis. And, those apartments he inherited were built by his father, using taxpayer money–appropriated by Congress to provide housing for GIs returning from WWII and Korea. According to Mary Trump, his niece who lived in one of the buildings, Fred Trump cut corners and the buildings were cheaply constructed from the lowest-cost materials he could find. Fred Trump wouldn’t even pay one cent more per brick to have different colored bricks–just the cheapest he could find. The Trumps are not the financial geniuses they try to pretend to be. All of the businesses he himself started either failed or are underwater–meaning he has to borrow money to keep the doors open. “The Apprentice” did make money–for awhile–until ratings dropped and the network dropped Trump. The entire premise of “The Apprentice” was that Trump was this fabulously wealthy financial genius, which we now know is just a lie.

            1. And that’s your bizarre rendition of what other people have done, which is absolutely NONE of your ——- business.

              What is your nose doing continually in other people’s business, comradette?

              What have you ever done but assimilate and incorporate welfare assistance, affirmative action, etc. into your life, constituting the foundation of your very existence.

              You communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) just can’t stand and hate free, talented, capable, motivated and successful people bequeathing their estates to their progeny or various beneficiaries who are not NUTCHACHACHA.

              Dang! You go, comradette girl, on Other People’s Money.

              What is it like to be a confirmed, life-long, dependent parasite?

              NUTCHACHACHA, may we get rid of affirmative action and your welfare state yet, or do you still need it to function in the world?

      2. “It’s the [scientific election mathematics], stupid!”

        – James Carville
        _____________

        If anyone bothered to read relevant statistics, actual numbers of votes were changed due to press “coverage” or the lack thereof.

        Those number differentials in critical states would have put Trump in the White House.

  3. Prof. Turley .. lest we forget .. “Slick Willie” had to publicly announce that his lumpy brother-in-law, Hugh Rodham .. did NOT have direct access to him ..

    What’s stopping “Not Trump” from saying this? Not enough napping?

  4. (OT)

    “Solomon Peña, who unsuccessfully ran for a state House seat in New Mexico as a Republican last November, was arrested Monday in Albuquerque for allegedly paying four men to shoot at the homes of four elected officials [all Democrats], police said. They say Peña paid $500 — and that he took part in one shooting himself. … In one case, Peña had visited one of the officials one or two days earlier, appearing at her home unannounced to complain that the election was stolen from him.”
    https://www.gpb.org/news/2023/01/17/losing-republican-candidate-in-nm-charged-over-shootings-at-homes-of-democrats

    Another election denier fostering violence.

    1. Aniny:
      “Solomon Peña, who unsuccessfully ran for a state House seat in New Mexico as a Republican last November, was arrested Monday in Albuquerque for allegedly paying four men to shoot at the homes of four elected officials [all Democrats], police said. They say Peña paid $500.00″
      ****************************************************
      I can feel and see your obvious consternation. Five hundred bucks is awfully cheap for effective pest control. Is there a GoFundMe yet?

      1. It is known for a fact the Wilmington Delaware home of Biden where he was senator holds numerous things of secret deception trafficking of children covered up with 100 years of documents my grandmother when England was being invaded was lost in the papers of time with 1000s of children coming off huge ships, them my mother,an then me now it is UK’s children again. 40 percent has been lost already . Not to mention that Foster Care workers are not coming forward to help , recover old and new cases. And his Corvette was a bribe

  5. (OT)

    Prominent conservative Matt Schlapp has been sued by a Hershel Walker staffer, who accused Schlapp of “aggressively fondling” his “genital area in a sustained fashion” while the two were alone in a car. The suit also accuses Schlapp’s wife Mercedes of defamation and conspiracy.

  6. Professor Turley,

    This is not “dubious logic”. We have known for decades that Russia will embed disinformation within a sea of truth to make it hard for reader to discern fact from fiction. The Soviet disinformation game used these methods, as well. A former Soviet Bloc disinformation officer and defector to the United States, Ladislav Bittman, makes this point in his 1972 book, “The Deception Game: Czechoslovak Intelligence in Soviet Political Warfare.”

    The letter that you reference above states only that laptop has the “classic earmarks” of Russian disinformation operation. It then states the REASONS for the signatories’ concern:

    1. Such an operation would be consistent with Russian objectives to create political chaos. This is true and a documented strategy of Russian disinformation.
    2. Such an operation would be consistent with key methods Russia has used (the “hacking” and “dumping of accurate information or the distribution of inaccurate or misinformation.” Note, that they recognized back then that accurate information may have been dumped.
    3. Such an operation would be consistent with “several data points.” They reference known intelligence regarding Russia’s targeting of Burisma to gain “access to its emails.” Specifically, Adriy Derkach has been identified as passing these materials on Burisma/Hunter Biden to Giuliani.

    Nothing in this statement and the Wise’s new comments is inconsistent. It is crucial that EACH email/photo/video, etc. be authenticated individually, rather than accepted as true en masse (as right-wing news has largely done with the HB laptop and as left-wing news has done with the Steele Dossier).

    Finally, calling Thomas Rid a WaPo “columnist” is like referring to you solely as a Fox News contributor. He is a professor, who is an expert in disinformation at Johns Hopkins and not simply a talking head without relevant credentials. His article makes the same point that other experts have made – that the laptop may not be entirely true or entirely false, and it is wrong to believe either extreme position without independent verification of each document.

    I don’t understand why a lawyer has trouble understanding the nuance here. In a courtroom, you can’t accept as true an entire trove of emails. You must authenticate each separate email that you plan to use as evidence at trial. The same should be true of ALL primary sources used for journalism, even if there is no reason to think that the Russians are involved.

      1. That is a statement reserved for the idiots on the blog. You are one of them? Are you President of the Turley fan club?

    1. Anonymous – do you have legal authority for the statement that if X owns a laptop, which is exclusively X’s laptop, and if that laptop contains a 1000 emails, a Court would not presume that all of the 1000 emails were “genuine”? Obviously, X might be given the opportunity to prove that someone hacked his laptop, but anyone in their right mind would begin by as accepting the genuineness of the emails. Your argument reminds me of the Alger Hiss case. When the FBI proved that incriminting documents had been typed on Hiss’s typewriter he told the grand jury that he had no idea how someone broke into as apartment and typed the documents. The grand jury laughed.

      1. The laptop is in the FBI’s possession.

        The hard drive “copy” that has been circulating was in multiple people’s possession, any one of whom could add/alter/delete things. It was not “exclusively” one person’s.

        1. Bzzt.
          Wrong Anon…

          You can raise these arguments. But alas no.
          Emails are kind of interesting.
          Look at the headers.
          Look at enough of them, you’ll see some things that show how and why they are very difficult to fake.

          Spoofing is one thing.
          Editing another.

          But both can be shown quickly.

          The legitimacy of the emails are not in doubt.

        2. But your initial argument was that the laptop was Russian disinformation even the hard drive the FBI had. You will keep changing your story as you always do.

          The information on the laptop was proven correct and had information proving it to be true, but you still insisted it was Russian disinformation. I believe you lied.

          1. “the information on the laptop was proven correct ”

            Do you have a cite for independent verification of every email, every photo, and every video, etc. Or are you just making that up?

            MANY were. SOME are uncorroborated. This does not mean ALL information has been verified.

            1. One never needs verification for everything. That idea of yours is one promoted by people who lie for a living. All one needs is verification for those things under question. The Bidens didn’t state the laptop and information wasn’t theirs. There were videos, hard to deny, there were audios, hard to deny, and there were conversations with third parties that agreed to the accuracy. Over one year the FBI found nothing wrong and since the release of the laptop, nothing was found wrong.

              On the other hand the letter, CIA 51, was acceptable to you and the NYTimes. It was used as evidence. Thank you for telling us how two-faced you are and proving you have no credibility.

        3. The hard drive “copy” that has been circulating was in multiple people’s possession, any one of whom could add/alter/delete things. It was not “exclusively” one person’s.

          All of these words are meaningless. It has all the markers of a finely crafted lie.

          1. Why is chain of custody and/or authentication “meaningless”?

            Do you value the truth in reporting? Or does it only matter when it supports your team?

            Chain of custody is a necessary part of authenticity. Without it, a journalist cannot determine whether the primary source has been tampered with before it reached him/her.

            To argue, dismissingly, and that this is meaningless must mean you do not care about the reliability of sources. If so, then continue reading whatever rags you want. You will always be misinformed. (And God forbid you are ever wrongly accused of a crime.)

            1. To argue, dismissingly, and that this is meaningless must mean you do not care about the reliability of sources.

              The leftist media cabal hasn’t had a relationship with truth for decades. the IC experts story should have never been written, because it contained opinion from people that admitted they had zero knowledge.
              Thats the point of this post.
              The media was desperate to kill the Hunter lap top scandal, so the reversed engineered willing experts to opine.

              You are the one that doesn’t care about sources. All you know is what the FBI and IC tell you. They have been proven liars constantly, yet you keep believing them because you want the propaganda

      2. @Edw as RDM

        Not sure what you’re trying to say here.

        Are you trying to establish a chain of custody?

        I think you’re trying to show that if we know that laptop is Hunters. (We can show that)
        That some of the emails have been corroborated, and there’s enough evidence to show that the other emails are consistent to being real. (checksum matches, no spoofing, etc …)

        That there is more than enough evidence to show its reasonable to conclude the emails are all legitimate.

        There will be evidence in some of the corroborated emails that lend authenticity to the others.

        -G

        1. “Are you trying to establish a chain of custody?”

          No. It’s cooking up arbitrary issues to deceive people and to undercut their confidence. It’s favorite tool of deception is to take a legitimate issue (in thise case, “chain of custody”) and use it to achieve a dishonest end.

    2. If you accept this way of looking at things, EVERY story that is critical of the candidate you oppose that is based on non-public documents most of which are thought to be genuine, and none of which has been shown to have been forged, would bear all the “earmarks” of a Russian disinformation operation.

      1. @Daniel,

        No. “This way of looking at things” (i.e. proper journalism) means that each primary document must be proven to be authentic/real. That does not mean every primary source has the earmarks of Russian disinformation. It could be Chinese. It could be domestic sources like political parties, etc. It could just be a lying idiot wanting to get attention (which is why reporters are supposed to get corroborating evidence before publishing.) But, if a journalist doesn’t verify sources, then the journalist isn’t doing his/her job.

        You get mistakes like the “golden showers” Trump story when you cut corners. That’s certainly “yellow journalism.”

        1. That does not mean every primary source has the earmarks of Russian disinformation.

          That is exactly what it means. This is exactly what happened. Because making the claim the negative information bears all the markings of Russia disinformation, lacked any evidence. ONLY the word of 51 experts.

          The 51 signed onto a letter linking the laptop to Russia disinformation. Those 51 had no evidence. The media had no evidence. The media coverage is still part of the news cycle. It is the logical fallacy of ‘appeal to authority’ . Something you use constantly. You use it on this post defending Thomas Rid. For no other reason than he is a professor, and you declared him “expert”. A great example of the logical fallacy of ‘appeal to authority’.

          1. Think about your comment. Does every primary source in the world have the same characteristics that led to that conclusion which lead it to be potential disinformation?

            Of course not. Why would a primary source for a sports news article — for example, an article quoting a head coach after a game – incite “political chaos”? It wouldn’t. Logic is hard.

          2. “. . . bears all the markings of Russia disinformation . . .”

            The only thing that “bears all the markings of” is that letter. And to be precise, it does not *bear* markings. It *is* textbook intelligence propaganda and manipulation, used to influence a presidential election. Can you say “Banana republic?”

            1. Do you have any support for the claim that the letter is intelligence propaganda? It is fine if you don’t. It just means that opinion is not very convincing.

              1. “Do you have any support for the claim that the letter is intelligence propaganda?”

                Tons. But none for you.

    3. “the laptop may not be entirely true or entirely false, and it is wrong to believe either extreme position without independent verification of each document.”

      LOLOLOL. Is that what gets you through the night? It may or may not be true? LOLOL.

      Biden is criminal scum, how is that so hard to understand and accept? He has risen from Token Joe the catholic white guy that makes obama seem less of a radical marxist wannabe, to a corrupt wheeler dealer. You think Burisma coincidentally paid junky biden all that money for nothing? LOLOL. Maybe Maybe not – bwahahahaha

      And you claim JT doesn’t understand nuance – lolol.

    4. What is not consistent, is who ever organized those ~50 former intel persons to sign a statement with no first hand knowledge.

      Academia has spent ALL of their credibility. Thomas Rid included.

      Your opinion is based on a 1972 book? Relevance is a word you should get accustom to.

      While it showed all the marks, examination proved it was not Russia. So it was always a lie.

      You demand “and it is wrong to believe either extreme position without independent verification of each document.” yet ignore your own standard for the ~50 intel experts

      In a courtroom, you can’t accept as true…
      But this is the Intelligence Community that has been running an extensive propaganda campaign under the direction of the Democrat Party, to affect elections. Not a court of law.,

      1. Which of the 50 experts are you claiming was the author of a news story?

        The argument concerns journalistic standards for hard news, not opinion articles.

        The letter explicitly stated that the OPINION was not based on any actual evidence. If your issue is with the news media amplifying the letter through their outlets, then I guess you are advocating for censorship of their First Amendment rights? Are you saying WaPo and NYT should not be able to run opinion pieces by experts?

        1. The letter explicitly stated that the OPINION was not based on any actual evidence

          The FBI/IC had the laptop for over a year by the time of the letter. The FBI/IC knew it was not Russia. The signers knew investigation has proven Russia not involved. All of this is consistent with the IC actively pushing propaganda. To oranize 51 IC spooks to sign such a letter exposes the lie. Wise exposed the whole thing.
          I never said anything about censoring. Let the lies flow. WaPo, NYT, no longer have any credibilty, because they keep getting exposed when people like Wise, final tell the truth. I never gave those 51 any credence, Why did NYT and WaPo? You never ask the question, because your a fan of the govt pushing propaganda

          1. Do you know the difference between fact and opinion? Between hard news and opinion articles?

            Perhaps we should start with the basics.

            If so, can you tell me which (news or opinion) the expert letter was?

            … Does your answer help you reevaluate your above comment that the letter shows I have ignored my “own standard”?

            Simple questions. Now, your turn.

            1. If so, can you tell me which (news or opinion) the expert letter was?
              That’s easy. It is fact. Those signatories were who they said they were. Fact that it utilized the logical fallacy, appeal to authority. Fact the experts knew NOTHING.

              FACT that despite all of the facts, the media made it a story.

              1. Wow. Ok. Now I understand. You just think the WSJ Editorial Board articles are also fact and not opinion because the authors are real people!

            2. “Do you know the difference between fact and opinion? Between hard news and opinion articles?”

              That is the question you should be asking yourself. You used the CIA 51 as evidence in your arguments, yet you said the laptop wasn’t proven even though nothing used from the laptop wasn’t verified. Your argument makes you sound like a duplicitous person who can never be trusted. Maybe we shouldn’t say, ’sound like’, and just say it as it is. You are a duplicitous person and a liar. You have proven that.

              You believed the Russia hoax and most of the components that didn’t even make sense, Are you that unintelligent. You believed the Ukraine hoax as well. You side with non-information when good information exists because the good information proves your world vision wrong.

              It seems your job in life is to taint everything that is good so you can promote badness and lies.

              1. OPINION articles and NEWS articles are DIFFERENT. I don’t know why this is so hard.

                News articles require journalistic standards because the journalist is reporting the news.
                Opinion articles are NOT news. They are… drumroll please…. OPINIONS.

                The letter was NOT NEWS. It was OPINION. Ergo, it is not subject to journalistic standards required of news articles. Capice?

                I used to teach second graders the difference between fact and opinion. Fact: “The Earth is round.” Opinion: “I think the Earth is big.” That is the second grade lesson.

                For those of us who have graduated Second Grade, NEWS: According to [Insert Hunter Biden Laptop Email], X.” OPINION: “We experts think the Hunter Biden laptop article may be Russian disinformation based on our expertise in the field.”

                Do you see the difference here? Yikes.

                1. because the journalist is reporting the news.
                  What was the “news” in the spooks, “news” piece. I see nothing in that piece of writing that qualifies as news. It contains zero information

    5. “It then states . . .”

      Mad speculation about a particular case is proof of nothing about that case. It does, though, prove an intent to deceive and to manipulate.That, of course, makes you an Apologist for deception and manipulation.

      1. What are you labeling “speculation”? Direct quotes from the letter? Have you read the letter? If not, who’s speculating?

        1. “Have you read the letter?”

          The one who supplies phony links, misinformation and books of details is asking whether another has read the letter. When dealing with fact Sam has been mostly correct and anonymous is almost always wrong even when he links to proof (that proves him wrong). It’s time to stop with the nonsense. Most people know you fail when it comes to providing proof, and you lie when it comes to providing evidence.

          1. https://www.politico.com/f/?id=00000175-4393-d7aa-af77-579f9b330000

            That link is to the letter. Please check my quotes above…. Please let me know if anything I quoted was “phony.”

            I’d like to respond to Sam, but I have no clue what “speculation” he is talking about. My whole point through this has been that journalistic standards should apply to each document contained within the laptop. There is nothing speculative about that. That applies regardless of whether the material is bad for Democrats or to Republicans.

            If you disagree, because you think you have a higher tolerance for some news to be based on fake sources, then that’s fine. But, I would rather read news that is based on sound reporting than Putin’s or Xi’s or DNC or RNC (or anyone else’s) designed ends.

    6. We do not conclude that because the wind is blowing we will have a huricane.

      Contra left wing nuts there is a chain of custody for the laptop HD and no reason to beleive the Russians were aware of it.

      Further even if the Russians got the HD and inserted a few FALSE flags in the midst of all the True information.
      That does not make the true information false.

      Each and every item in the NY Post story was VERIFIED before it was used.

      It is not hard for either Reporters or CIA agents (or even idiots like you) to vet information.

      Emails have senders and recipients. All that one needs is confirmation form ONE to assume something is not russian disinformation.

      The where and when of many things can be established.
      If there is a picture of Biden meeting with Narco Traffickers in Cancun in May 2015 – was Biden in Cancun in may 2015 and was he at the location of the picture ? Biden was either VP or ex-VP for much of this – his whereabouts are documented.

      Deleted data from the Laptop was used by black hats to reconstruct Hunter’s Apple Cloud security keys and gain access to Hunters iCloud account.
      This too authenticates the contents of the laptop.

      The authors of this memo all knew that it was possible, and in fact relatively simple to confirm just about any significant peice of information on the laptop fiarly quickly and all of it with enough time.

      1. What is the chain of custody for the laptop? Can you give it to me with detail?

        Can you cite any similar piece of reporting with anything remotely similar with respect to such chain of custody?

        1. Hunter to Paul Mac to FBI,
          Hunter to Paul Mac to Guiliani.

          You are free to beleive whatever you wish, but you have two copies that can if necescary be compared.

          I would note that the chain of custody is not actually important – though it is perfectly solid.
          Because the contents are Self authenticating.

          Glenn Greenwald probaly the most prestigious National Security Journalist of the past 20 years
          This is his Article on the Biden Laptop in Nov, 2020, about half way in he explains how to authenitcate the contents and why the idiotic “Russian Disinformation” crap is complete bollocks and just and excuse that Real Journalists would never credit if the Target was Trump.
          https://greenwald.substack.com/p/article-on-joe-and-hunter-biden-censored

          1. By this standard, did you support the authenticity of the Steele dossier? Authentication doesn’t matter if there’s a LOT of documents!

            This is ridiculous. Emails are generally not self-authenticating.

            Also, looking to Greenwald for authentication standards is rich. He is best known for document dumps like Wikileaks/Snowden/Brazil prior to authentication. Why use him?

            1. Please read what I wrote – authentication is not “lots of documents”

              It is lots of VERFIED documents.

              What of the Steele Dossier has been verified ? Nothing.

              Danchenko admitted it was all lies and gossip.

              That is what DOE NOT AUTHENTICATE means.

              Do you have a single email or photo from the Biden laptop that is meaningful and is provably false ?

              It is self evident that your standards are driven by politics not facts.

              We have debated RussiaGate here for a long time.
              There is nothing of any consequence regarding that that has not ultimately been PROVEN false.
              There is nothing of significance that was EVER proven True.

              Tony Bobulinski has confirmed every single email that he was part of.
              Nor is he the only one. Just the most high profile.
              Photo;s that place the Biden’s with specific bad dudes, have been verified that the people in the photo were at the locations they were photographed at those times.

            2. So what exactly has Greenwald EVER been wrong about ?
              He is pretty good at authenticated things – that is what is means when you NEVER get something wrong.

              BTW Greenwald has no ties to Wikileaks.

              Actually legitimate emails ARE “self authenticating”

              Aparently you are unfamiliar with emails. Every email has a header – what in other contexts is called meta data.

              That header identified every single mailserver that it traveled through, and the dates and times that it traveled through them, as well as UUID’s
              https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universally_unique_identifier
              that are asigned for each leg of the journey.

              Every bit of the information in the header can be verified against the logs on those servers that it traveled through.

              And if the Email is not Plain Text and anything sent by microsoft clients is not plain text, and most of what is sent by other clients is not plain text.
              Then the email and the header will have checksums to prove authenticity.

              Regardless, getting any of these emails admitted in court is trivial.
              You put on the stand anyone in the to, from, cc or bcc list and you ask them to confirm that the sent or recieved it

              You keep trying to pretend this is hard – it is not.

              There are not emails associated with the Steele Dossier – because faking an email is somewhere between unbeleiably hard and totoaly impossible. Faking 10 emails is astronmomically difficult Faking 100,000 emails is statistically impossible.

              I would separately note that CIA rejected the Alpha Bank nonsense – because they were easily able to detect that the internet records being used had been human manipulated.

              It is just not possible for humans to forge this kind of metadata without making errors that will get easily picked up.

              But I will bet you beleived the Alpha Bank hoax, and that Trump campaign people were using Russian phones.

              Quite odd – you fall hook line and sinker for obvious frauds and can not except truth when it bites you in the ass.

        2. “Can you cite any similar piece of reporting with anything remotely similar with respect to such chain of custody?”

          The chain of custody for RussiaGate is far worse. There is no direct links to the sources, and eventually the authors of the Steele Dossie admitted it was made up.

          The chain of custody for the DNC Emails in 2016 was much worse, It is Julian Assange claiming he got them from an inside source.
          The chain of custody for Pretty much everything from Wikileaks is worse.

          The chain of custody for nearly every Trump MAL story is worse. The only thing that is actually verified is the Warrant and the unredacted portions of the Affadavit of probable cause.

          The FACT is that nearly all reporting has a Far WEAKER chain of custody than this.

          In this case We have photos and emails etc From Hunter Biden’s laptop that can ALL be verified by getting confirmation from others who sent or received the emails, Photo’s can be verified using MetaData and comparing that to known facts about the people in the Photo – like were they where they were photgraphed at that time.

          You really are clueless about this.

          If this were a criminal trial it would not be very difficult to get this admitted.

          In the world of Journalism prior to 2017 when the MSM suddenly realized that by Reporting that Hillary Clinton and the DNC were crooks trying to F’over Bernie, that they contributed to getting Trump elected.

          Regardless, based on REAL standards of Journalism – the Steele Dossier would not normally get reported – because it can not be verified.
          But this would have been a giant news story with real journalists prior to 2017.

  7. I see by the way the Professor is writing now that he has totally had enough of these disgusting people.

  8. Turley, do you get a bonus from Fox when you find some way to DAILY bring up the “Hunter Biden Scandal”? I mean, really, how hard can you keep beating this dead horse, anyway? At some point, even the disciples will figure out that this is just a diversion away from truly important political stories that make Republicans look bad, like George Santos, whom the Republican not only aren’t going to sanction–today, he received Committee assignments. He’s a proven crook and liar, he’s wanted by Brazil for fraud, and he’s responsible for McCarthy getting the Speaker’s gavel after 14 failed rounds of voting. With the number of Republicans who just voted “present” if Santos wasn’t there, McCarthy would not have won on round 15, but you have nothing to say about this, eitehr. Even his fellow NY Republicans have demanded that he step down, but he refuses and just ignores reporters. Yet, every day, you find some way to criticize Democrats, accuse them of being deceitful, and other bad conduct, all because that’s what Fox does.

    Most Americans don’t care about Hunter Biden or his laptop, and no crimes have been proven to have been committed, so why harp on this constantly, other than the fact that you have sold your credentials to carry water for Fox. Hunter Biden did not work in the White House or have anything to do with government. Plus, you ignore the stories about Jared’s entanglements with MBS, who murdered Jamal Kashoggi. And, of course, you ignored today’s Trump trash talk piece: he’s blaming Evangelicals for not “fighting” for Republicans, instead of himself, his endless lying, his general repulsiveness and failures as a candidate, for the red wave that never happened. It is indeed a fact that Hannity told Trump to be sure to have a story about him every day, not to go away quietly like losing Presidential candidates have always done, in respect of the will of the American people. You are just part of this project.

    1. @Gigi,

      The Hunter Biden scandal is one of a lawless Hunter and Joe selling access and putting our nation at risk while they lined their pocket books.

      You seem to want to deflect and in you deflection, you make a worse argument. You do realize that Joe Biden had to also distance SA from the Kashoggi murder… yeah. He had to recognize that the SA royal family and those involved have diplomatic immunity. Note: That was Joe’s office admitting it.

      But lets get back on point.

      Hunter’s laptop is evidence of criminal activity. To your point. If this was Jared and Trump, you and the MSM would be all over it along w every lunatic fringe Dem calling for Trump’s impeachment and then criminal prosecution.
      Oh wait, they tried that 3 times and failed w weaker cases.

      -G

      1. Where is the proof that any of this happened? Do you have any? All you do is listen to alt-right media that claims, as if it were proven fact, that “access” was “sold” by Hunter to Joe Biden. The effect of which was—what? Do you know? Can you say who did the bribing, how much the bribes were, and what benefit was received by the ones paying the bribes (allegedly), or are you waiting for Mark Levin, Hannity and/or Tucker to come up with something? Kashoggi was murdered when the pig was in the White House–the pig who needs foreign loans to keep his phony empire afloat after taking 6 bankruptcies, and whose businesses continue generating losses year after year. That, too, is a fact proven by his tax returns he tried so desperately to hide. Hunter might just be a big fat liar–someone who makes up and/or embellishes the facts. Nothing has been proven. And, Hunter never worked in the White House, either, unlike Jared who needs MBS’s money to keep his failing business afloat.

        Trump WAS impeached–that DID happen. You are confusing impeachment with removal from office, which didn’t happen but SHOULD have. Republicans refused to do the right thing. The first impeachment was over Trump’s attempt to leverage aid appropriated by Congress to Ukraine. We all heard the call, what Trump said–those are FACTS–not spin–not inuennedo. The second impeachment was over his inciting of the riot when he refused to accept the will of the American people that he had lost the election. We all saw that, too–it was live on television at the time. He sat in front of a television for over 3 hours, transfixed, watching how much he was loved, while Capitol Police were being beaten, our Capitol building was desecrated, windows smashed, doors broken, urine and feces smeared on the walls, John Lewis Memorial defaced, offices broken into, things stolen, and our fearless leader refused to stop them, even when they called for hanging Mike Pence. He sat there for over 3 hours, ignoring pleas to stop the violence, even from his own daughter, and when he did finally act, he told the rioters they were “special” and that he “loved them”. Now, he calls them “patriots” and promises to “pardon” them if he can find a way to steal the White House again, which is the only way he’ll ever get back in. And, he still won’t shut up or go away. For a second time, Republicans failed to do the right thing. Neither the effort to gin up fake evidence against Biden by leveraging aid to Ukraine, nor the January 6th riots that Trump caused with his lies was a “weak” case. The evidence is public, and cannot be denied. Your belief that Joe Biden accepted bribes from some mysterious foreigners is based on nothing at all.

        1. @Gigi
          Wow
          Trump was impeached twice.
          Both politically motivated with no actual evidence to support the charges raised by the House.

          In fact Mueller’s theory on obstruction was nonsense from the get go. The courts have a precedence from Bush where in exercising his legal role as POTUS, he pardoned two people that stopped the Iran/Contra investigation. POTUS’s legal actions trump an investigation.

          But lets get back to the Bidens.
          You have the allegations. Yet no one has been charged … yet. So no guilt has been found.

          You really need to pay attention.

          As to the Jan 6th investigations… release the full set of videos taken that day.
          I’m sure you’ll find a bit more.

          The only thing that they were guilty of is stopping Congress which is a misdemeanor. Not sedition or anything.
          Also read the transcripts from Trump’s speech.

          1. Mueller had nothing to do with either impeachment, but your alt-right media tries to conflate things to confuse you disciples. Mueller investigated the Trump campaign conspiring with Russian hackers to spread lies about Hillary Clinton on social media in key districts where the lies might sway enough voters to win the Electoral College and still lose the popular vote, which is what happened The impeachments were over trying to leverage aid to Ukraine in exchange for ginning up lies about Joe Biden, and for fomenting a riot by lying about the election being “stolen”, which it wasn’t. The Trump-inspired rioters smashed windows and doors, beat up police officers, smeared human waste on the walls of the Capitol, and stole things–each of these things are individual crimes over and above the purpose for breaking in–which was sedition–to try to prevent Biden’s victory from being certified–and they conspired to do it in advance. A British journalist embedded himself with the Proud Boys (whom Trump told to “stand down and stand by”), and went on reconnaissance missions before Jan 6th to plot the most-vulnerable possible points of entry. Some have pleaded guilty and/or were found guilty of seditious conspiracy. YOU are the one who needs to pay atention.

        2. I was listening to Bari Weis’s “Honestly” podcast yesterday. They were doing a roundtable on “free speech”, with entirely left leaning but not Woke journalists.

          One journalist referenced “Fang Fang” and the others said “who is Fang Fang” ?

          And Bari Weis chimed in this was one of the things she learned from her work on the twitter files.

          We have two america’s divided over knowledge and ignorance. And knowing who “fang Fang” is, is a litmus test of whether you are on the left – insulated in every possible way from reality by the media, social media, etc. Or in the other half of the country that knows all about Fang Fang.

          Your rants are reflective of being in that left wing nut bubble isolated from reality.

          I doubt you know who fang fang is.

          You also do not know that pretty much all what you claim about J6 has been debunked. Quite often – such as the feces claim it attributes what happened at some prior left wing protests to those on the right.

          Please join the real world.

          Your entitled to your own opinions.
          Not your own facts.

          Hopefully MacCarthy will make good on his pledge to release all the 14,000 hours of J6 capitol video
          As well as communications between pelosi and the CP.

          I would also like to seem him release all the “secret” testimony the J6 committee gathered.

          Regardless, we are all entitled to the ACTUAL truth – not just the fake narative the left has been selling for 2 years.

          What lie is so big that when told by those on the left you cease to beleive ?

          You are still among the collusion delusion wing nuts.

          NYU just did a study of Russian bots in 2016 and found ZERO impact on the election.
          They found Hillary lost the election by trying to run up the vote in CA, rather than visiting the Rust belt where she was in trouble.

  9. Svelaz comments that 51 former intelligence officials wrote that they did not know if the emails provided to the New York Post are genuine or not and that they did not have evidence of Russian involvement. That, in and of itself and in another time when objective and impartial journalism existed, would have been more than enough for all discernible journalists to further investigate the matter rather than wholly abandon truth seeking and so obediently accept the suspicions of intelligence officials as final word on the matter.

    The concern we should have is not so much that some intelligence officials are now backpedaling, but instead that so much of our media failed so deliberately to press on. There is no better example of it than when Thomas Rid wrote in the Washington Post under the paper’s “Perspective” section: “We must treat the Hunter Biden leaks as if they were a foreign intelligence operation — even if they probably aren’t.”
    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-post-piece-calls-on-media-to-report-hunter-biden-leaks-as-foreign-disinformation-even-if-it-probably-isnt

    1. @Ron,
      Its a bit worse than that.

      They made a declarative statement that the laptop announcement had all the ‘hallmark’ characteristics of a Russian Disinformation campaign, and even suggested that they didn’t know if the Russians were involved, or if the laptop wasn’t real, only that it could potentially be a Russian Hoax.

      So what they said was that there was a potential hoax but couldn’t be sure … knowing that the MSM would jump on it. (Aka the Russian pee tapes could have been real but probably not. )

      They knew what they said was factually correct, yet improbable given the circumstances.

      All 51 of those men should lose all security clearances and should be looked at.

      -G

    2. Ron A. Hoffman, that’s not what they said. They emphasized that their letter was meant to be a cautionary warning that the laptop story shouldn’t be taken at face value. They didn’t claim their word was final or it was definitive. Right-leaning media was falsely characterizing the narrative that they were saying it was misinformation. They are not backpedaling. They never did. Turley is disingenuously making that claim without backing it up.

      Turley deliberately limited any quotes or linked to the article he used to make his claims precisely because they are not saying what he claims they said.

      1. @Svalaz

        Do you not pay attention, or actually spend time thinking about what you’re saying.

        Yes, their ‘letter’ was meant to be a cautionary tale that this may be Russian Interference, but they couldn’t be sure.

        Now why did they 51 sign on to a letter that offered no definitive value or actual warning?
        It was done w a purpose. A kitchen spoon so to speak. (It sounds better in Yiddish).

        Just making the statement itself was disinformation in an effort to provide air cover to the Bidens.

        There’s more to it.
        Bottom line. Spooks don’t make public statements unless they have something to gain or an agenda to pursue.
        Same spooks claimed Trump colluded w Russians.

        Now why would they make those knowingly false statements?

        -G

    3. The NYP did not give other outlets like WaPo and NYT access to the laptop. They finally received a copy from Jack Maxey, a GOP activist who got it from Giuliani in JUNE 2021. So, how could other sites “further investigate the matter rather than wholly abandon truth seeking?”

      If anything, the NYP was “abandoning truth-seeking” by failing to allow others to verify the laptop contents.

      By the way, once the other major outlets got access to it, they did attempt to and partially verify the laptop’s contents.

      WaPo: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/hunter-biden-laptop-data-examined/

      NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-tax-bill-investigation.html

      1. The FBI had the laptop for over a year. The NYT and WaPo are in lockstep with the Democrat Party, and you are in lockstep with the far left, not to be trusted.

        You hung onto the 51 CIA agent’s letter touting that type of cr-p. It shows you have no mind of your own and believe whatever agrees with your ideology. You lost credibility a long time ago and it seems you never had it in the first place.

      2. The NYP didn’t have access to the laptop.
        And they did provide verifiable evidence which was ignored for many years. WaPo and NYT could have gotten their hands on the data which was shared and could independently verify. Which they did… over 2 yrs later.

        Keep digging Anon.

        -G

  10. I clap my hands with joy when imagining this guy being interrogated by The House Intelligence Committee. They will ask, you signed something saying it was true when you knew it was not true? Do you not have a moral foundation of any kind? To think that your being in the CIA we trusted you with the security of the nation. Even now their is no repentance for your playing god. It is a sad day.

    1. OT: Biden’s use of private lawyers to conduct the searches instead of law enforcement may have made it more difficult to use fingerprint evidence to try and find out who handled the documents. A discovery of Biden’s prints would cast doubt on the “inadvertence” story.

    2. @Thinking it Through…

      You need to spend more time ‘thinking things through’. 😉

      Read exactly what they said.

      They said that it had all the hallmarks of a Russian Misinformation campaign however they don’t know and can’t say for certain about it.
      (We think maybe, but who knows. )
      In their letter they did the typical doublespeak and said it could be one thing, but who knows for certain.

      They admitted in their letter to the public that they didn’t know which end was up.

      They go in front of the House Intelligence Committee, they will just stand by their non specific statements.

      The real question that should be asked… who contacted them to be a signatory of the document?
      Why did they feel the need to call out a questionable call about Russian Misinformation.

      Then depending on the person… ask about other ‘disinformation campaigns like the infamous Pee tape.

      -G

  11. Some posting here are still saying that The Hunter laptop was somehow altered even after this guy admits that he and others always knew that the emails on the Hunter Biden laptop were likely genuine. Here is a man who was instrumental in debunking the laptop when he believed the contents were authentic. I would not doubt that he has his plagues on the wall in his home and office so that people can see his acts of patriotism. He always knew that the laptop was not Russian disinformation but he went ahead and effected an American election anyway. Im sure that Benedict Arnold had plagues on the wall too.

  12. I wonder if Mr. Wise is ever complemented by old acquaintances about his new looks. I’m sure they consider his increased nose length a thing of beauty! Truth be damned.

  13. We can only imagine the Democratic party and media crimes that are still hidden. This is the tip of the iceberg. When you control the media and the narrative, you can get away with anything. It also helps to have a bogyman like Trump to keep the masses entertained while you commit your dirty deeds in darkness.

  14. The administrative state gets to choose our leaders the whole vote thing is a charade. In 2016 the state seriously underestimated Trump’s numbers and did not have the ‘proper controls’ in place to overcome them. Why Obama called Clinton early on to concede so the steal operation wouldn’t be exposed.

  15. Stephen King said, “The trust of the innocent is the liar’s most useful tool.”
    How much longer will Democrats continue to trust the NY Times, Washington Post, MSNBC, CNN, etc — those who have spewed misinformation now for years? It appears that many Democrats are finally realizing they’ve been duped.

  16. I give Wise zero credit for this admission. It is no coincidence that this statement is made today, and not within the past two years, as we now have a Republican majority in Congress that will ask hard questions to be answered under oath. Wise is trying to protect his tail. He has no interest in ethics or principle, as he eagerly demonstrated by his signing of the letter.

  17. These traitors should be hung for lying to the American people and letting the corrupt Bidens get anywhere NEAR the White House.

    1. I’m convinced only Joe Biden could make Trump look good. In retrospect.

      Matt Taibbi is calling for new ‘Truth and Reconciliation’ hearings .. . but I’m thinking more like Nuremburg.

      Fwiw, the National Archives continues to maintain “all Obama documents” are accounted for and professionally managed according to existing law and protocols.

      *the stench wafting out of Washington D.C. is so foul and odious .. . birds drop dead just flying over it.

  18. Turley, It seems you are being a tad disingenuous with what Wise was saying and you leave out a lot of context about the whole story. At the time it was believed Russia was going to attempt to meddle in our election like they did before. Wise and all the other signatories were correct in issued that letter to express that we should be cautious about the Hunter Biden claims at the time. Turley keeps forgetting or deliberately leaves out the fact that Rudy Giuliani a very gullible patsy and all around moron was spreading this story and copies of the hard drive like candy. It has already been shown that the hard drive was tampered with multiple times making any legitimacy claims more difficult to corroborate.

    You never quote Wise directly and don’t link to the article itself. This is what he said,

    “ All of us figured that a significant portion of that content had to be real to make any Russian disinformation credible,”

    They are not saying what you claim they are saying. You’re not telling the whole story. You/re only providing what will fit your deceptive narrative.

    “ In the letter, the 51 former officials underscored “that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement.” The officials leaned on their credentials to argue “our experience makes us deeply suspicious that the Russian government played a significant role in this case.”

    “ The letter said it had the earmarks of Russian deceit and we should consider that as a possibility,” Wise added in his interview with the Australian. “It did not say Hunter Biden was a good guy, it didn’t say what he did was right and it wasn’t exculpatory, it was just a cautionary letter.”

    “ Wise also indicated he had no regrets about signing the letter since there was always the possibility that the “Russians or even ill-intended conservative elements could have planted stuff in there.”

    It has already been shown that a lot of those copies had a lot of content added. The suspicion was warranted at the time simply because the Russians DID meddle in the election and Trump’s very public pleading for Russians to hack Hillary’s emails reinforced that suspicion. They weren’t wrong in claiming that the Hunter Biden laptop story ‘could have been’ Russian misinformation and should be taken with a big grain of salt.

    1. Svelaz from the darkside (‘Turley, It seems you are being a tad disingenuous…’) .. just starting to read what you wrote, as always brings up the choice: do we cry or laugh over such absurd statements…??

        1. Proposed response by18th hole “we don’t need no stinking reading”….”we’ve got Hannity, Levin, Ingraham, Tucker and Turley”.

    2. Svelaz, you still continue to peddle the idea that the Hunter laptop was fake. You use the possibility of Russian disinformation as an excuse for the misleading of the American people. I have posted the following link on more than one occasion but you never respond. We now know that Russian influence on Twitter was not considered to be meaningful by twitter itself. Deny all you want but here is the link. https://www.cbsnews.com/video/copy-of-hunter-biden-laptop-data-appears-genuine-independent-experts-find/. You say that you just didn’t know back then but you did know. Like a toy cymbal clanging chattering monkey you repeat the same refrain over and over because it is what you’ve been programed to do regardless of facts that are before your eyes. Like in the Princess Bride you are inconceivable.

      1. Thinkitthrough,

        “ Svelaz, you still continue to peddle the idea that the Hunter laptop was fake.”

        Nope. Nobody is saying it’s fake. Only that things were added to it that were not from the original. Remember Giuliani set a ton of copies to a lot of people, but he doesn’t have the original.

        “ Several emails within a cache of more than 128,700 emails allegedly associated with a Hunter Biden laptop that allies of and former staff of President Donald Trump are circulating show “signs of tampering,” according to a recent analysis.

        Distributed Denial of Secrets, a nonprofit transparency journalism outlet focused on bringing newsworthy documents and data to light, published the findings Saturday.

        “There are considerable issues with this dataset including signs of tampering, as well as misconceptions about its contents,” a write-up of the organization’s findings reads. “More than one altered or implanted emails was detected in a version of the dataset distributed by Trump allies and former staffers.”

        https://www.cyberscoop.com/hunter-biden-emails-possible-tampering-trump-allies/

        “ The WaPo asked security experts Matt Green (who worked with his Johns Hopkins students) and Jake Williams to review the drive to see what they could authenticate.

        They discovered that people had kept adding content to the “laptop,” making it impossible to say what was on the “laptop” when it was provided to the blind computer repairman.

        https://www.emptywheel.net/2022/11/18/what-that-report-purportedly-authenticating-the-hunter-biden-laptop-really-said/

        1. “Nobody is saying it’s fake. Only that things were added to it that were not from the original. Remember Giuliani set a ton of copies to a lot of people, but he doesn’t have the original.”
          Guiliani does not have the original. He has a digital copy – exactly the same as the original.
          You could put it into the correct MAC laptop boot it and even hunter could not tell it from the original.
          In fact there is no consequential difference between that and the original.

          But far more importantly – every single email, photo, etc in the NY Post story was thoroughly authenticated before printing.
          Even if 99.99% of the Laptop was fake(0% actually was), what NY Post printed was true.

          If you believe that some of the contents were tampered with – make SPECIFIC claims publicly – not more of this 51 former …..

          Which emails were tampered with and how – so that we can go back and actually VERIFY those emails.
          You seem to fail to grasp that multiple people have copies of every email in the Biden laptop.

          If your security group claims some were tampered with – that can be PROVEN true or false relatively easily.

          BTW your quote regarding tampering and misconceptions is self repudiating.
          It is not the role of any legitimate forensics group to address perceptions – that is not inside the domain of computer (or any other) form of forensics. When you start talking about misperceptions, you are showing political bias and devaluing your forensics.

          Regardless, I can reach my own PERCEPTIONS – I do not need some left wing nut pseudo tech group to tell me what I should perceive.

          If you have evidence of “tampering” – that is actually easily tested.

          Are you prepared to bet your credibility on your actual evidence ?

          If you do not present the evidence – I think not.

        2. Did you read your own Source ?

          According to YOUR source – which is self describe Journalists. not cyber security experts.
          Only a few emails were “altered” and those “altered” did not change their substance.

          Further YOUR source – refused to provide any specifics to confirm their claims.

    3. At the time it was believed Russia was going to attempt to meddle in our election like they did before.

      That’s your lie. You always make a declarative statement. Often a lie.

      Cite your source.

      What we are learning, as with the admission of Wise, there was never evidence of any Russia attempt to influence the 2016 election, at a level to affect the outcome. The only proof I have ever seen was $200K facebook ads. For the innumerate left. That’s 200K out of $2,000,000,000 (yes Billion)

      That means people like Wise had zero evidence. to form such a “belief”

      Mueller indicted all those Russians for for interfering in the election. Wife and I heard that announcement while driving. My wife said,” that’s impressive” and I informed her, that indicting people that will never appear in court to answer the indictment, is meaningless PR.
      In fact one company did appear, and Mueller was forced to abandon the trial…due to lack of evidence.
      Yet another data point the DoJ is full of prosecutors that just aren’t capable of telling the truth. Like Trump has committed a criminal act by declaring documents his personal possession, and not a Presidential Record.

      1. We indicted 12 Russian military intelligence officers for their roles in interfering with the 2016 election. They were charged with computer hacking conspiracy involving gaining unauthorized access the computers of US individuals/entities, stealing documents from those computers, and staging releases of those documents to interfere with the 2016 election. There were other charges, like identity theft and conspiracy to commit money laundering. Two of the defendants were charged with a separate conspiracy, involving the hacking of computers of state boards of election, secretaries of state and US companies that supplied software and other tech related to the administration of the 2016 election.

        https://www.fbi.gov/wanted/cyber/russian-interference-in-2016-u-s-elections

        They are currently on FBI’s Most Wanted list. Still think there’s no connection to the 2016 election?

        1. Still think there’s no connection to the 2016 election?

          Still waiting for evidence.

          We know the one Russia indictment that was answered, Mueller was forced to dismiss. Indicting Russia intelligence officers was always a piece of propaganda to feed the always false notion that Russia affected the election in any meaningful way.

      2. This is small potatoes, something that can be done at any time under almost any circumstance. It’s meaningless. Keep twiddling your toes while the world moves by.

        1. Why is a foreign state’s efforts to influence US elections “small potatoes”?

          What would be “big potatoes”?

          Care to offer any support for this conclusion?

          1. Because you made a big deal over it when it is usual and inconsequential. You skip Biden’s double dealings, though if the Democrats decide to dump him ,you will proudly announce how bad he is.

            Big potatoes is Biden’s deals with China, Ukraine and elsewhere.
            Big deals is converting the US into a repressive nation with censorship.
            Big deal is impoverishing the working American, inflation, destroying our schools etc.

      1. Iowan2,
        The only way to prove or disprove “added content” would to be compare, bit by bit, the drives.
        Have yet to see any credible source prove that.
        The lengths the computer shop owner went to to get the FBI to even look at laptop let alone take it into their possession, and in light of the Twitter files, I would not consider the FBI to be a credible source.
        Otherwise, repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it to be true. To include the person whom told the lie in the first place.

        1. upstatefarmer,
          True
          I also highlighted we are only getting information through the IC, by interview, or by leak. The IC has proven itself to be nothing but a political actor pushing the political narrative dictated by the Democrat Part.

          It is important for all the consumers of news to understand the huge amount of misinformation pushed by the secretive, un-accountable Intelligence Community. Almost every news item is tainted by IC influence.

Leave a Reply