NYTs Doesn't Care That We Now Know Big Tech Rigged The Election

[HisArpy]

soooo...if Big Tech is so powerful and vast, why didn't Big Tech help Hillary win? It's only a four-year diff.

was the tech smaller then, or..?

maybe we should be calling them "Bigger Tech" now?

She lost, get over it.

 

[HisArpy]

How did all those people not hear about it? You guys on the right and right wing media at the time wouldn't shut up about the laptop or hunter and Biden's corruption.

Perhaps because social media censored the story and locked the NY Post's account so no one could read it?

 

[jomar]

Lol, you really are clueless.

What you don't know, yet post about, is legion

Or, are you trying to assert that just because you're completely ignorant, that means something never happened?

Media Research Center receives low credibility score

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/media-research-center-mrc/

 

[HisArpy]

Media Research Center receives low credibility score

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/media-research-center-mrc/

Lol, yep a typical ignoramous response, deride the source rather than discuss the content.

It's no freaking wonder you had to cheat to win the election in 2020.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

She lost, get over it.

I was over it when she conceded the night she lost, Matlock.

I know you can't say the same, it's okay. It's been about two years of your whine...if only the accompanying cheese was as quality!

https://media2.giphy.com/media/BFYLNwlsSNtcc/200.gif

 

[HisArpy]

I was over it when she conceded the night she lost, Matlock.

I know you can't say the same, it's okay. It's been about two years of your whine...if only the accompanying cheese was as quality!

https://media2.giphy.com/media/BFYLNwlsSNtcc/200.gif

Meanwhile you keep trying to rehash the election where she lost.

Why are you doing that if you, like you say, are "over it"?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Meanwhile you keep trying to rehash the election where she lost.

Why are you doing that if you, like you say, are "over it"?

That wasn't a "rehash," that was a comparison.

Why does Hillary trigger you so, if she accepted being a loser whereas your homeboy is still on his '20 Sour Grapes Tour?

 

[phrodeau]

Lol, you really are clueless.

What you don't know, yet post about, is legion

Or, are you trying to assert that just because you're completely ignorant, that means something never happened?

The Federalist article in your link says that they polled on eight Biden scandals, listing only seven items, four of which occurred under Trump.
Every one of the seven listed, I heard about in detail as they happened.

 

[jomar]

Lol, yep a typical ignoramous response, deride the source rather than discuss the content.

once again since you were absent, sources like that deserve derision as do posters who claim they’re legit

It's no freaking wonder you had to cheat to win the election in 2020.

except that even the Giuliani clown show and Arizona audit had nothing except the big lie to lean on

accept the L, you should be used to it by now

 

[Rightguide]

Sorry, but I don't know a single person who doubted the laptop was Hunter's....and that includes people who don't keep up on politics.

They do not, however, believe the Clinton Cash dude who "has the receipts" that show Hunter colluding with his dad to get rich.

But hey...you keep believing the bullshit.... nothing was rigged

Did Hillary sue him for libel? Is Joe Biden suing him for libel? Why not? We know why, but you are to slow to have figured it out.

 

[Rightguide]

Media Research Center receives low credibility score

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/media-research-center-mrc/

Fact Checkers are another phony left-wing creation to further their propaganda, all the way back to Snopes.

 

[ll74]

Did Hillary sue him for libel? Is Joe Biden suing him for libel? Why not? We know why, but you are to slow to have figured it out.

Because neither of them use litigation as a weapon like some other people do

 

[LLCox]

​

​

The New York Times Doesn’t Care If You Know That Big Tech Helped Rig Joe Biden’s Election​

BY: JOY PULLMANN
MARCH 21, 2022

On March 17, 2022, The New York Times stated it had verified the authenticity of a laptop and its data as belonging to the president’s son, Hunter Biden. This was the same laptop holding information that Twitter, Facebook, and other corporate media immediately suppressed when The New York Post, a right-leaning competitor of The New York Times, reported on it three weeks before the 2020 presidential election.

If they had known about one of the Biden family scandals, such as the Hunter Biden laptop information, 17 percent of Joe Biden’s voters wouldn’t have voted for him, found a 2020 post-election poll. This means big tech’s suppression of this story likely made enough difference to tip Joe Biden into his low-margin win in the Electoral College.


Back in October 2020, Twitter and Facebook immediately responded to The New York Post’s publication of information from Hunter Biden’s laptop by effectively banning it from their platforms that effectively monopolize public discussion. Twitter punished the Post for reporting the repeatedly authenticated laptop information by suspending its account for two weeks.

“What this means is that, in the crucial days leading up to the 2020 presidential election, most of the corporate media spread an absolute lie about The New York Post’s reporting in order to mislead and manipulate the American electorate,” commented independent investigative reporter Glenn Greenwald.

Major National Security Implications

That laptop provides evidence Joe Biden was involved in Hunter Biden’s pay-for-play schemes with foreign oligarchs, an obvious national security risk. Some of these corrupt deals involved Ukraine, a notoriously corrupt country that is currently petitioning the Biden administration to engage militarily with Russia on their behalf.

More here:

https://thefederalist.com/2022/03/2...that-big-tech-helped-rig-joe-bidens-election/

This is the NYTs trying to claw back its integrity without an apology for their being complicit in the conspiracy.

lol

 

[pecksniff]

Lol, you really are clueless.

What you don't know, yet post about, is legion

Or, are you trying to assert that just because you're completely ignorant, that means something never happened?

Citing The Federalist should be beneath even you.

The Federalist is an American conservative online magazine and podcast that covers politics, policy, culture, and religion, and publishes a newsletter.[1][2][3][4] The site was co-founded by Ben Domenech and Sean Davis and launched in September 2013.[4]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, The Federalist published many pieces that contained false information, pseudoscience, and contradictions or misrepresentations of the recommendations of public health authorities.[5][6][7] While ballots were being counted in the 2020 United States presidential election, The Federalist made false claims that there had been large-scale election fraud.[8][9]

 

[jomar]

Fact Checkers are another phony left-wing creation to further their propaganda, all the way back to Snopes.

Keep telling yourself that

https://my.lwv.org/michigan/copper-country/reliable-sources-fact-checking

https://skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4589/is-media-bias-fact-check-a-reliable-site

 

[pecksniff]

you had to cheat to win the election in 2020.

Not even you believe that.

 

[JohnEngelman]

No it isn't and you know it. Already there are polls of Democrats saying if they knew about the laptop they wouldn't have voted for Biden and it's around 9.5%, enough to change the outcome of the election.

What polls are you talking about? Post them. Hunter Biden is an adult. Joe Biden cannot control everything his son does.

 

[pecksniff]

Fact Checkers are another phony left-wing creation to further their propaganda, all the way back to Snopes.

 

[Rightguide]

Citing The Federalist should be beneath even you.

Citing Wiki is even worse since anyone can edit Wiki with left-wing propaganda. Citing the Federalist is an indicator that Harpy, unlike you, can think for himself and separate fact from fiction. You on the other hand, depend fully on propaganda, nationally discredited media sources, and your ever swollen glands to frame the content of your posts. The good part is we read your book and know how to separate those minute particles of truth from the carload of chaff in those posts.

 

[pecksniff]

Citing Wiki is even worse since anyone can edit Wiki with left-wing propaganda. Citing the Federalist is an indicator that Harpy, unlike you, can think for himself and separate fact from fiction.

The Federalist is an American conservative online magazine and podcast that covers politics, policy, culture, and religion, and publishes a newsletter.[1][2][3][4] The site was co-founded by Ben Domenech and Sean Davis and launched in September 2013.[4]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, The Federalist published many pieces that contained false information, pseudoscience, and contradictions or misrepresentations of the recommendations of public health authorities.[5][6][7] While ballots were being counted in the 2020 United States presidential election, The Federalist made false claims that there had been large-scale election fraud.[8][9]

Is there a word of that that isn't true? Certainly it is true that the claims of election fraud were false.

 

[Rightguide]

We knew that to be true going back years. This is from the Columbia Journal Review in 2012:

What the Fact-Checkers Get Wrong​

The language of Politifact and its peers doesn’t match their project​

https://archives.cjr.org/campaign_desk/what_the_fact-checkers_get_wro.php

More below as well:

Facebook versus the BMJ: when fact checking goes wrong​

BMJ 2022; 376 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o95 (Published 19 January 2022)Cite this as: BMJ 2022;37695
https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o95

How Political Fact-Checkers Distort the Truth​

Glenn Kessler and his ilk aren't sticking to the facts. They're promoting a moderate dogma.​

https://newrepublic.com/article/156039/political-fact-checkers-distort-truth

The Psychology of Fact-Checking​

Fact-checkers aim to get closer to the truth, but their biases can shroud the very truth they seek

• By Stephen J. Ceci, Wendy M. Williams on October 25, 2020

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-psychology-of-fact-checking1/

 

[phrodeau]

Citing Wiki is even worse since anyone can edit Wiki with left-wing propaganda. Citing the Federalist is an indicator that Harpy, unlike you, can think for himself and separate fact from fiction. You on the other hand, depend fully on propaganda, nationally discredited media sources, and your ever swollen glands to frame the content of your posts. The good part is we read your book and know how to separate those minute particles of truth from the carload of chaff in those posts.

Wikipedia is constantly being monitored and corrected, and every change is logged in a page’s history, which can’t be edited. Yes, there is some left-biased info that’s not caught and changed within a day, but there is lots of right-biased info, too.

 

[pecksniff]

We knew that to be true going back years. This is from the Columbia Journal Review in 2012:

See post #40.

 

[YDB95]

Did Hillary sue him for libel? Is Joe Biden suing him for libel? Why not? We know why, but you are to slow to have figured it out.

Why yes, we do know why not: they'd have to be able to prove monetary damages to have any grounds for a libel suit. You can't just sue someone for lying about you alone.

 

[pecksniff]

Why yes, we do know why not: they'd have to be able to prove monetary damages to have any grounds for a libel suit. You can't just sue someone for lying about you alone.

Well, not monetary damages as such. A defamation suit must prove damage to the plaintiff's reputation. It is almost impossible for a "public figure" to win one, the law places such in a different category.