Hunter's Laptop - The Reality

Left’s disinformation campaign stole 2020 election

Media, Big Tech Democrats and Bureaucracy are co-conspirators

The Response

Are we serious people anymore? Certainly, we once were. We were serious enough to build the most powerful nation the world has ever seen, as well as the most benevolent nation ever. But it’s difficult to say that we’re serious about much of anything anymore. And the interview between Brett Baier, the anchor and editor of Fox News Channel’s Special Report, and David Priess, a former CIA officer, and one of the 51 intelligence agents who signed a letter in October of 2020 stating that the Hunter Biden laptop “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation,” is a stark example of how lacking we are today as a serious nation.

The words of the letter were very carefully chosen, no doubt to provide an, albeit flimsy defense after the election it was intended to influence. And influence the election it did.

According to a Media Research Center poll, 16% of 2020 Biden voters would have changed their votes if they knew the laptop was real. Biden is said to have won the election with 81-million votes to Donald Trump’s 74-million votes. Losing 16% of his voters would have left Biden with 68-million votes, well below Trump’s.

And that doesn’t count the 4% of Biden voters who, when polled, said they would have voted for Trump. That represents another 3-million votes, giving Trump a 77-million to 68-million vote victory.

Even if these numbers are off a little, it’s clear that this one issue would definitely have changed the outcome of the election. It proves that Biden’s victory was based on a lie. But those intelligence agents aren’t going down without a fight. Like a kid who is caught throwing a rock through a window, they’re blaming it on the rock or, more accurately, the homeowner who owns the window.

The Interview From Hell

The interview between Baier and ex-CIA officer Priess would be comical if it didn’t spell out the harm that was done to confidence in our electoral process and our government’s credibility. With a possible few missed words, here is the content of the interview:

Click HERE to see the Baier - Priess interview video.

Baier: “Do you regret signing onto the letter?”

Priess: “Oh, absolutely not, because the words are still true. It has all the classic earmarks …”

Baier: “Do you think it changed the outcome of an election?”

Priess: “Oh, absolutely not.”

Baier: “Even though it wasn’t true? It had all the earmarks but it wasn’t true?”

Priess: “What is not true?”

Baier: “That it was Russian disinformation?”

Priess: “That’s not what we said in the letter. Read the actual letter and we said we did not know if this is Russian disinformation.”

Baier (repeating what the letter actually said): “It has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation?”

Priess: “Exactly. The difference between an information campaign, and a disinformation campaign and a misinformation campaign – it’s not my fault if people do not look up the definitions.”

In that last sentence, Priess puts all the blame on the American people. It was their fault that they didn’t realize it was carefully crafted misinformation designed to sway, or more aptly put, to steal an election.

Click HERE to see the Baier - Priess interview video.

The letter signed by 51 intelligence agents was very carefully crafted not to actually say that Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation; they merely said that it had “all the classic earmarks” of Russian disinformation. The letter cast a doubt on the validity of the laptop story that the New York Post had brought to the attention of the American people. And it did so at a critical juncture only 15 days before the election.

In reality, by leaning on their credentials in the intelligence field, those who signed the letter knew they were doing more than that; they knew their words would be taken as though giving Biden a clean bill of health where the laptop is concerned.

2020 Disinformation from the Same Criminals that gave us 2016 Russian-Collusion Lie

The reality is that the laptop story is a continuation of what happened in 2016 when the Russian-Collusion story was carefully fed to the media. We now know that it was a fabrication paid for by the Hillary campaign and the Democratic National Committee. It was disinformation alright, but it wasn’t Russian disinformation (beyond where a Russian was paid to help fabricate the story) – it was domestic disinformation created between a political campaign and members of the U.S. government bureaucracy.

The laptop story turns that on its head. Instead of creating a false image that a president is compromised, the letter, and the Left’s controlled response to the laptop story, tells Americans not to believe their own eyes. Where there is substantial evidence that Biden is, in fact, compromised, we are lied to and told that the evidence isn’t credible.

‘Don’t worry about it. Everything is fine.” That’s what the letter told us in a manner reminiscent of what the crew of the Titanic was telling passengers shortly after the ship had hit an iceberg, before, and even after, passengers began noticing that the deck was listing and cabins below deck were filling with water.

We now know that Secretary of State Antony Blinken, then the senior advisor to the Biden campaign, was the brainchild for the letter. He got the ball rolling and ensured that the letter was released in time for Biden to use it to deny the laptop story during the Oct. 22, 2020, presidential debate in Nashville. And that’s exactly what Biden did.

While Biden was using the letter to deny what amounts to blatant evidence, the media and Big Tech were joyfully jumping on the bandwagon.

Consider what Priess said: “It’s not my fault if the people did not look up the definitions.” Did Biden fail to look up the definitions? Did Twitter fail to look up the definitions when they shutdown the NY Post Twitter account? Did other Big Tech companies fail to look up the definitions when they began blocking people from sharing the laptop story? And what about the media?

The media was all in. Did they not understand what was said in the letter? Or did they not want to acknowledge what was in the letter? The answer cuts one way or the other. The media was either totally incompetent for failing to question “the definitions” or was totally corrupt for endorsing the story in a way that would reassure readers, listeners and viewers not to question the letter.

Americans should have been serious about the election but the media, Big Tech, the bureaucracy and the Biden campaign did everything they could to ensure that the American voter was anything but serious about the process. The letter was a lie – the true “Big Lie” – because the author and signatories knew full well how the letter would be interpreted. They planned it that way.

The only hope is that Americans will wake up and start taking our country and our elections seriously. Currently, there’s not a lot of hope when America is instead all in a fuss over defining a man or a woman and accepting widespread crime in the name of a fabricated claim of “institutionalized racism.”