Why Twitter and Facebook squelching the Hunter Biden story backfired

[rayg]

As It quickly became clear that in their attempts to strangle the Hunter Biden story, two social media giants left themselves gasping for air.

Twitter and Facebook took major steps to squelch the New York Post piece, but wound up giving it far more attention than if they had done nothing

https://www.foxnews.com/media/why-twitter-and-facebook-squelching-the-hunter-biden-story-backfired

[togor]

Murdoch owns the Post, occasionally runs tabloid stories. Is there a journalist who has put their reputation on the line, or is this just repeating what Giuliani and Bannon and Russia connected Ukrainians say?

Because those guys are not trustworthy.

Remember Tara Reade?

[rayg]

It's all over the internet.

[togor]

It's all over the internet.

So are campaign adds. And that's the question....is this a real story or just a campaign fairy tale? It seems more the latter, so some circulate it, some do not. As you recall in 2016, Trump was very adept at co-opting the media to push his stories.

[S.A. Boggs]

It's all over the internet.

Back when Ronnie was President, he asked the 3 networks to carry a speech that he wanted to convey to the nation. All 3 declined to assist the President so this was the power that they wielded at that time. Now with FOX, the net with streaming services the truth can no longer be stopped. More and more of the info on the Biden crime family is being exposed and again the left is RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA.
Sam

[clintonhater]

Murdoch owns the Post, occasionally runs tabloid stories. Is there a journalist who has put their reputation on the line, or is this just repeating what Giuliani and Bannon and Russia connected Ukrainians say?

Because those guys are not trustworthy.

If the story is false, why wouldn't the Dem-controlled media be anxious to present facts refuting it, rather than doing everything possible to cover it up?

[togor]

If the story is false, why wouldn't the Dem-controlled media be anxious to present facts refuting it, rather than doing everything possible to cover it up?

It's the oxygen question, and never easy. Does one give oxygen to a false story by refuting it? Does one let it grow unchecked?

Fair to say in this case it's immaterial to you personally whether it's true or not. You just want it to be out there in the hope that other people think it is true. If it fizzles, ala Tara Reade, you'll be unhappy, not because justice was denied, but simply because the bomb failed to properly detonate at its target.

[rayg]

[QUOTE=togor;600383]

Fair to say in this case it's immaterial to you personally whether it's true or not. You just want it to be out there in the hope that other people think it is true.

And you just don't want it to be true...

[togor]

Fair to say in this case it's immaterial to you personally whether it's true or not. You just want it to be out there in the hope that other people think it is true.

And you just don't want it to be true...

Is it true? What I want or don't want is immaterial to that question. Is it true?

[clintonhater]

Is it true? What I want or don't want is immaterial to that question. Is it true?

How can that be determined without an investigation? It's an incontestable fact not made up by the Russians that Hunter was paid a ridiculous sum of money for no apparent reason.

[togor]

How can that be determined without an investigation? It's an incontestable fact not made up by the Russians that Hunter was paid a ridiculous sum of money for no apparent reason.

No it isn't incontestable. You really think Giuliani and Bannon are going to let independent examiners see whatever it is they have in that bag? The whole point of this story is to generate noise. Bengazi. Hillary's emails. The Clinton Foundation.

This one was actually a Bannon-Mercer project that got so clumsily hijacked by Trump and Giuliani that it led to impeachment. What you're seeing now is what's left of the project being rolled out. Look, nobody including you actually believes this stuff.

And you're ducking the burden of proof question. Hint: it doesn't lie with Biden.

[rayg]

What a bunch of double talk.. Lol

[S.A. Boggs]

What a bunch of double talk.. Lol

Well, he excels at it so well Togey has a hard time keeping up with himself.
Sam

[Roadkingtrax]

1- A Trump supporter who is legally blind and runs a computer repair shop claims someone claiming to be Hunter Biden dropped off a computer for repair.

2- Allegedly, this laptop was filled with very sensitive data

3- After Hunter abandons the laptop, the shop owner decides to hack the laptop and illegally look at the data, committing a series of federal felonies as he violated:

The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA);

The Stored Communications Act (SCA);

The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA); and

The Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA).

4- After that, this confessed felon contacted the FBI. Not getting anywhere, he decides to call Ghouliani and Bannon, just because.

[togor]

And to think once upon a time Conservatives prided themselves for critical-thinking skills.

- - - Updated - - -

Also worth pointing out the Bannon is looking at Federal mail fraud charges, so a dirty trick and subsequent Trump pardon is his most promising legal defense strategy. Not that what he's doing is corrupt or anything.