|
|
|
|
|
by Ancapistani
2074 days ago
|
|
It’s been hard to keep up with the (largely crazy, frankly) events and speculation here, but a few things stick out to me that make me lean toward believing the story as told: * Hunter Biden’s attorney, George Mesires, has allegedly gotten a subpoena issued for the return of Hunter’s laptops. In doing so his ownership is implicitly verified. Caveat: I wasn’t able to find a copy of this subpoena, though I’m fairly sure I read it a day or so ago. * The Biden campaign has not denied _any_ of this. * The FBI has not commented. If there were no active investigation they would typically say so. If there were an active investigation, they are bound not to comment on it. |
|
I don't know that I reach the same conclusions as you though. The lack of denials is disconcerting and does imply some elements of truth in the story.
For the subpoena for Hunter's laptop I could see a lawyer doing that if there was no laptop to force someone either into contempt of court, perjury, or acknowledging the laptop doesn't exist. It could be a tactic to undermine the story rather than supporting evidence is what I'm saying (but on the surface is looking bad).
As for the FBI [0] I think things are a little more complicated than taking a lack of an answer for confirmation.
[0] https://www.marketwatch.com/story/fbi-probing-whether-purpor...