[archontes]

I think Greenwald's characterization of the letter's contents is a bit disingenuous. The letter makes the claim that recently proposed legislation that would enforce non-discriminatory access would do so in a way that would include foreign adversaries.

Greenwald takes that and elevates the claim to, "Any attempts to restrict Big Tech's monopolistic power would therefore undermine the U.S. fight against Moscow."

The letter makes no such claim. This amounts to a straw man.

Greenwald goes on to rail at the signees for the letter claiming that Hunter Biden's laptop had the hallmarks of Russian disinformation, but while the NYT recently apparently confirmed the genuine nature of Biden's laptop, that letter was still well-founded at the time. A thing can be genuine and have the hallmarks of developed disinformation.

I think Greenwald is being intellectually dishonest.

[aaronsimpson]

It's been Greenwald's MO for a long time now. Take completely uncontroversial statement -> twist it using just the right amount of slippery slope or change/omit one key detail -> make it seem inflammatory and controversial. There's nothing wrong with criticizing the negatives of Big Tech, but Glenn's turned his "anti-establishment" beat into an obsession with being anti-{whatever the current thing is}.

[pessimizer]

> that letter was still well-founded at the time.

You should be explaining this claim rather than speculating about "hallmarks."

[archontes]

Well, I prefer not to speculate, but let's assume for a moment that the intelligence community knows some things before the general population does.

I don't think it would be unreasonable to speculate that they knew then what a portion of the general population knows now, namely that a vast disinformation network was disseminating information on behalf of Steve Bannon. This has been analyzed and reported on by social media analysis firm Graphika.

So combine an outlandish story of an abandoned laptop making its way to Rudy Giuliani with the outlandish and serially repeated claims of child pornography and push it out with a known disinformation network, and it has all the hallmarks of a disinformation campaign.

But that's just what I see that leads me to conclude that it's reasonable. Don't expect me to actually explain the intelligence community's behavior.

I suppose I'll also speak to the fact that someone from among the intelligence community vs. Trump's ilk deserves more of the benefit of the doubt. Given Trump and his ilk's long and trivially verifiable history of being brazen liars, I find it exceedingly easy to give the benefit of the doubt to the intelligence community.

[refurb]

”that letter was still well-founded at the time”

They had zero proof it was Russian disinformation.

They just made that up despite indications the laptop was in fact authentic.

And they did that right before a Presidential election.

That doesn’t concern you? You feel that the letter was “well founded”? Founded on what? A politically convenient guess?

[archontes]

Without knowing what information they had at the time, I will say we now know that there was plenty of disinformation about it being manufactured and spread.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/04/hunter-biden-la...

Perhaps the most concerning thing is that a group of such blatantly unscrupulous people has actual political support in the US.

I feel the need to draw a parallel to Trump's refusal of military aid to Ukraine contingent upon them manufacturing an investigation of Hunter Biden, over which he was impeached.

[pessimizer]

Mother Jones has the hallmarks of a media outlet deeply connected with US intelligence.

[archontes]

I'm not sure what your point is. Is it that you suspect that they are not accurately relating the contents of Guo's whatsapp message?

If I were a betting man, I'd happily bet that they're reporting accurately, and that Bannon and Wengui were, as usual, being unscrupulous. It's not hard to see that claims of serial bullshit-peddlers that contain all the same bullshit as they always contain is bullshit. How much pattern recognition do you need?

Not only that, but the laptop turns out to be verifiable, and it goes to the FBI, which investigates. As normal. I fail to see the outrageous part.

[refurb]

That article is a most impressive whitewash that changes nothing.

The laptop was authentic yet the intelligence community and mass media closed ranks and called it Russian disinformation without any proof. Just a suspicion (as your link claims) that “something was up”.

That is a pitiful excuse for journalism. Sure, call the content “alleged”, publish rebuttals from the Biden team, whatever.

But they didn’t do that. They said “its likely Russian disinformation so not worth discussing at all”. That not journalism that’s actively shaping the story.