The country is abuzz (or would be, sans partisan social media censorship) about the contents of a laptop and external hard drive that apparently belonged to former vice president Joseph Biden’s son Hunter and that have become the subject of a “bombshell” report by the New York Post.
This entire saga seems too familiar, considering all that we’ve learned about the Deep State and the “resistance” to President Trump’s presidency.
The FBI seized the laptop in Dec. 2019 but did nothing with it (except tip off their Democrat allies)?
Just a month later, the New York Times published this (without evidence?): (emphasis and comments added to quotes)
With President Trump facing an impeachment trial over his [can we have an “alleged” here?] efforts to pressure Ukraine to investigate former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and his son Hunter Biden, Russian military hackers have been boring into the Ukrainian gas company at the center of the affair, according to security experts.
The hacking attempts against Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company on whose board Hunter Biden served, began in early November , as talk of the Bidens, Ukraine and impeachment was dominating the news in the United States.
It is not yet clear what the hackers found, or precisely what they were searching for. But the experts say the timing and scale of the attacks suggest that the Russians could be searching for potentially embarrassing material on the Bidens …
The Russian tactics are strikingly similar to what American intelligence agencies say was Russia’s hacking of emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman and the Democratic National Committee [didn’t happen] during the 2016 presidential campaign. …
Fancy Bear and GRU strike again!!!
Coincidentally (or not), Area 1 is the “Silicon Valley security firm” that discovered this alleged hack. The company is headed by Oren Falkowitz, a Democrat donor:
Before we break out the rocket launchers in response to reports that Russian hackers have targeted the Ukrainian gas company Burisma, let’s consider the source of that information: a single cybersecurity start-up, whose founder is a Democrat and who won’t say anything about how he knows that the hacking actually happened.
The New York Times and the Washington Post on Monday [January 13, 2020] reported that technology company Area 1, founded by Democratic donor Oren Falkowitz, has found that Burisma’s internal cyber system was breached by Russian hackers. …
There has yet to be any corroboration of this by Burisma (the seedy company at the center of President Trump’s impeachment, and which paid Joe Biden’s son Hunter hundreds of thousands of dollars for unknown services), Russia, or U.S. intelligence.
No, the only evidence that any breach occurred is an assertion by Falkowitz, who is trying to get his company, Area 1, off the ground and turn it into a leading cybersecurity firm.
Sound like a Crowdstrike reprise to you?
Yesterday, the New York Times reported again, citing their January 2020 story about the alleged hack:
The Times reported last January that Burisma had been hacked [can we have an “allegedly” here?] by the same Russian GRU unit that was one of two groups that hacked the Democratic National Committee in 2016 [again, didn’t happen.] Last month, United States intelligence analysts [who?] contacted several people with knowledge of the Burisma hack for further information after they had picked up chatter that stolen Burisma emails would be leaked in the form of an “October surprise.”
Among their chief concerns, according to people familiar with the discussions, was that the Burisma material would be leaked alongside forged materials in an attempt to hurt Mr. Biden’s candidacy — as Russian hackers did when they dumped real emails alongside forgeries ahead of the 2017 French elections — a slight twist on Russia’s 2016 playbook when they siphoned leaked D.N.C. emails through fake personas on Twitter and WikiLeaks.
Facebook said that soon after the story was posted it noticed the controversy around the veracity of its claims and over how The Post had obtained the evidence. …
Who gave all of this likely classified information to the New York Times? Wouldn’t this, as with the leaks during the 2016 election, constitute illegal leaking of national security information?
Again with the “people with knowledge” about and the people “familiar with the discussion!” All ANONYMOUS sources who seem to be, once again, potentially leaking classified national security information to the media during an election.
Are these speculative and poorly sourced New York Times articles being censored by social media? Of course not.
Who are these mysterious and anonymous “intelligence analysts” and how can the media rely upon mysterious and anonymous “people with knowledge of the [alleged] Burisma hack?”
Can we assume that this alleged “hack” is what Facebook referenced when they censored the Hunter Biden “bombshell” as a product of “hacking,” without evidence?
Let’s build a timeline:
April 2019: The laptop and external hard drive are left at computer store. Also in April, coincidentally or not, former VP Joe Biden announces his run for the presidency and is immediately the front runner.
About July 2019: The store owner examined the contents of the devices, after 90 days expired during which the owner failed to retrieve them. At some point afterwards the store owner, concerned about what he saw, notified the FBI.
December 5, 2019: It’s reported that Biden got “terse” and “heated” at a town hall, angrily denying involvement with his son’s dealings in Ukraine or that his son was involved in anything nefarious. Could Joe have known what was coming? Did somebody tip him off about that laptop? Days later …
December 9, 2019: A U.S. District Court grand jury in Biden’s home state of Delaware (for some unknown reason) subpoenaed the laptop and external hard drive. Both were turned over to the FBI, but the computer store owner copied the hard drive. (By then both were his property, according to Delaware law about abandoned property). Shortly thereafter …
December 31, 2019: Area 1 claimed to have suddenly discovered that the Russians hacked “Ukrainian companies” and days later claimed that all of the “hacked” companies happened to be Burisma subsidiaries. Just weeks later …
January 13, 2020: The New York Times published a story alleging, without evidence, that the Russians had hacked Burisma to “dig up information … that could embarrass the Bidens.”
Sometime after February 5, 2020: After President Trump was acquitted of the trumped-up charges that resulted in the wholly partisan impeachment process in Congress, the store owner, concerned that the Hunter Biden evidence didn’t emerge during the hearings, began to contact others, including members of Congress, who apparently rebuffed him or at least did nothing with the information.
September, 2020: Steve Bannon told the NY Post about the hard drive. The store owner had given a copy to Rudy Giuliani’s lawyer at some point after the FBI seized the laptop and external hard drive.
October 14, 2020: The New York Post published a story documenting the saga of the laptop/hard drive, the incendiary contents and their implications.
October 14, 2020: The New York Times published a story claiming, without evidence, that intel “chatter” had indicated that the contents of the laptop/hard drive “would be” revealed as an “October surprise” and that unnamed “intelligence analysts” feared that allegedly “forged” information would be included, all designed to damage Joe Biden’s “candidacy.” (However, nothing in the story seems to suggest that these “intelligence analysts” were at all concerned about national security–just the potential effect on Biden’s campaign.)
So what does this look like? Another “insurance policy” where Deep State actors, social media moguls, and the complicit mainstream media cover, once again, for the Democrat candidate?
Let’s not forget about all those odd warnings we read in the complicit media about “deep fakes” that just might affect the 2020 election and about how social media had to be ready to censor misinformation to prevent interference in the process. Again, the Russians are the scapegoats.
Were they preparing the narrative? Setting us up to disbelieve our own eyes?
“Forged” documents? Faked photos?
Are we to believe in doppelgangers, too?
It’s all about the timeline.
The timeline shows that the “hack”, if it happened, had nothing whatsoever to do with the laptop or hard drive. Both were in the store owner’s possession in April 2019 and in the FBI’s possession by early December 2019. The alleged “hack” didn’t happen, if it ever happened, until New Year’s Eve, weeks after the FBI and the Delaware grand jury had the information.