Posted on 04/01/2021 4:08:55 PM PDT by Libloather
NPR is under fire for falsely reporting Hunter Biden’s infamous laptop was "discredited by U.S. intelligence and independent investigations by news organizations."
The inaccurate claim was part of a review of Hunter Biden’s memoir, "Beautiful Things," in which the president’s son details his past as an alcoholic and a crack addict. NPR senior editor and correspondent Ron Elving wrote that President Trump and Rudolph Giuliani spent much of the 2020 campaign attempting to tie the Biden family to various scandals and controversies.
The laptop, first reported by the New York Post, allegedly contains emails revealing details of his foreign business interests, including contacts in Ukraine and China, along with a series of unflattering photos of the president’s son.
"The last gasp of Giuliani's campaign against the Bidens featured a laptop supposedly obtained from sources that would document the younger Biden's drug use and other offenses. The laptop story was discredited by U.S. intelligence and independent investigations by news organizations," Elving wrote.
Washington Examiner editor Daniel Chaitin noticed the inaccurate sentence and blasted NPR on Twitter.
"No, the contents of the laptop have not been discredited," Chaitin wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I don’t know what Gullianis problem is. Release the entire contents on a torrent, Biden porn and all. Sick of these Biden degenerates being protected.
GOP = GIVE OTHER PEOPLES’
MONEY, TECHNOLOGY, AND CHILDREN
TO CHINA AND THE TRAFFICKING NETWORKS WW.
GOP <=== worst scum on the planet. covered in coke,
associated with, and the coverup, of treason, election fraud,
while backstabbing every single voter in America;
and even gave POTUS’ PAC money to BIDEN.
NPR has already changed the wording regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop at their link.
Original:
“The last gasp of Giuliani’s campaign against the Bidens featured a laptop supposedly obtained from sources that would document the younger Biden’s drug use and other offenses. The laptop story was discredited by U.S. intelligence and independent investigations by news organizations,” Elving wrote.
Now:
The last gasp of Giuliani’s campaign against the Bidens featured a laptop supposedly obtained from sources that would document the younger Biden’s drug use and other offenses. Numerous news organizations cast doubt on the credibility of the laptop story.
They got rid of the helium reserve and the Texas super collider so that pretty much proves your point.
Can we, as taxpayers, sue NPR for deliberately publishing information/claims that they know to be fake/false/disinformation? Our taxes pay for them so they have a “due diligence” to write/speak the truth about issues, esp. when it is readily available to them.
“Could they get past the democrat filibusters? . . . Sop blaming the Republicans for the democrats conduct.”
The budget reconciliation process avoids the 60 vote requirement of a filibuster. The attempt to repeal O’care came outside the filibuster process. GOP Senators John McCain, Lisa Murkowski, and Susan Collins all cast votes to prevent the repeal of O’care and as a result the measure passed. You can blame them for the failure to repeal Obamacare.
In addition, the Constitution requires all revenue and spending bills to originate in the House of Representatives. The Senate cannot even vote on a spending item unless it is included in an appropriations bill sent to the Senate by the House. The founding fathers purposefully gave the House control over the public purse. All the GOP had to do from 2011 to 2019, when it controlled a majority in the House, was to pass appropriations bills excluding items like funding Planned Parenthood, PBS and wasteful government programs. If funding the Senate Democrats want isn’t in the bill, Senators can only vote for or against the bill, they can’t add the funding to the bill. Sometimes funding is added in reconciliation, but the House has to approve the changes in reconciliation. If House Republicans had eliminated spending on programs, and held firm, the Senate could have only voted the appropriations bills up or down.
Under Speakers Hastert, Ryan, and Boehner Republicans had the power under the Constitution to end government programs by not including the funding in appropriations bills. They chose to include the spending and send the bill to the Senate for approval. They were 100% complicit. The filibuster argument is a red herring and applies to some votes, like federal judge appointments, which only the Senate votes on. However, if it has to do with spending, the power of the purse is with the House of Representatives, not the Senate.
Arguably, the power of the purse is greater than the power of the filibuster. However, only if you use it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.