Image 01 Image 03

#Twitterfiles Are About Biden Family Corruption and Media Coverup

#Twitterfiles Are About Biden Family Corruption and Media Coverup

We must not shy away from the truth that the run-up to the 2020 election was manipulated to bury a story that could have and possibly would have changed the outcome of the election.

By the time you read this, I’ll be 30,000 feet in the air. (I always like a dramatic opening.)

By now you’ve heard of the #Twitterfiles released by Elon Musk to Matt Taibbi and summarized and excerpted in a long Twitter thread. More files are reportedly being released to others.

Musk made a mistake by portraying this as a First Amendment issue and as government interference. That allowed others, particularly in the corrupt corporate media, to argue over whether it really was a constitutional issue because the government involvement was obtuse (based on what’s been revealed). The government involvement was by the Trump FBI, but anyone with half a brain knows that the Trump FBI was out to get Trump, so the issue is muddy. And Biden campaign involvement was pre-Biden administration.

So we have this fevered distraction about whether the 1st Amendment applied — it’s reminiscent of the endless debate about whether the gross racialization of education really is “Critical Race Theory.” Arguing over what the meaning of “is” is, is a classic Democrat tactic.

What the files do show is a deliberate effort by leftists inside Twitter (which was about all of them) to spike the story and any mention of the story on the most important political platform in the country, based on false claims that the laptop was hacked and/or Russian disinformation. It was one of the greatest travesties of media manipulation, amplified across multiple platforms and mainstream media outlets.

They killed the greatest threat to the Biden candidacy — the exposure a month before the election that Joe Biden sold his office and his access via his son, and he lied about it.

Yes, it was a big deal, and yes it might have made a difference in an election where the margins in key swing states were tight. You can’t prove definitively it would have changed the result, but common sense need not be checked at the door. The efforts to kill the story were so intense precisely because the story could have made a difference.

We had a chance to test whether the Hunter Biden laptop story would make a difference, but that opportunity was denied voters.

The #Twitterfiles may not yet have told us more than we already knew, but they provided evidence.  That doesn’t mean there is a do-over, the world doesn’t work that way.

But it does mean we must not shy away from the truth that the run-up to the 2020 election was manipulated to bury a story that could have and possibly would have changed the outcome of the election. And the perpetrators will do it again if they can in 2024.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


smalltownoklahoman | December 4, 2022 at 9:16 pm

If anything it highlights the importance of having social media as well as other sites available that do receive large amounts of traffic and will be willing to let people speak about inconvenient stories & facts to those in power.

“That doesn’t mean there is a do-over, the world doesn’t work that way.”
So leftists should not complain when they discover there’s no “amnesty” from second amendment recourses, either.

“the perpetrators will do it again if they can in 2024”

I think you have stated what is glaringly obvious.

Thank you Professor for being objective on this.

We are in some seriously dangerous and uncharted waters. Throwing molotovs isn’t likely to bring clarity and ultimately a solution, no matter which side is doing it.

This really is a big deal. We have never had to deal with an election that may have been won fraudulentaly. That there are so many fronts that this fraud was happening on, makes it even that much more difficult to assess where we go from here. Screaming about this person or that person doesn’t make this easier and just serves to muddy the water. The way forward is very unclear and I am not sure any of us will like what that future looks like.

    CommoChief in reply to Technique. | December 4, 2022 at 10:01 pm

    ‘We’ve never had to deal with an election that may have been won fraudulently’.

    Pretty sure the 1960 Kennedy v Nixon election had a good many ‘irregularities’ in both Illinois and Texas among other places. Had the same sort of media bias dynamics as well in many respects. We’ve been through this before within living memory.

    As others have said, even some liberal historians acknowledge the 1960 election MAY have been won fraudulently.

    However, it is a known fact that LBJ won his first Senate primary election in 1948 due to fraud. It was a very close election and fraud made the difference. Contemplate the implications that set in motion. LBJ went on to win his Senate seat. He became Senate Majority Leader. He then became JFK’s VP. He became President after JFK’s assassination. As president, he lied incessantly about Vietnam. He built up force levels that caused tens of thousands of American boys to die and multiple times that number to be permanently physcially and mentally scarred. He permanently changed the relationship between the government and the people with his redistributionist “Great Society” welfare/vote buying schemes that is largely responsible for the national debt burden today.

    That illegitimate win of a Senate primary election in 1948 paved the way for all of that. Yes, voters could have thrown him out in subsequent elections which were not tainted by fraud. But that fraudulent election is the first link in the chain. IMO, the consequences have been catastrophically disastrous.


    In the “machine politics” era, city bosses like the Pendergasts, Daleys, Tammany Hall, and the rest routinely rigged elections.

    Google “Battle of Athens” (Tennessee). In 1946 citizens got fed up with election rigging and took matters into their own hands. Several people were injured in riots after shots were fired.

    The 1872 presidential election was extremely shady.

    Then there’s Clay’s “Corrupt Bargain” in the early 1800s.

    Fraud in elections has not been rare.

    Deborahhh in reply to Technique. | December 5, 2022 at 10:15 am

    Recall also, Bill Clinton saying: We had to do everything we could to stop that Republican juggernaut. I took that to mean that lying, cheating, stealing votes, making up votes, paying people to vote—oh the list goes on and on—nothing was too illegal for the Democrats. And the Democrats prove it over and over again. Nothing is too illegal for them to do.

BierceAmbrose | December 4, 2022 at 9:54 pm

There are two payoffs to this kind of thing. It’s like Cloward-Piven: setting up a crisis to “never let … got to waste.”

Musk is getting a two-fer here: the shenanigans-“fortified” election shenanigans. BUT, he’s personally under pressure of extortionate federal influence: “Nice company you have there — interesting stuff on The Twit. You do want to keep building cars, and launching rockets, right?”

Trump is such a damaging brand to this movement. He goes out and gives Dems heaps of political cover to tamp this down for “safety” reasons and dupe the center of the political landscape that this is just Trump’s revenge. It is not even coming from Trump, but he has to jump in and make it about him while pouring gasoline all over it.

I’m now hoping Trump gets indicted and convicted just so he can go away faster.

He thinks too much like a Democrat having been one most of his life, and he thinks he still has the ability to throw principles out the window just like he did when he was a Democrat. That kind of lazy “end justifies the means” crap only works in progressive circles.

    Mauiobserver in reply to healthguyfsu. | December 4, 2022 at 10:39 pm

    The election was close. The laptop became a big issue in the debates where Biden and Wallace shouted Trump down saying national security experts say it is Russian disinformation.

    I suspect in swing states a number of independents and even some Dems would have sat the election out rather than voting for Biden if they believed he and his family were selling out this country to China and other potential adversaries.

    Also some key states violated their laws on mail in ballot security (signature verification) harvesting including nursing homes where operatives could get dozen or hundreds of ballots often from people with diminished mental capacity.

    With Biden corruption exposed some judges might have upheld state laws on election integrity

    Please tell us more about what you think about Trump.

    JohnSmith100 in reply to healthguyfsu. | December 5, 2022 at 10:36 am

    “I’m now hoping Trump gets indicted and convicted just so he can go away faster.”

    Now you sound like a Dem. I hate injustice, It was wrong when George Zimmerman and his family were being worked over, wrong in a host similar cases, wrong Jan 6, and it is wrong with Trump.

    Trumps wealth and his scrappy temperament, his determination makes him the best person to take out the swamp. If that is not done, America is lost.

      Dimsdale in reply to JohnSmith100. | December 5, 2022 at 12:44 pm

      At minimum, he is a most effective lightning rod.

        healthguyfsu in reply to Dimsdale. | December 5, 2022 at 7:15 pm

        For what? Losing elections?

        You trump lovers have the worst made plans I’ve ever seen.

        People like rule of law, not anarchy. Trump’s provocateur schtick was soundly rebuked in this last cycle. He needs to go away yesterday.

    retiredcantbefired in reply to healthguyfsu. | December 5, 2022 at 12:19 pm

    Trump jumped the shark with his tweet about chunks of the Constitution somehow being invalidated.

    Now you’re jumping the shark with a call for Trump to be indicted and convicted, whether DOJ’s case against him has any merit or not..

    It looks as though antiConstitutionalism is highly contagious.

    If you want to ditch the Constitution, just join the Democrats already. Meritless Federal indictments and convictions are their project.

      Pres. Trump indicated that the LEFT invalidated the Constitution with their rampant and unapologetic fraud.

      People keep making it sound like he just wants to throw out the Constitution. Quite the opposite: he wants to restore it to its rightful place as the supreme law of the land.

        CommoChief in reply to Dimsdale. | December 5, 2022 at 1:53 pm

        Why would he state we need either a ‘do over election’ or to just install Trump as POTUS if that wasn’t what he meant?

        Trump is fully capable of expressing himself clearly and he did. There wasn’t any ambiguity. He has not, to my knowledge, offered any of the sorts of explanations y’all are attempting to use to mitigate his statement.

        Milhouse in reply to Dimsdale. | December 5, 2022 at 4:54 pm

        It doesn’t matter who he thinks “invalidated” it. The point is that he says it’s invalid, and he wants to ignore it. Though without a constitution how does he imagine he could get what he wants? Who exactly does he think should do what, and why?

      Please submit all that he said… and parse exactly what he said… not just what was

Any reckonable force that is supposed to be neutral putting their thumb on the scale is a big deal.

But let’s be honest- this did not change the outcome of the election. If you voted for Biden, a story about the truth of Biden was not going to change that vote.

They did not vote for Biden, they voted against Trump. Joe himself could have been neck deep in coke, hookers, and personally signing the bribery checks from the Ukraine and it wouldn’t have changed the outcome.

The media’s non stop hate machine for 4 years straight did the trick. Spend Thanksgiving with family that believed the Proud Boys were Trump’s personal brown shirts if you don’t believe me.

Biden won the same way Trump won in 2016. That fine sliver of Independents hated him slightly less than the other candidate on the ballot.

    Mauiobserver in reply to Andy. | December 4, 2022 at 10:45 pm

    Disagree I think quite a few independents would have refused to vote for Biden if they knew how he and his family were sellling out America to China and others.

    They might not have vot d for Trump but probably tens of thousands and maybe hundreds of thousands in n swing states would not have voted for Biden.

    It could have easily changed the outcome.

      Jawbreaker in reply to Mauiobserver. | December 5, 2022 at 10:20 am

      They would’ve just had to cheat harder in Atlanta, Philly, Detroit and Phoenix but once they knew the numbers would have gotten it done.

      The argument is saying that the entire crop of journalists in the world today ONLY have access to twitter and that is also the ONLY mechanism readers have to access to cutting edge stories the mild mannered reporters shirk away from.

      Nay- it was the willfull and probably RICO like action of most MSM to spike the story that is more probable. Even more probable is the non-stop hate campaign for 4 years.

      Zero hate stories on the skeletons in Bidens closet. That isn’t twitter.

      Dimsdale in reply to Mauiobserver. | December 5, 2022 at 12:48 pm

      And they would have been quite interested in the fact that the tech overlords and the media were actively suppressing/censoring the story in favor of Biden.

      On the other hand, the mail in ballots (the real ones) would have been placed before this poop hit the fan.. Excuse me: would have hit the fan.

    CountMontyC in reply to Andy. | December 4, 2022 at 11:26 pm

    Are you saying that no votes might have changed if the story hadn’t been suppressed? Because in Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania were all decided by very narrow margins where a matter of a few thousand vote switches in each state changes the election result ( and that doesn’t even cover the other irregularities that occurred).

    Milhouse in reply to Andy. | December 5, 2022 at 12:47 am

    When the story came out, many people who had already voted tried to find out how to recall their ballots, and found that they couldn’t. This is strong circumstantial evidence that many people who hadn’t yet voted, but who never heard about this story until after the election, would have changed their votes had they known. How many? Impossible to know. But a significant number.

Hunter’s laptop is but a sliver of the corruption that is, at last, becoming more difficult for the degenerate media to look away from. The “Resistance “ has been around for years. Hell, they learn crap at university. You can only speak freely if you sound like us.

Bitterlyclinging | December 5, 2022 at 8:31 am

Seven FIB DC Office Field Agents flying out weekly to brief San Francisco FIB agent Elvis Chan on what to instruct facebook, google, twitter and instagram how to cover the Hunter Biden Laptop from Hell story.
The FIB’s Praetorian Guard Operation deliberately protecting the most openly corrupt candidate for the presidency against the welfare of the American people.
As Rudy Giuliani stated Saturday, the Biden Crime Family is at a minimum 31 million and counting in debt to the Chinese Communist Party.

    At what point is it a First Amendment Issue? If the Federal Government actively restricts information, even using a 3rd party, when does that become a First Amendment Violation?

      Dimsdale in reply to MattMusson. | December 5, 2022 at 12:54 pm

      Well, let’s see:

      “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

      “Abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press” comes to mind. The left actively buried the NYPost story and any other expression of it by allegedly free citizens in supposedly open, townhall discussions or just anywhere, e.g. jobs, and school.

      Nobody restricted the lies of the left.

      Milhouse in reply to MattMusson. | December 5, 2022 at 4:59 pm

      It doesn’t become a first amendment issue until and unless the government instructs a 3rd party to abridge someone’s freedom of expression. Twitter never did that, because there is no freedom to express yourself on its servers, just as there is no freedom to express yourself in the NYT or on anyone’s property. Twitter had every legal right to do what it did, so the fact that someone in the FBI asked it to doesn’t make it a 1A issue. Had the FBI forced Twitter to do this, and Twitter didn’t want to, then it would have violated Twitter’s 1A rights, not those of the NY Post or any other user.

        BierceAmbrose in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2022 at 1:38 pm

        So, like the EU is doing to Twitter just now: “Censor for us, or we’ll come at you!”Were that in the US, that would be a thing, yes? Do they have to make the threat in a speech, or does mentioning what they want in the weekly meetings enough to count as direction?

        Asking for 330 million friends in the US.

        Valerie in reply to Milhouse. | December 6, 2022 at 3:44 pm

        Shutting down a news story is abridging someone’s freedom of expression.

          Oh, Valerie. Now we have to listen to Milhouse rail against this for days. You have to know that the Constitution prevents only Congress from creating laws abridging one’s freedom of speech/expression.

          Valerie in reply to Valerie. | December 7, 2022 at 10:12 am

          Of course I know that the Constitutions says “Congress shall make no law….” However, there is such a thing as entanglement between the government and private entities, and such entanglement is regarded as consequential by our own courts. Lawless action by the Executive Branch also counts as entanglement.

          You will be seeing much more about this, so be ready for Milhouse to rail.

          Musk got it right, which is why, in a later development, James Baker got fired.

          BierceAmbrose in reply to Valerie. | December 8, 2022 at 2:16 pm

          Yeah, it’s purely coincidental that once The Musky Troll de-captured The Twit Space, Yellin (Yellon, Yellen, Yeltzen?) of the treasury declares they might kind, sorta, have to look at all his entanglements with CCP China.

          It’s like Dept of State having to sign off on the environmental impact of The Keystone Pipeline.

          So, how many approvals are needed, here?
          One more than you can afford.

          BierceAmbrose in reply to Valerie. | December 10, 2022 at 1:53 pm

          “Congress shall make no law…” has quite a reach, or not.

          — Some arguments go: “That law is discriminatory, because this interpretation, by this authority, with this consequence can look discriminatory if you tilt your head and squint just right. So, you can’t pass that.” CoJ “Civil Rights” exercises have raised this convolution to high art, slimeing up good and righteous principles in the process.

          — The converse arguments are as common: “That distant, trivial thing you wanna do is actually governed through a possible interpretation, of this here authoritah, under that there law (which is allowed to Congress, because reasons), so we actually *can* ban that.” The ATF are the champs at this.

          — The Supremes have steadily advanced the state of their hair splitting art in declaring what’s Ok and not, in both directions.

          For example, recall that President Jimmy The Farmer couldn’t get direct federal mandate of state speed limits past The Supremes. President Malaise did, however, manage to inflict his preference through *not granting* — we normies call that “withholding” — federal transit funding from states that didn’t impose the speed limits he wanted.

          “Nice state you have there. Would be a shame if your budget n economy choked because you never got back funds we extract from you regardless.” The Supremes declared this not coercion. Thus the approach has since become standard practice for the feeb, expanded to literally everydamnthing where a local jurisdiction has a different opinion.

          Such is “precedent.” Sometimes they’re BadAndWrong; sometimes we even unwind them if they are wrong enough.

So much in one story. If the government works to suppress speech the I would rule it a violation of the 1A. Now I need a seat on SC to make a difference. Did it affect the outcome? Probably not because the left would have delivered more votes to overcome the deficit. Finally, Trump FBI is an oxymoron. Try Uniparty apparatchiks or leftist in cognito or Obama embeds.

I think Trump’s refusal to do the 2nd (virtual) debate had more of an impact on the result. He had an opportunity to make the Hunter Biden laptop contents an issue before many mail-in ballots were sent, but did not do so.

    henrybowman in reply to The_Mew_Cat. | December 6, 2022 at 5:02 am

    No way he had that opportunity. He would have immediately been derided from all sides for spouting / taking advantage of Russian propaganda. The Russia, Russia, Russia hammer was still operational then.

Trump lost not just because of the spiking of the contents of the laptop but also because of his initial optics on the vaccine, relying on Fauci & Co and his first debate,. The question is not just the smoking gun evidence released by Musk from Twitter but what other such actions were taken by Big Tech in conjunction with the Democrats and are still ongoing now at the present-that is what the House Oversignt should focus on

The oregon news media suppressed an ongoing story/investigation into ethics issues with John Kitzhaber until after the election. Had they come out, Oregon would have had a Republican Governor and Kate Brown (worst Governor ever) wouldn’t have been able to skate in as Sec. of State when Kitzhaber resigned in February.

The oregon news media suppressed an ongoing story/investigation into ethics issues with John Kitzhaber in 2014 until after the election. Had they come out, Oregon would have had a Republican Governor and Kate Brown (worst Governor ever) wouldn’t have been able to skate in as Sec. of State when Kitzhaber resigned in February 2015. BTW, he paid a $50K fine even though it was shown that his fiancee had used her position to obtain about a half mil in consulting “gigs” due to her proximity.

The Clinton News Nets take on this is hilarious, It wasn’t us in bed with the DNC oh no, it was big tech suppressing the information.

Yes, there will be a do over. Unfortunately it will be in 2024. The US must insure clean elections and find a way to keep government agencies out of the political arena. I would recommend withholding funding of any government agency until every senator and member of congress certify that those agencies have answered every inquiry to their satisfaction.

    BierceAmbrose in reply to kjon. | December 10, 2022 at 2:03 pm

    So much this: ‘withholding funding of any government agency until every senator and member of congress certify that those agencies have answered every inquiry to their satisfaction.”

    Also, declare out loud that that’s why. And each CongressCritter withholding approval specify what they need answered. “I’ll let it move to vote when we know what’s in it; I’ll vote for or against based on what’s in it.

    While we’re at it, go back to regular budgets vs. continuing resolutions, and appropriation bills coming jointly out of House and Senate standing committees.