On the Biden-laptop story, the script from the establishment media already is clear. It’s also deeply dishonest.
Until the election, the script calls for media outlets to ignore the continuing reports about the contents of the laptop, haughtily dismiss them, or label them as “widely discredited,” all without actually doing the work to see whether they are credible. Seizing on the fact that President Trump’s henchman Rudy Giuliani was central to the hard drive’s chain of custody, the media elites aver that such sketchy provenance automatically refutes the contents.
Yet as both history and simple logic attest, this assertion is spurious. For the simple logic, readers should consult former super-prosecutor Andy McCarthy, who writes (with my emphasis added) that “even if the information had been hacked, that would not make it inauthentic. The reason hacking is a serious offense that causes humiliation and wreaks financial and privacy havoc is because it exposes true information.”
Further, McCarthy writes (much more concisely than I did three times last week), “First and foremost in any authenticity examination is the item itself. Here, we have thousands of Biden photographs and videos that plainly appear to be real. The emails make contextual sense, and they fit what is known about Hunter Biden’s business activity.”
It’s also instructive that the Biden team now admits it is possible that Joe Biden did indeed meet with the shady Ukrainian oligarch in question, that Hunter Biden’s attorney hasn’t denied the laptop was his and in fact has asked for it to be returned, and that at least two different sources have confirmed either the authenticity of one of the most explosive emails or of 26,000 other emails that seem to corroborate some of what’s in the alleged Biden stash.
As for history, the suspicion of provenance is often not dispositive. Consider that the most infamous case of espionage in U.S. history was produced by a heavy-set schlub from inside a hollowed-out pumpkin on his Maryland farm. Then, too, the media were aghast that the less-than-attractive Whittaker Chambers dared point the finger at the debonair, widely admired Alger Hiss. But Chambers and his pumpkin were proven right, whereas the Harvard Law-educated pillar-of-society Hiss ended up rightfully convicted of perjury.
Likewise, Monica Lewinsky’s blue dress disproved Bill Clinton’s vehement denials of sexual activity, the mathematics and telescopic evidence proved Galileo right against ecclesiastical interference, and evidence proved cyclist Lance Armstrong had doped up even though most people dismissed his accusers as jealous competitors.
In sum, it is a fallacy — a version of the argumentum ad hominem, in fact — to adjudge the value of accusations by merely claiming the source is less authoritative than the entity being challenged.
To again quote McCarthy, whose superb prosecutorial career shows he knows a bit about how evidence works, “The most salient consideration in analyzing the authenticity of an item is the item itself.” As the old expression goes, “the truth will out.”
That truth will be perfectly acceptable for the establishment media, but only after they are sure Biden has been elected. If indeed Biden is elected beyond dispute, the big media’s subconscious biases and herd mentality will kick in. Until Donald Trump is out of the way, they don’t want the Biden laptop contents to be real.
Yet they have no particular fondness for Biden. Once the choice isn’t between Biden and Trump, but instead between Biden and his replacement by Vice President Kamala Harris, the big media surely will turn on Biden so Harris can ascend the throne. Then, suddenly, the laptop’s contents will be accepted as real (without apology for all the earlier dismissals), and Biden will be burnt toast. You heard it here first.
