Influence Operations: Hunter Biden’s Laptop
A review of the literature
by John Morrison
October 6, 2023
SUMMARY
Timeline of the Hunter Biden Laptop Story
April 2019 - Hunter Biden drops off two laptops that were apparently damaged by water at a Delaware computer repair shop. He never returns to pick them up and no one from the Biden family will ever deny that the laptop belongs to Hunter.
December 2019 - John Paul (J.P.) Mac Isaac, the owner of a Delaware computer store, contacts the FBI about a laptop that Hunter Biden has left with him.
9 December 2019 - the FBI issues a subpoena for and takes Hunter Biden's laptop from the Delaware computer store. The FBI does not investigate the many signs of criminal activity revealed by Hunter Biden’s laptop and its contents.
January 2020 - Yoel Roth resists “FBI efforts to get Twitter to share data outside of the normal search warrant process.”
31 March 2020 - Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center publishes a report urging editors and journalists to “break the Pentagon Papers principle.” The report influences the ensuing “Hack-and-Dump Working Group” around the Hunter Biden laptop story.
July 2020 - the FBI’s Elvis Chan arranges for “temporary Top Secret security clearances for Twitter executives so that the FBI can share information about threats to the upcoming elections.”
August 2020 - after waiting for many months to receive a reply from the FBI, Mac Isaac emails Rudy Giuliani and gives him a copy of the laptop. Giuliani is under FBI surveillance at the time and so the FBI likely knew what is happening.
August 2020 - William Evanina, director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, releases a statement warning that “Russia is using a range of measures to primarily denigrate former Vice President Biden” and “boost President Trump’s candidacy via social media and Russian television”.
11 August 2020 - “the FBI's Chan shares information with Twitter's Roth relating to the Russian hacking organization, “APT28,” through the FBI's secure, one-way communications channel, Teleporter.”
September 2020 - top national security reporters at the New York Times, CNN, and the Washington Post, as well as social media executives, attend a “tabletop exercise” on how to cover a potential Hunter Biden “hack-and-dump” in what may have been a “pre-bunking operation”. The event at the Aspen Institute is organized by Vivian Schiller, the former CEO of NPR, the former head of news at Twitter, the former general manager of The New York Times, and the former Chief Digital Officer of NBC News.
September 2020 - “the FBI’s Elvis Chan and Yoel Roth have set up a special encrypted messaging network so employees from the FBI and Twitter can communicate. They also agree to create a “virtual war room” for “all the [Internet] industry plus FBI and ODNI” [Office of the Director of National Intelligence].”
15 September 2020 - “the FBI’s Laura Dehmlow, who heads up the Foreign Influence Task Force, and Chan, requests to give a classified briefing for Jim Baker, without any other Twitter staff, such as Yoel Roth, present.”
October 2020 - Giuliani shares the laptop’s hard drive and its contents with The New York Post.
13 October 2020 - “an FBI Special Agent in San Francisco named Elvis Chan sends 10 documents to Twitter’s then-Head of Site Integrity, Yoel Roth, through Teleporter, a one-way communications channel from the FBI to Twitter.”
14 October 2020 - “The New York Post runs its explosive story revealing the business dealings of President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter. The article is accurate and has stood the test of time. And yet, within hours, Twitter and other social media companies censored the NY Post article, preventing it from spreading and — more importantly — undermining its credibility in the minds of many Americans.”
Mid-October 2020 - the mainstream media begins downplaying and suppressing the New York Post laptop story.
16 October 2020 - House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff tells CNN that the New York Post story is a smear on Joe Biden that “comes from the Kremlin”.
19 October 2020 - a letter is published by 51 intelligence agents in which they state their belief that the Hunter Biden laptop had “all the earmarks” of Russian disinformation. Anthony Blinken, who was then a senior aide to the Biden campaign, is accused of being behind the letter and The Washington Examiner later reports that the letter, authored by Obama-era CIA official Michael Morell, was whipped up “to give Biden a talking point to use in response”.
Late October 2020 - Hunter’s former business partner, Tony Bobulinski, goes public with documents backing up some of the laptop’s contents in October 2020, he states accusations that the information is fake or “Russian disinformation” are “offensive.” The Wall Street Journal examines his claims which corroborate the Post’s laptop emails.
April 2021 - in an interview with CBS, Hunter Biden states that he doesn’t remember dropping off a laptop in Delaware for repairs, adding: "There could be a laptop out there that was stolen from me. It could be that I was hacked. It could be that it was Russian intelligence. It could be that it was stolen from me."
March 2022 - The Washington Post and the New York Times finally acknowledge that Hunter Biden’s laptop is real.
November 2022 - FBI agent Elvis Chan admits that there was no new intelligence that proved the laptop was a hack-and-leak operation. Chan is accused of lying under oath about his knowledge of Hunter Biden laptop and talks with Facebook and about contacting Twitter.
December 2022 - the Twitter Files are published from December 2022 through March 2023. The right claims the files are proof of social media’s left-wing bias and collusion with government, while the left claims the files reveal little of anything.
February 2023 - former Twitter executives acknowledge that the company “erred” and should’ve reinstated the New York Post’s account, but claim the climate of disinformation complicated the process. But AOC nevertheless calls the laptop story “half-fake” and says the New York Post’s two-week ban a “24-hour hiccup in a right-wing political operation”.
March 2023 - Hunter Biden countersues Mac Isaac, responding to his defamation suit and alleging that Mac Isaac had invaded his privacy and had no legal right to copy and distribute his private information. The suit lists six counts of invasion of privacy by Mac Isaac and others and seeks a jury trial to determine compensatory and punitive damages.
Key players
The Biden family and campaign team
The FBI
Twitter and Facebook
The mainstream media
Summary of the Influence Operation that Censored the Hunter Biden Laptop Story
The FBI obtained Hunter Biden's laptop in December 2019 from a computer repair shop in Delaware.
Along with sordid pictures related to Hunter’s use of drugs and prostitutes, the laptop contains over 100,000 emails and other documents related to Hunter’s business ventures with foreign companies. The agency always knows it’s real and that it wasn’t obtained through hacking.
The FBI then began an influence campaign that hyped “hack and leak” operations while it was itself engaged in “brief and leak” operations.
The campaign is aimed at executives at traditional news media, Twitter, and other social media companies who will together censor and discredit the Hunter Biden laptop story ahead of the 2020 Presidential election.
The FBI spent most of 2020 telling Twitter and Facebook’s senior executives that a "hack-and-leak" involving Hunter Biden would occur in October of that year. The agency persuaded executives that the Hunter Biden laptop did not come from a whistleblower, even though it did, and allowed social media companies to conclude that the New York Post story was Russian disinformation despite knowing otherwise.
White papers are published by academics and tabletop exercises are hosted which brief members of the mainstream media on how to cover a potential Hunter Biden “hack-and-dump”.
After the New York Post published the Hunter Biden laptop story on 14 October 2020, social media executives initially decided that the article did not violate any of their terms. But following continued pressure from current and former intelligence agents, the social media giants censored the article within hours and Twitter blocked the New York Post’s account.
Five days later, at the behest of current Secretary of State Anthony Blinken who was then a senior aide to the Biden campaign, 51 former intelligence community leaders signed an open letter in which they stated their belief that the laptop has “all the earmarks” of Russian disinformation.
It was not until after Joe Biden won the 2020 Presidential Election that reports on the veracity of the Hunter Biden laptop story gained mainstream traction.
But the apparently coordinated effort by existing FBI officials and former FBI and other intelligence community leaders to discredit the Hunter Biden laptop may represent election interference and the politicization of the FBI.
PREBUNKING THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP STORY: ROLE OF INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES
An IRS whistleblower claimed that the FBI had ‘verified’ the authenticity of Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop as early as November 2019. The FBI also denied officials access to the laptop.
The New York Post reports that “The FBI “verified” the authenticity of Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop in November 2019 and a federal computer expert assessed “it was not manipulated in any way,” IRS supervisory agent Gary Shapley told Congress in June 2023.”
“Investigators probing President Biden’s son for tax fraud and other crimes were not given full access to the laptop’s contents, however, Shapley told the House Ways and Means Committee during his May 26 deposition.”
“The computer guy said that they could do a CSV list that shows when everything was created … the whole discussion was about can we rely on this information on the laptop, is it Hunter Biden’s? And their opinion was, it was, and it was not manipulated in any way,” he said.
“In October 2019, the FBI became aware that a repair shop had a laptop allegedly belonging to Hunter Biden and that the laptop might contain evidence of a crime. The FBI verified its authenticity in November of 2019 by matching the device number against Hunter Biden’s Apple iCloud ID,” Shapley said.
But, “when the FBI took possession of the device in December 2019, they notified the IRS that it likely contained evidence of tax crimes,” Shapley said.
The New York Post writes that Shapley, “who… worked at the tax agency for 14 years, supervised a 12-person team that determined Hunter Biden had failed to pay $2.2 million on $8.3 million in income earned between 2014 and 2019 from foreign countries where his father held sway as vice president, such as China, Romania and Ukraine.”
There was also a meeting “with the prosecution team and the FBI’s computer analysis team to discuss Hunter Biden’s laptop,” Shapley said.
“We once again objected that we still had not been given access to the laptop,” he said. “Special Agent [redacted] asked about the full filter reviewed copy of the contents of the devices. He stated he had not been provided with the data. AUSA Lesley Wolf stated that she would not have seen it because, for a variety of reasons, prosecutors decided to keep it from the investigators. This decision is unprecedented in my experience.”
William Evanina, director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center, released a statement warning in August 2020 that “Russia is using a range of measures to primarily denigrate former Vice President Biden” and “boost President Trump’s candidacy via social media and Russian television.”
According to the Washington Post, “Evanina claimed in a statement that Russia is “using a range of measures” to interfere in the 2020 election and has enlisted a pro-Russian lawmaker from Ukraine — who has met with President Trump’s personal lawyer — “to undermine former vice president [Joe] Biden’s candidacy and the Democratic Party,” a top U.S. intelligence official said in a statement Friday.”
The FBI’s influence operation persuaded Twitter executives ahead of the 2020 election that the Hunter Biden laptop did not come from a whistleblower, even though it did.
Public News reports that “One Twitter executive linked to a Hill article, based on a Washington Post article, from October 15, which falsely suggested that Giuliani’s leak of the laptop had something to do with Russia.”
“While the FBI hyped “hack and leak” operations it was itself engaged in “brief and leak” operations.”
“There is strong evidence that FBI agents have repeatedly warned elected officials, including President Donald Trump, of foreign influence with the primary goal of leaking the information to the news media. This is a political dirty trick used to create the perception of criminality.”
Then-FBI General Counsel Jim Baker was investigated twice for leaking information to the news media.
Michael Shellenberger reports that “Then-FBI General Counsel Jim Baker was himself investigated twice, in 2017 and 2019, for leaking information to the news media.”
“You’re saying he’s under criminal investigation?” asked a congressional investigator. “That’s why you’re not letting him answer?” To which Baker’s attorney said, “Yes.”
FBI agent Elvis Chan admitted in November 2022 that there was no new intelligence that proved the laptop was a hack-and-leak operation.
Shellenberger notes that “the FBI warnings of a Russian hack-and-leak operation relating to Hunter Biden were not based on any new intelligence.”
“Through our investigations, we did not see any similar competing intrusions to what had happened in 2016,” admitted FBI agent Elvis Chan in November 2022.
FBI agent Elvis Chan lied under oath about his knowledge of Hunter Biden laptop and talks with Facebook. He’s also likely lied about contacting Twitter.
The New York Post reports that Chan “lied under oath about discussions he had with big tech companies that suppressed The Post’s reporting on the Hunter Biden laptop story.”
“A Facebook employee said in an Oct. 15, 2020, message that he had spoken with Chan, who said he was “up to speed” on the FBI’s probe of Hunter’s laptop and “that there was no current evidence to suggest any foreign connection or direction of the leak.””
“But in sworn testimony on Nov. 29, 2022, Chan said he had “no internal knowledge of that investigation” and twice claimed he never communicated with Facebook beyond the one conference call with the FBI task force.”
“Chan also denied having any knowledge of the laptop outside of media stories:”
“On Hunter Biden’s laptop, he claimed on Nov. 29, 2022: “I only found out through news media. I had no internal knowledge of that investigation[.]””
“But a Facebook official, internal message, on Oct. 15, 2020, stated: “SSA Chan advised that he was up to speed on the current state of the matter within the FBI and that there was no current evidence to suggest any foreign connection or direction of the leak.””
“Chan also denied having discussed the laptop with any Twitter officials.”
“Documents posted by Michael Shellenberger showed that Twitter’s former head of trust and safety, Yoel Roth, was contacted by FBI Agent Elvis Chan just hours before The Post published the first laptop story on Oct. 14, 2020.”
“Chan used a special, one-way communication channel to send Roth and at least one other person 10 documents on the night of Oct. 13, 2020, and asked them to confirm receipt, Shellenberger found.”
“Chan also arranged “temporary Top Secret security clearances” for Roth and other Twitter executives for briefs on foreign threats to the 2020 election — despite admitting in his deposition that the FBI was not aware of any meddling.”
PREBUNKING THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP STORY: ROLE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
By 2020, so many former FBI employees worked at Twitter that they had their own Slack channel. Former FBI employees include Jim Baker, the former general counsel of the FBI and Dawn Burton, former deputy chief of staff to FBI head James Comey, who initiated the investigation of Trump.
Public News reports that “in August 2020, the FBI’s Elvis Chan asked Twitter: does anyone there have top secret clearance? When someone mentions Jim Baker, Chan responds, "I don't know how I forgot him" — an odd claim, given Chan's job is to monitor Twitter, not to mention that they worked together at the FBI.”
“Who is Jim Baker? He's the former general counsel of the FBI (2014-18) and one of the most powerful men in the U.S. intelligence community.”
“Baker has moved in and out of government for 30 years, serving stints at CNN, Bridgewater (a $140 billion asset management firm), and the Brookings Institution. As general counsel of the FBI, Baker played a central role in making the case internally for an investigation of Donald Trump.”
“Baker wasn't the only senior FBI executive involved in the Trump investigation to go to Twitter. Dawn Burton, the former deputy chief of staff to FBI head James Comey, who initiated the investigation of Trump, joined Twitter in 2019 as director of strategy.”
“As of 2020, there were so many former FBI employees — "Bu alumni" — working at Twitter that they had created their own private Slack channel and a crib sheet to onboard new FBI arrivals.”
Internally, Twitter executives reported little Russian activity or foreign influence on its platform leading up to the 2020 election.
Public News continues that “Twitter executives repeatedly reported very little Russian activity. For example, on September 24, 2020, Twitter told the FBI it had removed 345 “largely inactive” accounts “linked to previous coordinated Russian hacking attempts.” They “had little reach and low follower accounts."”
“In fact, Twitter staff routinely debunked false claims made by mainstream journalists of foreign influence on its platform:
“"We haven’t seen any evidence to support that claim (by NBC News’ Ben Collins)”, wrote Roth in an email to the FBI.”
“After the FBI asks about a Washington Post story on alleged foreign influence in a pro-Trump tweet, Twitter's Roth says:”
"The article makes a lot of insinuations... but we saw no evidence that that was the case here (and in fact, a lot of strong evidence pointing in the other direction).”
In the buildup to the 2020 election, the FBI had been repeatedly pressuring Twitter to share data, change its API policies, and provide evidence of foreign influence on its platforms.
Some examples include:
“In January 2020, Roth resisted FBI efforts to get Twitter to share data outside of the normal search warrant process.”
“Pressure from the FBI on Twitter had been growing. “We have seen a sustained (If uncoordinated) effort by the IC [intelligence community] to push us to share more information and change our API policies,” complained a senior Twitter executive. “They are probing and pushing everywhere they can (including by whispering to congressional staff).””
“Time and again, the FBI asks Twitter executives for evidence of foreign influence and Twitter responds that they aren’t finding anything worth reporting. “[W]e haven’t yet identified activity that we’d typically refer to you (or even flag as interesting in the foreign influence context).””
“Despite Twitter’s pushback, the FBI repeatedly requested information from Twitter that Twitter has already made clear it would not share outside of normal legal channels.”
Social media companies have stated, including Yoel Roth at Twitter and Mark Zuckerberg, that federal law enforcement agencies warned them about the spread of hacked information on their platforms leading up to the 2020 election as part of weekly meetings.
Public News reports that “Yoel Roth, Twitter’s head of Site Integrity (and later Head of Safety and Trust), stated that he was warned in weekly meetings with federal law enforcement agencies that hacked information related to Hunter Biden would be disseminated on Twitter.”
“This is from a sworn declaration by Roth given in December 2020:”
“During these weekly meetings, the federal law enforcement agencies communicated that they expected "hack-and-leak operations" by state actors might occur in the period shortly before the 2020 presidential election, likely in October. I was told in these meetings that the intelligence community expected that individuals associated with political campaigns would be subject to hacking attacks and that material obtained through those hacking attacks would likely be disseminated over social media platforms, including Twitter. These expectations of hack-and-leak operations were discussed throughout 2020. I also learned in these meetings that there were rumors that a hack-and-leak operation would involve Hunter Biden.”
“Mark Zuckerberg similarly stated to Joe Rogan that the FBI warned Facebook about impending dissemination:”
“The FBI basically came to us [and] was like, ‘Hey... you should be on high alert. We thought that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election. There's about to be some kind of dump similar to that.’”
In July 2020, the FBI arranged for temporary Top Secret security clearances for Twitter executives to share threats about upcoming the 2020 election. Yoel Roth states that by the time of the Hunter Biden laptop leak, he was primed to attribute it to the Russian hacking group APT28.
Public News writes “in July 2020, the FBI’s Elvis Chan arranged for temporary Top Secret security clearances for Twitter executives so that the FBI could share information about threats to the upcoming elections.”
“On August 11, 2020, the FBI's Chan shared information with Twitter's Roth relating to the Russian hacking organization, “APT28,” through the FBI's secure, one-way communications channel, Teleporter.”
“Recently, Twitter’s Roth told tech journalist Kara Swisher that he had been primed to think about the Russian hacking group APT28 before news of the Hunter Biden laptop came out. When it did, Roth said:”
"It set off every single one of my finely tuned APT28 hack-and-leap campaign alarm bells."
By mid-September 2020, the FBI had set up a special encrypted messaging system with Twitter so its employees could communicate with the Bureau; they also created a virtual war room. The FBI then gave a classified briefing to Jim Baker - without any other Twitter staff present.
Public News continues, “by mid-September, 2020, the FBI’s Chan and Roth had set up a special encrypted messaging network so employees from the FBI and Twitter could communicate.”
“They also agreed to create a “virtual war room” for “all the [Internet] industry plus FBI and ODNI” [Office of the Director of National Intelligence].”
“Then, on September 15, 2020, the FBI’s Laura Dehmlow, who heads up the Foreign Influence Task Force, and Chan, requested to give a classified briefing for Jim Baker, without any other Twitter staff, such as Yoel Roth, present.”
PREBUNKING THE HUNTER BIDEN STORY: ROLE OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA
On 31 March 2020, Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center published a report urging editors and journalists to “break the Pentagon Papers principle.” The report influenced the ensuing “Hack-and-Dump Working Group” around the Hunter Biden laptop story.
On March 31, 2020, Michael Shellenberger testified to The House Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government that “Stanford University’s Cyber Policy Center, the same umbrella organization that houses the Stanford Internet Observatory, published a report by Obama political operative Andrew Grotto and ex-journalist Janine Zacharia urging editors and journalists to “Break the Pentagon Papers principle.”
“By this, they meant reporters should not cover leaked information, even when true, because it could contribute to “disinformation.””
“Stanford’s goal was explicitly to change norms so journalists would not do what they did in 1971 with the Pentagon Papers.” The authors write,
“The more news outlets that embrace a new set of norms, the more resilient American media will be against exploitation by malicious actors.”
Shellenberger continues, “the authors describe how the news media will, in real life, cover the Hunter Biden laptop, in October 2020.”
“Focus on the why in addition to the what,” they say. Make the disinformation campaign as much a part of the story as the email or hacked information dump. Change the sense of newsworthiness to accord with the current threat.”
In September 2020, top national security reporters at the New York Times, CNN, and the Washington Post, as well as social media executives, attended a “tabletop exercise” on covering a potential Hunter Biden “hack-and-dump.”
The New York Post reports that “in essence, the fourth estate was instructed to de-emphasize the importance of materials that would politically harm the Bidens and instead elevate how the materials were obtained.”
“Focus on the why in addition to the what.”
“Make the disinformation campaign as much a part of the story” as the newsworthy material itself.”
Public News adds that “efforts continued to influence Twitter's Yoel Roth. In September 2020, Roth participated in an Aspen Institute “tabletop exercise” on a potential "Hack-and-Dump" operation relating to Hunter Biden.”
“The goal was to shape how the media covered it — and how social media carried it,” the author said.
“The organizer was Vivian Schiller, the former CEO of NPR, the former head of news at Twitter, the former general manager of The New York Times, and the former Chief Digital Officer of NBC News.”
“Attendees included Facebook’s head of security policy and the top national security reporters for The New York Times, CNN, and The Washington Post.”
The full list of attendees includes:
Jessica Ashooh, Director of Policy, Reddit
Olga Belogolova, Policy Manager – IO, Facebook
John Bennett, Director of Security, Wikimedia Foundation
Kevin Collier, Reporter, NBC News
Rick Davis, EVP, News Standards and Practices, CNN
Nathaniel Gleicher, Head of Cybersecurity Policy, Facebook
Garrett Graff, Director, Cyber Initiatives, Aspen Institute
Andy Grotto, Director, Stanford Cyber Policy Center
Steve Hayes, Co-Founder and Editor, The Dispatch
Susan Hennessey, Executive Editor, Lawfare
Kelly McBride, Senior VP, Poynter Institute
David McCraw, VP and Deputy General Counsel, The New York Times
Ellen Nakashima, National Security Reporter, The Washington Post
Evan Osnos, Staff Writer, The New Yorker
Donie O’Sullivan, Reporter, CNN
Dina Temple Raston, Investigations Correspondent, NPR
Yoel Roth, Head of Site Integrity, Twitter
Alan Rusbridger, Former Editor in Chief, Guardian, Member of Facebook Oversight Board
David Sanger, Chief Washington Correspondent, The New York Times
Noah Shachtman, Editor in Chief, The Daily Beast
Vivian Schiller, Executive Director, Aspen Institute
Claire Wardle, Cofounder and Director, First Draft News
Clement Wolf, Global Public Policy Lead for Information Integrity, Google
Janine Zacharia, Visiting Lecturer, Stanford127
In the buildup to the 2020 election, the media was routinely making claims of foreign interference on social media that was debunked by the social media platforms themselves.
Michael Shellenberger, in his testimony to The House Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, said that “Twitter staff routinely debunked false claims made by mainstream journalists of foreign influence on its platform.”
The New York Post reported that “in June 2020, Roth responded to a Chan inquiry about an NBC report that foreign-controlled Twitter bots were spreading misinformation about a purported government communications blackout amid protests in Washington DC following the murder of George Floyd by Minneapolis police.”
Shellenberger continues, “In response to an article suggesting the #dcblackout campaign was driven by foreign bots, Yoel Roth wrote in an email to Elvis Chan:”
“We haven’t seen any evidence to support that claim.”
“After the FBI asked about a Washington Post story on alleged foreign influence in a pro-Republican tweet, Roth said:”
"The article makes a lot of insinuations... but we saw no evidence that that was the case here (and in fact, a lot of strong evidence pointing in the other direction).”
MANAGING THE RELEASE OF THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP STORY: ROLE OF SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS
When the New York Post released the expose, several executives at Twitter questioned whether the article violated the platform’s terms. Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna also contacted Twitter with concerns the decision to block the story violated the First Amendment.
Public News reports that “on October 14, shortly after The New York Post published its Hunter Biden laptop story, Roth says:
“It isn’t clearly violative of our Hacked Materials Policy, nor is it clearly in violation of anything else," but adds, “This feels a lot like a somewhat subtle leak operation.”
USA Today quotes, “Trenton Kennedy, a Twitter communications official (who) wrote in an email:
“I'm struggling to understand the policy basis for marking this as unsafe," Kennedy advised that the company says it is "waiting to understand" whether the New York Post story is the result of hacked material.
“Brandon Borrman, former vice president of global communications asked in an email:”
"Can we truthfully claim that this is part of the policy?”
“A Democratic congressman, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., whose district includes Silicon Valley, reached out to a top Twitter executive with concerns that the decision to block the story violated "1st Amendment principles.””
But Jim Baker pushed the narrative that the story was the result of a hack, despite evidence to the contrary.
Public News writes that “in response to Roth, Baker repeatedly insists that the Hunter Biden materials were either faked, hacked, or both, and a violation of Twitter policy. Baker does so over email, and in a Google doc, on October 14 and 15.”
He insisted there were “some facts that indicate the materials may have been hacked,” and claimed: “I’ve seen some reliable cybersecurity folks question the authenticity of the emails in another way (i.e. that there is no metadata pertaining to them that has been released and the formatting looks like they could be complete fabrications).”
“And yet it's inconceivable Baker believed the Hunter Biden emails were either fake or hacked. The New York Post had included a picture of the receipt signed by Hunter Biden, and an FBI subpoena showed that the agency had taken possession of the laptop in December 2019.”
Ultimately, Twitter blocks the story and Facebook limits the article’s visibility in users’ news feeds.
Shellenberger writes that, “Finally, by 10 a.m., Twitter executives had bought into a wild hack-and-dump story.”
USA Today notes, “Twitter removed links to tweets linking to the story, marked them as "unsafe" and blocked the ability to send the story in direct messages. The Twitter team said the Hunter Biden laptop material fell under its "hacked materials policy.”
Public adds that “the suggestion from experts - which rings true - is there was a hack that happened separately, and they loaded the hacked materials on the laptop that magically appeared at a repair shop in Delaware,” wrote Roth.
The New York Times notes that “meanwhile, Facebook limited the article’s visibility in users’ news feeds.”
Public News adds that “at 3:38 p.m. that same day, October 14, Baker arranged a phone conversation with Matthew J. Perry in the Office of the General Counsel of the FBI.”
Laura Dehmlow testified to the House Judiciary Committee and Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government that the FBI shut down an agent when they confirmed to social media platforms that the laptop was real on the day the story broke - the FBI decided from then on that its answer to such questions would be “no comment.”
Eli Lake writes in The Free Press that Laura Dehmlow was the “chief of the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force, the FBI body that interacts with social media platforms to warn against foreign disinformation.”
“In one conference call with social media executives, on the day the first New York Post laptop story ran, an executive asked if the FBI knew if the laptop was real. A junior G-man began to answer that it was until he was cut off and a more senior person said there was “no further comment.””
“After the call, according to Dehmlow, the task force huddled to determine the new policy on whether it would confirm that the laptop had been authenticated. The decision—which Dehmlow took pains to say she did not make—was that it would offer no comment going forward.”
FBI agents Elvis Chan and Laura Dehmlow were also involved in high-level communications that allegedly “led to Facebook’s suppression” of the Post’s reporting.
The Intercept writes that “according to records filed in federal court, two previously unnamed FBI agents — Elvis Chan, an FBI special agent in the San Francisco field office, and Laura Dehmlow, the section chief of the FBI’s Foreign Influence Task Force — were involved in high-level communications that allegedly “led to Facebook’s suppression” of the Post’s reporting.”
It should also be noted that the FBI pays social media companies millions of dollars for its staff’s time.
Public News reports that “the FBI’s influence campaign may have been helped by the fact that it was paying Twitter millions of dollars for its staff time.”
“I am happy to report we have collected $3,415,323 since October 2019!” reports an associate of Jim Baker in early 2021.
MANAGING THE RELEASE OF THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP STORY: ROLE OF INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES AND POLITICIANS
Anthony Blinken, then a senior aide to the Biden campaign, and other Biden campaign officials have been accused of inspiring Michael Morell, the former Acting Director of the CIA, to get 51 intelligence agents to state their belief that the Hunter Biden laptop had “all the earmarks” of Russian disinformation.
The New York Times reports that “according to closed-door testimony and emails, Biden campaign officials, including Antony J. Blinken, now the secretary of state, played a role in the creation of the letter. They also said a C.I.A. employee “may have” been involved in soliciting at least one signature for it.”
The Wall Street Journal adds that “Morell acknowledged that before Blinken's call, he didn't have any intent to write this statement. After Blinken's call, he got all the rest of the intelligence officials together and put it out there. The Biden campaign also apparently helped strategize its release in terms of who it went to in the press.”
The Washington Examiner reported that the letter, authored by Obama-era CIA official Michael Morell, was whipped up “to give Biden a talking point to use in response.”
The Wall Street Journal notes that “the Biden campaign had been involved in the genesis of this statement, which it then went on to use to refute any of the claims that were out there.”
“The Washington Examiner revealed Morell had said in an email to former CIA Director John Brennan that he was gathering names of intelligence community members to cast doubt on the Hunter laptop story because “We want to give the VP a talking point to use in response.””
““Can I add your name to this list?” Morell asks Brennan in the email.”
““Trying to give the campaign, particularly during the debate on [Oct. 22, 2020], a talking point to push back on Trump on this issue,” Morell explains, admitting the letter was to help Biden during his showdown with Trump.”
The New York Post continues, “in the second and final 2020 debate, Biden cited the letter, which was first published by Politico.”
“There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what he’s accusing me of is a Russian plant.”
The Biden campaign said that Twitter’s censorship of the story suggested that the allegations in the New York post article were wrong.
Jamal Brown, Biden’s campaign press secretary stated that “I think Twitter’s response to the actual article itself makes clear that these purported allegations are false and they’re not true and glad to see social media companies like Twitter taking responsibility to limit misinformation.”
House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff told CNN that the New York Post story is a “smear on Joe Biden that comes from the Kremlin.”
The Hill reports that “Schiff said in an interview with CNN shortly after the New York Post story broke that the “smear” campaign against Biden and his ties to Ukraine originated as part of a Russian disinformation plot more than a year ago, but he did not explicitly link the Kremlin efforts to the Post story.”
Schiff told Wolf Blitzer:
“We know that this whole smear on Joe Biden comes from the Kremlin. That’s been clear for well over a year now that they’ve been pushing this false narrative about the vice president and his son.”
“Clearly, the origins of this whole smear are from the Kremlin, and the president is only too happy to have Kremlin help and try to amplify it.”
The FBI briefed Senators Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson that there was evidence of “Russian interference” in their investigation of Hunter Biden in 2020. The senators believe the FBI was trying to discredit their investigation.
Public News reports that “in 2020, the FBI gave a briefing to Senators Chuck Grassley and Ron Johnson, claiming evidence of “Russian interference” in their investigation of Hunter Biden. The briefing angered the Senators, who suspected a rat. They believed the FBI did it to discredit their investigation.”
“The unnecessary FBI briefing provided the Democrats and liberal media the vehicle to spread their false narrative that our work advanced Russian disinformation,” they wrote.
MANAGING THE RELEASE OF THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP STORY: ROLE OF THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA
Following the release of the New York Post expose, the mainstream media ran numerous stories undermining the article.
Politico ran the story:
“Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say”
The New York Times ran pieces headlined:
“New York Post Published Hunter Biden Report Amid Newsroom Doubts”
“Trump Had One Last Story to Sell. The Wall Street Journal Wouldn’t Buy It”
The Washington Post ran a piece headlined:
“The truth behind the Hunter Biden non-scandal”
NBC News had reporters Ben Collins and Brandy Zadrozny producing serious-sounding articles:
“How a fake persona laid the groundwork for a Hunter Biden conspiracy deluge”
“Inside the campaign to ‘pizzagate’ Hunter Biden”
CNN pundits dismissed the story, as The Hill reports:
“Brian Stelter said the story was a “manufactured scandal” and “a classic example of the right-wing media machine” — an obvious shot at Fox News, one of the few TV outlets that gave the story airtime. “They want you to stay mad and stay tuned,” Stelter said.”
“CNN anchor Jake Tapper said “the right wing was going crazy” over the story and that the Hunter Biden claims were “too disgusting to repeat on CNN””
““The anatomy of the New York Post’s dubious Hunter Biden story” wrote Alexis Benveniste.”
The Daily Beast featured headlines that read:
“Russian State Media Is Desperately Trying to Keep the Hunter Biden Story Alive”
“FBI Examining Hunter’s Laptop As Foreign Op, Contradicting Trump’s Intel Czar”
The Hill writes that “Anne Applebaum, staff writer at The Atlantic and author of “Twilight of Democracy: The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism,” noted that Joe Biden’s legacy in Ukraine is about promoting democracy, the rule of law, and creating a better legal system, said of the story:
“There’s no ‘there’ there.”
NPR had to issue a major correction after falsely claiming the Hunter Biden laptop story was 'discredited' by intelligence. Terence Samuel, NPR’s managing editor for news, said NPR was not covering the laptop story because it was a waste of time:
NBC reporter Ken Dilanian, a leading voice in the debunked Russian collusion coverage, quickly revealed that the FBI was investigating whether the laptop story was part of an ongoing Russian disinformation effort.
On 16 October, NBC quickly published the exclusive story under the title:
“Feds examining whether alleged Hunter Biden emails are linked to a foreign intel operation.”
Dilanian wrote that “federal investigators were examining whether emails allegedly describing activities by Joe Biden and his son Hunter and found on a laptop at a Delaware repair shop are linked to a foreign intelligence operation.”
The article cast further doubt on the story by stating that “many commentators have said it is hard to believe that Hunter Biden would abandon a Mac laptop full of incriminating information at a repair shop.”
The NBC article added that “some have speculated that the material could have been hacked from Hunter Biden’s accounts and put on the laptop as a cover story to offer a plausible explanation of how the material became public.”
In October 2020, Hunter’s former business partner, Tony Bobulinski, went public with documents backing up some of the laptop’s contents and says accusations that the information is fake or “Russian disinformation” are “offensive.” The Wall Street Journal examined his claims which corroborate the Post’s laptop emails.
The Wall Street Journal reports that “in October 2020, The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel examined hundreds of emails and texts provided to the paper by Hunter Biden’s former business partner, Tony Bobulinski, who confirmed their authenticity.”
“Those emails corroborated and expanded upon the Post’s laptop emails:”
“They showed that Hunter was seeking to cash in on his name via a business deal with a Shanghai-based company with ties to the Chinese government and military.”
“One email noted that the deal envisioned “10 held by H for the big guy,” whom Mr. Bobulinski identified as Joe Biden. That struck us as news.”
“Mr. Bobulinski said he went public because he wanted to clear his name, which was contained in those published emails, and because accusations that the information is fake or “Russian disinformation” are “offensive.””
It should be noted that the media claims they weren’t given access to the laptop by Giuliani.
NBC News stated that it “sought to obtain the documents on the alleged Hunter Biden laptop, but was rebuffed.”
“An NBC News correspondent sent a letter two weeks later to Giuliani, seeking copies of the materials.”
“His lawyer, Robert Costello, granted the correspondent the opportunity to review some Hunter Biden emails and other materials in person. The materials included copies of Hunter Biden's identification documents that appeared to be genuine.”
“But without taking possession of the copies, it was not possible to conduct the sort of forensic analysis that might help authenticate the emails and documents.”
MANAGING THE RELEASE OF THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP STORY: ROLE OF NGOS, ANTI-DISINFORMATION GROUPS, FACT-CHECKERS, AND ACADEMICS
Disinformation and information security experts told the media that they believed the Hunter Biden laptop story was part of a disinformation operation.
The Hill reports that “Clinton Watts, a disinformation expert and research fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute, said in an interview with The Hill last week that there is a “high” likelihood that the information is part of a disinformation operation.”
“I think we won’t know before the election and that’s my worry,” Watts said. “I don’t know that you could ever know where this came from, potentially.”
“Thomas Rid, an information security expert and professor at Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies, also told The Hill that there is a “significant likelihood” — more than 50 percent — that the laptop is part of an information operation from Russia or another foreign nation.”
“Rid also said the emails allegedly on the laptop might have been forgeries, but said the formatting in the Post article makes it impossible to know for sure.”
“He said the source of the information appeared to be deliberately trying to obscure the original file format and the metadata, which makes it more difficult to investigate the email.”
“He said it was impossible to know the real-time stamps for the email, for instance.”
“The way these emails are released into the public makes it hard to do follow-on investigations, and that is just adding to the suspicion,” Rid added.”
Chris Krebs of the Aspen Institute was saying as late as April 2022 that the Hunter Biden laptop still looked like Russian disinformation which should not have been covered during the 2020 election.
Michael Shellenberger’s March 2023 testimony to The House Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, states that “Chris Krebs. CISA Director (2018 to 2020). Chair of Aspen Institute “Commission on Information Disorder,” helped organize DHS’s “whole of society” approach to censorship.””
“Krebs then declared that “misinformation” was an attack on election security. Krebs said in April 2022 that the Hunter Biden laptop still looked like Russian disinformation and that what mattered was that news media did not cover the laptop during the 2020 election cycle.”
AFTERMATH OF THE HUNTER BIDEN LAPTOP INFLUENCE OPERATION
The Federal Election Commission ruled in September 2021 that Twitter did not violate federal elections law when it restricted the distribution of the New York Post article.
NBC reports that “The Federal Election Commission ruled Twitter did not violate federal elections law when it restricted the distribution of a New York Post article with unverified claims about President Joe Biden’s son, Hunter, according to documents made public Wednesday.”
“It also found Twitter did not violate the law by adding warning labels to former President Donald Trump’s tweets or allegedly “shadow banning” conservative viewpoints.”
“The agency found in a unanimous decision that Twitter had made valid decisions based on commercial reasons, according to a statement by the commission’s Vice Chair Allen Dickerson and Commissioner James “Trey” Trainor III, who are Republicans.”
“They wrote that “one need not shrink from the difficult policy questions involved with social media moderation to realize that they are not, at their core, campaign finance issues,” saying such issues fall outside of the scope of the FEC’s mandate. They said Congress is the appropriate forum for the complainants’ concerns.”
The New York Times and The Washington Post acknowledged in March 2022 that Hunter Biden’s laptop is real.
The New York Times points out that “most news outlets ignored the laptop’s contents until well after Biden won the 2020 election, with the Washington Post and New York Times saying only in March 2022 that they had confirmed the authenticity of the files.”
“In the heat of the presidential race of 2020, the New York Times never missed a chance to cast doubt on the laptop, saying the information was “purported” and quoting a letter from former Democratic officials who claimed — with no evidence — that it was Russian disinformation. As recently as September 2021, the Times called the laptop “unsubstantiated” in a news story.”
“But finally, the New York Times decides that Hunter Biden’s business woes are worthy of a story. Then, deep in the piece, in passing, it notes that Hunter’s laptop is legitimate.”
“In October 2020, the Times cast doubt that there was a meeting between Joe Biden and an official from Burisma, the Ukrainian gas company for which Hunter was a board member. “A Biden campaign spokesman said Mr. Biden’s official schedules did not show a meeting between the two men,” the Times wrote.”
“But in its report, the Times said the meeting likely did happen. Biden had attended the dinner in question.”
“Following the New York Post’s expose, the Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” feature said the paper “has not been able to verify or authenticate these emails” and said there were “fears that the emails could be part of a broader disinformation campaign” by Russia.”
“Washington Post op-eds also called the emails “unverified” and said they “have never been authenticated,” and a news analysis dismissed the New York Post’s reporting as “sketchy.””
“The Washington Post then became the second major news outlet to reverse course and admit that emails from the infamous Hunter Biden laptop are authentic — nine months after it obtained them and a year and a half after the New York Post first reported on them.”
CNN reported that allegations the FBI told Twitter to suppress the story are supported, with half a dozen executives and senior staff, as well as federal officials, denying the allegations - the Twitter files provide no proof of direct censorship from the FBI.
CNN “has previously reported, however, that allegations the FBI told Twitter to suppress the story are unsupported, and a half-dozen tech executives and senior staff, along with multiple federal officials familiar with the matter, all denied any such directive was given in interviews with CNN.”
“Baker said in his opening statement to the House Oversight Committee for the Republican majority investigating President Joe Biden’s administration and family.”
“I am aware of no unlawful collusion with, or direction from, any government agency or political campaign on how Twitter should have handled the Hunter Biden laptop situation…Even though many disagree with how Twitter handled the Hunter Biden matter, I believe that the public record reveals that my client acted in a manner that was fully consistent with the First Amendment.”
In separate reporting, CNN states that “none of the released messages explicitly show the FBI telling Twitter to suppress the story. In fact, the opposite view emerges from sworn testimony by an FBI agent at the center of the controversy. And in interviews with CNN, half a dozen tech executives and senior staff, along with multiple federal officials familiar with the matter, all deny any such directive was given.”
““We would never go to a company to say you need to squelch this story,” said one former FBI official who helped oversee the government’s cooperation with companies including Twitter, Google, and Facebook.”
In February 2023, former Twitter executives acknowledged that the company “erred” and should’ve reinstated the New York Post’s account, but claimed the climate of disinformation complicated the process.
CNN reports that “former Twitter executives acknowledged to lawmakers Wednesday that the social media company erred when it temporarily suppressed a New York Post story regarding Hunter Biden’s laptop in October 2020, but the officials emphasized there was no government involvement in the decision.” Roth said,
“It isn’t obvious what the right response is to a suspected but not confirmed cyberattack by another government on a presidential election. I believe Twitter erred in this case because we wanted to avoid repeating the mistakes of 2016.”
“The Twitter executives argued that the social media platform made mistakes in its handling of the New York Post story, but emphasized that the heightened focus on combating disinformation complicated the company’s decision-making process.”
“Vijaya Gadde, Twitter’s former chief legal officer, testified that looking back, Twitter should have immediately reinstated the New York Post’s account after the company reversed its decision to block the Hunter Biden story.”
“Roth said he personally disagreed with the decision to temporarily suppress the laptop story but said that the company’s judgment was colored by the “real Russian activities we saw play out that year.””
Even by February 2023, AOC was calling the laptop story “half-fake” and called the New York Post’s two-week ban a “24-hour hiccup in a right-wing political operation.”
The Daily Mail reports that “New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez tore into the laptop story as 'half fake' and accused Republicans of 'weaponizing' the Oversight panel to 'inject' it back into the media narrative.”
“We’re talking about Hunter Biden’s half-fake laptop story. I mean, this is an embarrassment,” the 33-year-old raged, suggesting the House Oversight Committee hearing should have been focused on issues like abortion and civil rights.
The New York Post continues, “disregarding both journalistic practices and the principle of free speech, Ocasio-Cortez suggested The Post’s ban from Twitter was its own fault because it did not loop competing outlets in on the laptop’s contents.”
“She referenced a Washington Post article that claimed left-leaning sources — who later belatedly admitted the laptop was, in fact, legit — had faced a “roadblock” in trying to corroborate the trove of emails discovered on the scandal-scarred son’s device.”
“The New York Post had this alleged information and was trying to publish it without any corroboration, without any backup information, they were trying to publish it to Twitter, Twitter would not let them — and now they are upset,” Ocasio-Cortez claimed.
“I believe that political operatives who sought to inject explosive disinformation with the Washington Post couldn’t get away with it,” she continued.
“And now they’re livid and they want the ability to do it again. They want the ability to inject this again. They are weaponizing the use of this committee.”
“The platform, then headed by CEO Jack Dorsey, also locked The Post out of its Twitter account for more than two weeks because of baseless claims that the report used hacked information.”
“However, Ocasio-Cortez dismissed the furor as a “24-hour hiccup in a right-wing political operation.””