Biden-Harris lie about Hunter’s laptop turns 4 as evidence of cover-up mounts

As we approach the fourth anniversary of one of the most significant deceptions propagated by the Biden-Harris administration—the claim that Hunter Biden’s laptop was a fabrication—it is essential to revisit the events leading up to the 2020 election.

In October 2020, just weeks before the presidential election, the New York Post broke the story regarding the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop. The report included an email from one of Hunter’s business associates referencing a meeting with then-former Vice President Joe Biden. Throughout his campaign, President Biden denied any interactions with his son’s business partners, labeling such claims as conspiracy theories.

However, subsequent evidence, including photographs, confirmed that President Biden did indeed meet with one of Hunter’s associates. The laptop’s contents were authentic—a fact known to the FBI, members of the Biden-Harris campaign, and Hunter Biden himself. Instead of addressing the truth, the Biden-Harris campaign orchestrated a disinformation campaign, dismissing the laptop as a product of Russian interference.

The American public is aware that political campaigns often engage in spin, but this was a blatant lie. Democracy thrives on the ability to express one’s beliefs freely. As I have often stated, “Democracy only works when we can say what we believe. You are not free if you cannot say what you think.”

Before the New York Post even published its findings, the FBI pressured social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook to suppress the story. Facebook limited the visibility of posts linking to the article, while Twitter went so far as to ban links to the report and suspend the New York Post’s account for 16 days.

In a troubling twist, Anthony Blinken, then a member of the Biden-Harris campaign, reached out to intelligence officials to propagate the narrative that the laptop was part of a Russian disinformation effort. He managed to rally over 50 intelligence officials to sign a letter asserting that the laptop had “the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

The mainstream media, eager to align with this narrative, largely ignored the laptop story for years. NPR dismissed it as a “pure distraction,” while many outlets failed to investigate the claims thoroughly.

Today, the reality is undeniable: the laptop is real, and the FBI has used its contents to prosecute Hunter Biden for gun-related charges. However, this issue transcends the laptop itself; it highlights the Biden-Harris administration’s willingness to leverage its power to silence dissent and restrict access to vital information during a critical election period.

As we find ourselves in a similar situation today, with just weeks until another election, the Biden-Harris administration appears to have learned little from the past. Reports have surfaced indicating that the FBI has continued pressuring social media companies to censor information, particularly regarding COVID-19. When confronted with these revelations, White House spokeswoman Karine Jean-Pierre remarked that it was “not healthy” to discuss the administration’s censorship efforts.

Vice President Kamala Harris’s potential re-election campaign raises further concerns. Her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, has stated, “There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.” This begs the question: who determines what constitutes misinformation or hate speech?

It is ironic that Vice President Harris and Governor Walz recognize the rights of college students to express their views, even when those views are critical of Israel, yet overlook the same rights for Americans wishing to voice concerns about the Biden-Harris administration.

As I have previously asserted, “the best way to correct misinformation is with more and better information, not censorship.” The Biden-Harris administration claims to be “protecting democracy,” but their actions suggest otherwise. Suppression of information and censorship of dissent are fundamentally anti-democratic and immoral.

In conclusion, the American people deserve transparency and the freedom to engage in open discourse. The truth must prevail, and it is imperative that we hold those in power accountable for their actions.