In this case absolutely. If the source is known to be create fake news how can they be credible.

No, they are not. None of their videos have ever been shown to be fraudulent.

You may want to watch the video.

Also, keep in mind that no mainstream sources have reported on the Hunter Biden e-mails either, even though the FBI, Biden's former business partner, the other recipients of the e-mails, AND Hunter Biden's own attorney (indirectly) have confirmed they are indeed real.

Not to mention the media silence regarding Joe Biden's increasingly obvious dementia. Watching his speeches and interviews over the last 2-3 months has been just the most horrible experience. I really do feel bad for him and his wife, and I have serious doubts even the best medication will be able to get him on his feet and coherent enough to be sworn in come January.

That's what worries me too. With most presidents, you wonder if they will serve a second term; with Biden, you wonder if he will even complete one term. If he doesn't, we get the Harris woman, about whom I have heard nothing good. I gather that she didn't even stand for nomination in her own right because she knew no one would vote for her. Yet this way, she gets to be president by the back door. Weird!

The Democratic Party is prepared for this. They know Joe Biden isn't fit for the office, which is why they've introduced legislation that would prepare a committee to evaluate the president's mental state.

Nancy Pelosi made a lot of references to Trump's fitness for office when the legislation was introduced, but that was just a smokescreen. The commission could only evaluate the president's fitness as mandated by the 25th amendment, which requires the VP to take the initiative, and no-one in their right mind could possibly believe that Mike Pence would ever try to oust Donald Trump.

But all the noise about Trump seems to have fooled the NYT, because they missed the obvious reason for having such a commission ready to act on short notice: If the Democrats were to win the 2020 election, Kamala Harris would use it to declare Joe Biden unfit and replace him as president.

I don't know much about her, but I do know what she doesn't have: principles.

She ran against Joe Biden to be the presidential nominee, and during debates the accused him of sexual misconduct and of being a racist. She then pulled out when it became clear that she had no support, but shortly thereafter she was only too happy to be Biden's VP candidate. Watch what happened when Stephen Colbert asked her about this.

I don't need to.

My exaggeration in calling highly edited deceptive videos as fake.

https://money.cnn.com/2017/11/28/med...ing/index.html
https://www.motherjones.com/politics...-james-okeefe/

I don't doubt the emails are real. It is possible that any real information is being held back due to the election but all the allegations are basically from the right wing media sources without context or real information.

You don't need to evaluate something yourself in order to make a judgement? That's being a bit naïve, dont' you think?

So some journalists were the subject of a failed undercover sting. James O'Keefe seems to have been wrong about them, as they didn't jump on a fake story, but did proper fact checking instead. Great!

But what about the instances where O'Keefe wasn't wrong? Where a corrupt politician or a less-than-honest reporter actually took the bait? Does this failed operation discredit the successful operations?

So the e-mails are real. Hunter Biden did indeed broker deals in China and Ukraine where companies were to receive favourable treatment from the U.S. (courtesy of VP Joe Biden) in return for cash payments to Hunter for do-nothing jobs. And Hunter would then have to give 50% of these bribes directly to "the big man", confirmed to be Joe Biden by multiple parties involved in the deals.

And you're right, this is being suppressed by the media because of the election. Because some influential people are worried that many voters might not vote for a thoroughly corrupt man to become their president, and I think they could be right about that.

In this case not at all. IMHO Okeefe's discredits far out weigh his successes. Source credibility is seriously lacking.

I don't know. As far as I know the content of the emails has not been released to the public so again proof to the allegations is lacking.

I suppose it must be proof that the mainstream media is fake, since voter fraud is so easy to find on twitter and facebook but they aren't reporting it. I wonder why the Republican legal teams have presented no evidence with their filings?

https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/...es/6173694002/

Copies of the hard drive are being circulated. In fact, there's a slight chance I might be able to obtain one if I reached out to the right people.

But the reason you haven't seen the proof is that it's being actively suppressed by the media. Journalist Glenn Greenwald (who has impeccable credentials and multiple awards under his belt) wrote an extensive piece on the Hunter Biden e-mails. Guess what happened? The Intercept refused to publish it. As a result, he quit.

Defending their stance, the editors at The Intercept claims his article contained "unsupported innuendo".

In other words, if you obtain a copy of my hard drive (through legitimate means), and I confirm that you do indeed possess a copy of my hard drive (and may I please have it back immediately, pretty please with sugar on top, or else I'll sue you into the ground), and the FBI confirms that this is indeed unaltered and legitimate data with absolutely no Russians involved, anything you publish from that drive should still be considered "unsupported innuendo"?

Well, now you can read the article (and the e-mail exchanges between Greenwald and his editors at The Intercept) at Greenwald's own site, Substack. You can also see exactly what he has done in order to verify the authenticity of the information.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/202...leged-n1245533

But the Wall Street Journal and Fox News — among the only news organizations that have been given access to key documents — found that the emails and other records don’t make that case. Leaving aside the many questions about their provenance, the materials offered no evidence that Joe Biden played any role in his son’s dealings in China, let alone profited from them, both news organizations concluded.

The lack of major new revelations is perhaps the biggest reason the story has not gotten traction, but not the only one. Among others: Most mainstream news organizations, including NBC News, have not been granted access to the documents. NBC News asked by email, text, phone call and certified mail, and was ultimately denied.

8bit

I don't have either a facebook or twitter account. IMHO there is so much misinformation spewed on both sites how do you really know what is fact?

IMO the real issue is the available bias in the media. For example:

By in large, most of the world believes Trump's response to Covid was poor at best. Except for Trump supporters that listen to right wing media.

How can we agree on solutions if we can't agree on the problems. For me this is the biggest hurdle to get over.

8bit

Argh, why doesn't this article contain any sources or verifiable facts? Surely there should have been a link to the actual court filings, given that they are public documents?

And it's not my intention to throw shade on the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel in particular, as I've searched numerous other news outlets for information on the lawsuits filed by the Trump Campaign. I couldn't find a single article containing even a direct quote from the filings!

I'm not sufficiently versed in the various states' legal systems to dig up these documents myself. I guess I'll just wait until one of the YouTube lawyers looks into the case(s) and posts links to the actual information.

I 100% agree.

I believe this is the main takeaway from this entire debacle: Media today consists of echo chambers, and it's frighteningly easy to get caught up in one.