Yeah. And when even normally more reputable media outlets talk about it, they just talk vaguely about ‘Hunter Biden’s laptop’ without making it clear whether they mean the actual laptop, or the actual original external hard drive, or the copy the geek made of the external hard drive, or some files provided by someone who has examined one of those other things, and who knows which?

After the data left the repairman’s possession. There is still no actual evidence that the laptop even existed much less was owned or in possession of Hunter Biden.

This is the part that mystifies me. Was there a laptop? What did the FBI take from the geek? A laptop, or an external drive, or some files? I have no idea.

This is a little long-winded, but I thought it was pretty comprehensive and humorous

Thanks, really, but I don’t think an hour-and-a-quarter video on YouTube is going to be the reliable primary source I’m looking for about whether there is actually a laptop at all.

The Wikipedia page gives a summary that accords with my understanding from following the story closely before the election. It is pretty well established that Hunter Biden in fact dropped off the laptop at this repair shop in Delaware. The shop owner had a signed receipt copy, and furthermore it is the only Mac repair place in the town and very plausible that Biden would leave the laptop there.

Biden never retrieved the laptop. The shop owner felt entitled to snoop the contents and say he was concerned about evidence of criminality, copied the contents and supposedly gave the laptop itself to the FBI (data on the laptop may or may not be useful in a tax fraud investigation the FBI is purportedly conducting into Biden.)

The data shopped around to various news organizations is supposed to be from the shop-owners’ copy of the laptop contents. At this point it’s clear that a good bit of the data is genuine (lots of the emails have been confirmed by recipients) but there’s no way to determine if all the data in question is from the laptop or if some was obtained from other sources (such as hacking), or if some of the elements were just fabricated. If Biden gets indicted from the laptop contents presumably the FBI will provide some sort of forensic analysis.

I read the Wikipedia entry, but in some ways it just raises more questions. Why do they talk about a laptop in some cases and an external desktop hard drive in other cases? Did Hunter Biden drop off both items? If the problem was that the laptop had gotten wet, why turn in an external drive as well?

Did the FBI seize a laptop or a hard drive or both? Did the geek copy the laptop or the hard drive or both?

Is there a separate thread for this?

On the laptop or the hard drive?

“Well established”?

That wiki article cites a politifact article regarding Trump saying “I was right about everything” which contains this passage.

It was real in the sense that it exists, but it didn’t prove much.

Trump allies obtained a laptop or copies of a laptop during the 2020 campaign that allegedly belonged to Hunter Biden, President Joe Biden’s son. Over time, there has been less doubt that the laptop did in fact belong to Hunter Biden, though how the laptop came to be obtained by Trump allies and Trump-friendly media outlets is unclear.

“Less doubt” is the strongest establishment the cited source from wiki offers.

There is no actual physical laptop now, whether there was one in the first place isn’t really established at all. At best there’s a data image with a highly questionable chain of custody that does contain at least some information that was Hunter Biden’s.

If the chain of custody is questionable then the assertion that it is or was Hunter Biden’s is also questionable. No?

Yes, the assertion that the alleged laptop that the repairman made an image of to an external hard drive which he then gave to Rudy Giuliani who then gave it to the New York Post is really a legit unaltered image of Hunter Biden’s laptop in indeed questionable.

Especially, as the wiki article mentions, the image provided for analysis was clearly tampered with.

Thank goodness the upcoming House committees investigating this will be holding to strict evidentiary rules and carefully respect the chain of custody to assure only the facts matter.

I never quite understood why nothing had been done with the guy that grabbed the data.

I thought the thread title had to do with hyper loop.

Another good question. I’m mostly stunned that there is no good, authoritative précis of the actual facts, with citations to the sources. It’s all vaguery.

You mean the patriot who tried to save the US from the anti-American Demonrats?

Maybe because it’s all bullshit? Just asking questions. :)

Twitter is looking to hire