NEW: The Hunter Biden Story IS True

This is a transcript from my radio show. You can subscribe to my premium newsletter and get exclusive content like my conversation today with Dan Crenshaw on Afghanistan and the border. Subscribe below for only $7/month or $70/year. Thanks for reading.

The story about Hunter Biden’s laptop was true. You and I have known for some time that Hunter Biden on his laptop had all sorts of scandalous pictures of himself smoking crack or doing drugs or some such with prostitutes. We also knew, for example, that Hunter Biden was trying to structure a business and in structuring the business was trying to give his father a part of the business and trying to work his dad into the situation. At the time that it happened, the national political press said, "Well, we're sorry. We can't verify the story's true. We can't run this story. It might not be true."

National Public Radio, in fact, ran a story on why you weren't hearing about the Hunter Biden story from them. They took a very smug position that they couldn't verify that it was actually really true. It was annoying and disgusting. Here's the New York Post from April of earlier this year.

"National Public Radio has corrected an online article that falsely asserted that documents from First Son Hunter Biden's laptop had been discredited by U.S. intelligence. A book review of Hunter Biden's memoir, Beautiful Things, initially dismissed the documents first reported in October of last year by the New York Post. The laptop story was discredited by U.S. intelligence and independent investigations by news organizations the book review by Ron Elving, Senior Editor of NPR, initially claimed.”

The correction on Thursday, this is, again, April of 2021 says, "A previous version of this story said U.S. intelligence had discredited the laptop story. U.S. intelligence officials have not made a statement to that effect."

And yet National Public Radio insisted that there was no reason to cover the story because the story was in some ways false. Remember, they ran with Christine Blasey Ford allegations and they ran with all the other allegations as well about Brett Kavanaugh that turned out not to be true, but they blocked coverage of Hunter Biden.

---

You should listen to my conversation with Dan Crenshaw.

---

Now, according to Politico, it turns out there are a lot of corroborating details that show the Hunter Biden story was true. Here is what you've got to understand. During the campaign in 2020, William Barr, the Attorney General of the United States, kept it quiet that Hunter Biden was under investigation.

Now, he did not do this as some of the President's supporters speculated to protect Hunter Biden. It actually is well-settled precedent in the United States that if someone is under investigation by the Department of Justice, during a campaign season in particular, you don't make it public if it might impact the campaign. You don't do it. That was one of the grievances that the Democrats had in 2016, about the way James Comey the former head of the FBI went after Hillary Clinton. It was not for him to do that. He was not supposed to make that public. Now, the FBI Director at the time reasoned that because it had leaked Hillary Clinton was under investigation for the email scandal he needed to make it clear and correct the record that the investigation had concluded and there was nothing. And then, because he had made it public that the investigation had concluded nothing when there were more details to be investigated, he had to come out and say, "Wait a second. We're still investigating."

The Democrats blame James Comey. Before they blamed Russia for costing Hillary the election, they blamed James Comey. Comey, you will notice, finally disappeared. He tried to write that book about Donald Trump and all and use his Twitter account to get fawning praise from the Democrats, the Democrats were livid with him. They would not embrace him because they blamed him before they blamed Russia for Hillary's loss. Well, the norm is that the federal government, if you're in a campaign and someone close to the campaign is being investigated, you don't talk about it at all, because you don't want to be accused of disrupting the campaign. So the Justice Department wouldn't come out and say they were investigating Hunter Biden. The Biden team denied that any of this stuff was true and the media ran with it. Hook, line, and sinker, the media took the bait. Not only did the media take the bait, but Twitter itself blocked the New York Post's Twitter account for reporting on what was on Hunter Biden's laptop, even though we now know they were telling the truth.

Now, there's a larger story here we need to pay attention to. There's a growing distrust of the media in the country. They are gatekeepers for partisan information about the Left. They want to protect the Democrats at all costs. I mean, look, for example, at this story today. According to the COVID estimator website, Florida has the lowest R rate in the country. Florida's rate is below 0.5, which means the virus is not only not spreading, it's actually receding in Florida. Georgia is in second place at 0.56 or 0.58, which also means the virus is not spreading in Georgia. It's receding in Georgia. If the number's below one, it's receding. The lower below one, the faster it's receding. You heard the media repeatedly attack Ron DeSantis in Florida and, to a degree, Brian Kemp in Georgia for refusing mask mandates and the like. You heard the media attack Ron DeSantis regularly about Regeneron and monoclonal antibodies. It turns out he was right.

You heard and saw 60 Minutes try to reframe a story to make it look like there was a scandal with Publix when there wasn't. And now they're not talking about it at all. They're not talking about the Northern states seeing a big COVID surge. The media have become gatekeepers to protect the Democrats and that causes distrust. Part of the media bias in this country is not what they report, it's what they don't report. The media did not want to report on Hunter Biden at the time. Not only did the media not want to report on it, they tried to silence people from even covering it. And yet again, here we go, another story that's proven true. And they do this with COVID as well. Yesterday, there was a doctor on one news outlet, Dr. Osterholm, I think, it was on CNN. He actually claimed that COVID is killing kids at a higher rate than the flu.

Dr. Osterholm:
This is a challenge that all of us are confronting. I mean, the facts are, one out of every 500 Americans has died from COVID virus infection in the last 18 to 20 months. This will soon in terms of number of deaths surpass the worst catastrophe we've had in this country ever in our history, which was the 1918 influenza pandemic. The fact of the matter is that this is killing kids right now at a rate much, much, much higher than our worst severe influenza years.

You got that? There have been 159 children died of COVID since January of last year in the United States. So more than a year and a half, a year and nine months, less than 200 kids have died. In the last flu season, which only the last six months, 200 kids died. This is now the new talking point out there. Anthony Fauci himself said this yesterday.

Anthony Fauci:
So, even though relatively speaking, compared to an adult, they do not get as seriously ill. We have lost more children from SARS-Covid-2 than we ever lose for influenza, and we vaccinate children against influenza.

New York Magazine actually ran a piece on this. The headline, "The Kids Are All right: Why Now Is The Time To Rethink COVID Safety Protocols. The kids are safe. They always have been. It may sound strange given a year of panic over school closures and reopenings, a year of masking toddlers and closing playgrounds, and huddling in pandemic pods that according to the CDC, among children the mortality risk from COVID is actually lower than that of the flu. The risk of severe disease or hospitalization is about the same. This is from July and the data has not changed even with the spread. This is now from the CDC, “COVID 19 seems to spread more easily than flu. However, as more people become fully vaccinated against COVID-19, the spread of the virus that caused it slows down. Compared to the flu, COVID-19 can cause more serious illness in some people. COVID-19 can take longer to show up even after it has been contagious, but it does not impact children as aggressively as the flu."

Why is Fauci suddenly saying this? Why is this other doctor on CNN, Dr. Osterholm, saying this? The data doesn't seem to back it up. So now take the totality of the stories here for just a moment with me. The media says you can't talk about Hunter Biden. Twitter shuts down the New York Post account. It turns out the story's true. Dr. Fauci comes out and says, "Kids are dying at a higher rate of COVID than the flu." That's not true. The media touts that. Other people point out that the death rate for COVID is to some degree overstated. The media gets mad when you point it out. It turns out it's true. The data has come out now and said, "At this point, masks actually only have about a 10% efficacy rate in slowing COVID." The media doesn't want you to talk about that. They insist that everybody needs to be masked. The data and the real-world scenarios often contradict the media and the media and social media groups are censoring people who are telling you things that actually are true.

And then the media plays catch up later and says, "Oh, our bad. Turns out this is right," after they've already censored other people. Can you understand why there's so much distrust in the country right now with the media? Nobody can believe anything. So when the media, for example, comes out and says, "Listen, the election wasn't stolen," how can you believe the media? The media got all the other stuff wrong. I actually don't think the election was stolen, but it's a great example of why people who believe it is won't be convinced by a media that sensors stuff that is true if that stuff might hurt the Democrats. How can you believe them? You can't. The media has lost moral credibility. And as they've lost moral credibility, they've lost the ability to convey the truth to people because no one actually believes what the media says anymore. And this isn't just on the Right. This isn't just Conservatives. Even Progressives are having this problem with the media.

They're realizing that the media is aggressively censoring things that are true in order to protect certain people. It undermines the full trust of the media when it comes to covering everything. If you can't believe the media on this, you can't believe the media on that. The only people who don't seem to realize this are the people in the media who still think they have a monopoly on coverage and truth. In the age of the internet, they sure as heck don't. But they're not changing. Maybe it would be good for the media to begin restoring some of its credibility by actually being honest and forthcoming and open and covering the Hunter Biden story. Except they won't do that because the thing the media fears more than anything else is a resurgent Republican Party, particularly if Donald Trump is at the helm. They would rather you never trust them again than be truthful if that truth might actually provoke people to go vote Republican.