5 ms·

> I don't know all of the ins or outs, but my understanding is that it doesn't amount to anything, and certainly nothing in comparison to the entanglements of t

> I don't know all of the ins or outs, but my understanding is that it doesn't amount to anything, and certainly nothing in comparison to the entanglements of the Trump family. This is a pretty astounding sentence, but I would let it go, except that I see this all the time. It reads like a dismissal of the importance of the story because there is nothing that matches the unique danger of "the Trump family". Is that fair? Bear with me for a second as I ask, respectfully, How would you know? Perhaps it is true that Trump is a unique evil that must be defeated by extraordinary measures, but whence comes this information? If you rely, for your mental picture of what is good and evil, of what is important and what can be dismissed, on the same institutions that suppress true stories and promote false ones, then how even are you making these choices? Further, remember, whatever powers are used against the guy you don't like this election, can be used against the guy you do like down the road.

peter422 4y ago
Joe Biden had been in the public eye for 50 years, releasing tax returns, etc. Hunter Biden was not running for office. Perhaps it is possible that this laptop, at the time completely unverified, had some magic smoking gun to bring down a 50 year career, magically showing up in a random place 10 days before the election. But obviously the much, much more likely situation is that it was either fake or insignificant. If it were my social network and I cared about my responsibility to society, I don’t see why not promoting this story is at all controversial. It isn’t like Facebook is the entire internet, people still were reading about it.
- rendall 4y ago
  If the question were Was it reasonable to suppress the laptop story? this would be an excellent answer. The question I asked is: If you rely, for your mental picture of what is... important and what can be dismissed, on the same institutions that suppress true stories and promote false ones, then how even are you making these choices?
  - pstuart 4y ago
    Take in the information as a whole and sift out one's best guess. That's all anyone can do. Cognitive bias is a bitch though.
    - rendall 4y ago
      My answer is a few rules of thumb: - political stance is not my identity - actively seek to falsify that which I know to be true - be skeptical about any statement that fits neatly into my preconceptions - apply the principle of charity, to reply to the strongest, most charitable interpretation of a statement, even of those with whom I disagree - not to rely on any source once it has demonstrated a capacity to lie - understand most people want prosperity and peace in society, and may have different, possibly excellent ways of getting there - no, most people are not idiots, morons, crazy or evil, not even those who look at the same information I have and come to a different conclusion
      - pstuart 4y ago
        That sounds lovely but theory and practice vary in their overlap. One point I'll counter you on is that a significant portion of the population is literally below average intelligence and that hate and spite are strong motivators for many. I've yet to see any capitulations by the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop but I'm willing to try to zero in on that with you to see if your words match your actions.
        rendall 4y ago
        > One point I'll counter you on is that a significant portion of the population is literally below average intelligence Yes, half, but IQ is only one measure of a person. Compassion, wisdom, grit are others. Someone can be low IQ and yet wise, compassionate, etc. > and that hate and spite are strong motivators for many. Not sure what you mean by that. How many? How do you know? > I've yet to see any capitulations by the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop What would capitulation look like to you? Do you see me as one of "the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop"? > but I'm willing to try to zero in on that with you to see if your words match your actions. Not really sure what actions are possible given the format. But sure, walk me through.
- dmix 4y ago
  Hunter turned out to be mostly a non-story [1] in practice but the FBI silencing his laptop story makes every partisan person in the country immediately think there's something they are trying to hide. Especially when it comes out they already had access to the laptop data before the suppression of the information, so they knew it was real. I don't blame them for thinking it's a big deal. They Streisand'd it into the biggest deal possible. [1] besides people who find rich kids being fuck-ups damaging to the parent, but he wasn't politically involved like other politicians children and there wasn't much tangible beyond that
  - typeofhuman 4y ago
    > but he wasn't politically involved like other politicians children and there wasn't much tangible beyond that He was a board member of a Ukrainian oil company receiving tons of money having 0-energy related business experience. Then there's the firing of the prosecutor looking into the corruption of Burisma at the behest of Joe Biden ("son of bitch, he got fired"). Now we're sending billions of dollars over there with reports saying few of those dollars are going to the front lines. Conservatively, there's enough there to warrant the appearance of impropriety and the American public deserve to have answers. When a story came out exposing this behavior the democratic party, the major news networks, social networks, and now the FBI actively peddled misinformation wrongly calling it Russian-propoganda and/or censoring/suppressing it. Seems sketch.
    - myko 4y ago
      > FBI actively peddled misinformation wrongly calling it Russian-propoganda and/or censoring/suppressing it. No, they weren't wrong. This was a Russian propaganda op to amplify a non-story.
      - typeofhuman 4y ago
        What part of the story was inaccurate?
        4y ago
alsaaro 4y ago
Trump proved he was a unique evil after he tried to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power by usurping democracy. Remember, there are also questions about Trump's loyalty to the United States, he was literally placed under a counter-intelligence investigation for fear he was working for a foreign power, the results of this investigation are still unknown. Extremism in the defense of liberty isn't a vice. When it comes to obstructing Trump and his acolytes, the ends always justify the means.
- rendall 4y ago
  If the question were Is Trump actually a unique evil? this would be an excellent answer. The question I asked is: If you rely, for your mental picture of what is... important and what can be dismissed, on the same institutions that suppress true stories and promote false ones, then how even are you making these choices?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
pstuart 4y ago
I'll double down on the quoted line. Do you care about the laptop because it's ostensibly proof of corruption or because it tarnishes the reputation of the sitting president? If it's the latter then go pound sand. If it's the former, then good, let's investigate and root out the corruption and address it in a court of law. But that requires being open to treating similar treatment of corruption by the prior administration. Every mention of the laptop so far seems to fall in the "Biden is dirty" camp, not "let's punish this corruption". > How would you know? There's a wealth of evidence that Trump serves only Trump. Disclaimer: I think the Hunter Biden affair was genteel corruption but there's been no substantiated evidence that his father was significantly influenced. I put country over party, do you?
- rendall 4y ago
  It's buried in my own verbiage, but this is the thrust of my reply. If you rely, for your mental picture of what is ... important and what can be dismissed, on the same institutions that suppress true stories and promote false ones, then how even are you making these choices? At the risk of distracting you from answering that question, I'll answer yours: partisan feuding is destroying the US, so I absolutely put country before party. Moreover, I actively seek out, listen to and even respect people with whom I disagree. Corruption is corruption, whether it's "my guy" or "their guy".
  - rendall 4y ago
    You answered my question here[1] with Take in the information as a whole and sift out one's best guess. That's all anyone can do. With respect, that's not all anyone can do, and it's not nearly enough. My answer[2] isn't perfect, but in order not to be influenced by partisan lies in a mediascape that is actively hostile to truth, one must be more active than that. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32617732 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32617732 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32617838 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32617838
  - pstuart 4y ago
    Ok, so corruption matters to you? From my observations Trump (and his admin) were corrupt as can be. Small case in point: Jared Kushner's business dealings where he's gotten huge amounts of money whilst ostensibly serving as a government employee. I could dig up citations if you demonstrated its veracity if you would take the time to review them. Back to the Biden affair -- I've seen nothing of the corrupt board membership resulting in government interference from Joe Biden. A nice summary here: https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-johnson-grassley-report-biden-and-burisma https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-johnson-grassley-repor...
rendall 4y ago
Downvoters: explain!

peter422 4y ago

Joe Biden had been in the public eye for 50 years, releasing tax returns, etc. Hunter Biden was not running for office. Perhaps it is possible that this laptop, at the time completely unverified, had some magic smoking gun to bring down a 50 year career, magically showing up in a random place 10 days before the election. But obviously the much, much more likely situation is that it was either fake or insignificant. If it were my social network and I cared about my responsibility to society, I don’t see why not promoting this story is at all controversial. It isn’t like Facebook is the entire internet, people still were reading about it.

rendall 4y ago
If the question were Was it reasonable to suppress the laptop story? this would be an excellent answer. The question I asked is: If you rely, for your mental picture of what is... important and what can be dismissed, on the same institutions that suppress true stories and promote false ones, then how even are you making these choices?
- pstuart 4y ago
  Take in the information as a whole and sift out one's best guess. That's all anyone can do. Cognitive bias is a bitch though.
  - rendall 4y ago
    My answer is a few rules of thumb: - political stance is not my identity - actively seek to falsify that which I know to be true - be skeptical about any statement that fits neatly into my preconceptions - apply the principle of charity, to reply to the strongest, most charitable interpretation of a statement, even of those with whom I disagree - not to rely on any source once it has demonstrated a capacity to lie - understand most people want prosperity and peace in society, and may have different, possibly excellent ways of getting there - no, most people are not idiots, morons, crazy or evil, not even those who look at the same information I have and come to a different conclusion
    - pstuart 4y ago
      That sounds lovely but theory and practice vary in their overlap. One point I'll counter you on is that a significant portion of the population is literally below average intelligence and that hate and spite are strong motivators for many. I've yet to see any capitulations by the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop but I'm willing to try to zero in on that with you to see if your words match your actions.
      - rendall 4y ago
        > One point I'll counter you on is that a significant portion of the population is literally below average intelligence Yes, half, but IQ is only one measure of a person. Compassion, wisdom, grit are others. Someone can be low IQ and yet wise, compassionate, etc. > and that hate and spite are strong motivators for many. Not sure what you mean by that. How many? How do you know? > I've yet to see any capitulations by the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop What would capitulation look like to you? Do you see me as one of "the crowd obsessed with Hunter's laptop"? > but I'm willing to try to zero in on that with you to see if your words match your actions. Not really sure what actions are possible given the format. But sure, walk me through.
dmix 4y ago
Hunter turned out to be mostly a non-story [1] in practice but the FBI silencing his laptop story makes every partisan person in the country immediately think there's something they are trying to hide. Especially when it comes out they already had access to the laptop data before the suppression of the information, so they knew it was real. I don't blame them for thinking it's a big deal. They Streisand'd it into the biggest deal possible. [1] besides people who find rich kids being fuck-ups damaging to the parent, but he wasn't politically involved like other politicians children and there wasn't much tangible beyond that
- typeofhuman 4y ago
  > but he wasn't politically involved like other politicians children and there wasn't much tangible beyond that He was a board member of a Ukrainian oil company receiving tons of money having 0-energy related business experience. Then there's the firing of the prosecutor looking into the corruption of Burisma at the behest of Joe Biden ("son of bitch, he got fired"). Now we're sending billions of dollars over there with reports saying few of those dollars are going to the front lines. Conservatively, there's enough there to warrant the appearance of impropriety and the American public deserve to have answers. When a story came out exposing this behavior the democratic party, the major news networks, social networks, and now the FBI actively peddled misinformation wrongly calling it Russian-propoganda and/or censoring/suppressing it. Seems sketch.
  - myko 4y ago
    > FBI actively peddled misinformation wrongly calling it Russian-propoganda and/or censoring/suppressing it. No, they weren't wrong. This was a Russian propaganda op to amplify a non-story.
    - typeofhuman 4y ago
      What part of the story was inaccurate?
      - 4y ago

alsaaro 4y ago

Trump proved he was a unique evil after he tried to obstruct the peaceful transfer of power by usurping democracy. Remember, there are also questions about Trump's loyalty to the United States, he was literally placed under a counter-intelligence investigation for fear he was working for a foreign power, the results of this investigation are still unknown. Extremism in the defense of liberty isn't a vice. When it comes to obstructing Trump and his acolytes, the ends always justify the means.

rendall 4y ago
If the question were Is Trump actually a unique evil? this would be an excellent answer. The question I asked is: If you rely, for your mental picture of what is... important and what can be dismissed, on the same institutions that suppress true stories and promote false ones, then how even are you making these choices?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

pstuart 4y ago

I'll double down on the quoted line. Do you care about the laptop because it's ostensibly proof of corruption or because it tarnishes the reputation of the sitting president? If it's the latter then go pound sand. If it's the former, then good, let's investigate and root out the corruption and address it in a court of law. But that requires being open to treating similar treatment of corruption by the prior administration. Every mention of the laptop so far seems to fall in the "Biden is dirty" camp, not "let's punish this corruption". > How would you know? There's a wealth of evidence that Trump serves only Trump. Disclaimer: I think the Hunter Biden affair was genteel corruption but there's been no substantiated evidence that his father was significantly influenced. I put country over party, do you?

rendall 4y ago
It's buried in my own verbiage, but this is the thrust of my reply. If you rely, for your mental picture of what is ... important and what can be dismissed, on the same institutions that suppress true stories and promote false ones, then how even are you making these choices? At the risk of distracting you from answering that question, I'll answer yours: partisan feuding is destroying the US, so I absolutely put country before party. Moreover, I actively seek out, listen to and even respect people with whom I disagree. Corruption is corruption, whether it's "my guy" or "their guy".
- rendall 4y ago
  You answered my question here[1] with Take in the information as a whole and sift out one's best guess. That's all anyone can do. With respect, that's not all anyone can do, and it's not nearly enough. My answer[2] isn't perfect, but in order not to be influenced by partisan lies in a mediascape that is actively hostile to truth, one must be more active than that. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32617732 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32617732 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32617838 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32617838
- pstuart 4y ago
  Ok, so corruption matters to you? From my observations Trump (and his admin) were corrupt as can be. Small case in point: Jared Kushner's business dealings where he's gotten huge amounts of money whilst ostensibly serving as a government employee. I could dig up citations if you demonstrated its veracity if you would take the time to review them. Back to the Biden affair -- I've seen nothing of the corrupt board membership resulting in government interference from Joe Biden. A nice summary here: https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-johnson-grassley-report-biden-and-burisma https://www.lawfareblog.com/what-make-johnson-grassley-repor...

rendall 4y ago

Downvoters: explain!