> People should get to decide for themselves whether "10% for the big guy" is incriminating or not. I applaud your faith in humanity but the same population is

> People should get to decide for themselves whether "10% for the big guy" is incriminating or not. I applaud your faith in humanity but the same population isn't likely going to read the exonerating report that I cited elsewhere and will note here. Read the conclusion at the end and then tell me again why the laptop story still needs to be promoted: https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC%20-%20Finance%20Joint%20Report%202020.09.23.pdf https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/HSGAC%20-%20Fin... > If the story had gotten to run its normal course Nobody pushing that story cares about anything other than the story sticking around to be a campaign talking point. The Steele Dossier is far more complicated because of its origins and handling (yes Clinton helped fund some of it but McCain and Comey were alarmed by it). It was also always framed as raw, unverified intel that, once public, compelled verification of it. At that time it was also paired with the Buttery Mails investigation which likely tipped the scales away from Clinton. Read the wiki and you can see that it's not cut and dried. Meanwhile that whole thing has been turned into RussiaGate and categorically denied. MSM has dropped that line. Nobody on the left is defending Hunter Biden. But again, he's not the candidate, so why is there such concern? Because it's ButteryMails v2. The laptop story is the story. I'm not sure what I'm supposed to condemn about the Dossier affair -- it had its moment in the sun and then was squashed, with the bonus that it's now projected that Trump is 100% innocent in regards to dealing with Russia and that just ain't the case.