![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | â | Archive 5 |
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=BidenâUkraine_conspiracy_theory&diff=983698064&oldid=983697931
Aviartm? soibangla ( talk) 18:51, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
It is making an extraordinary claim, requiring corroboration from reliable sources, and that doesnât mean sources simply reporting The Post reported this. No such corroboration exists. The article makes at least one clearly false assertion and allusions to other dubious if not false assertions. The material is clearly UNDUE and must be removed. soibangla ( talk) 19:13, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Corroboration is already underwaySure looks like debunking at this point. soibangla ( talk) 19:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Is this Wikipedia policy or just an opinion? Just because a newspaper gets something wrong once doesn't mean that it is unreliable. Most newspapers make mistakes occasionally. It also isn't relevant to its accuracy if it is right or left-winged. To date, the only disputes about NY Post's article are that it was obtained through hacking. Nobody is disputing the accuracy of its contents. 12:17, 16 October 2020 (UTC) â Preceding unsigned comment added by Skb7 ( talk ⢠contribs)
I removed a claim that the computer-shop owner was a QAnon supporter, which I was unable to substantiate. A believer in the Seth Rich conspiracy theory, yes, but not QAnon (according to anything I could find, and presuming that there is even a difference anymore, cf. the conspiracy singularity). The original source in that passage was this Business Insider story, which doesn't mention QAnon specifically. If anyone has a more direct connection that I overlooked, that would be much appreciated! Cheers, XOR'easter ( talk) 00:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
This sentence currently exists in the article
"In its opening sentence, the New York Post story falsely asserted "the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor who was investigating" Burisma."
Given it is universally accepted that Biden did pressure Ukraine into sacking the prosecutor, this is a terrible sentence...being a direct contradiction of reality. I am aware that Bidens' reason was actually the exact opposite of what Republican propaganda claims, but it's still bad to say it didn't happen: it definitely did. 81.135.238.69 ( talk) 12:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
NB, a user/IP deleted this section shortly after I posted it. The edit summary they used was nonsense: to be clear (as if it isn't) I am specifically criticisng the sentence of the article I quote as being directly untrue and suggesting it is removed/changed. 81.135.238.69 ( talk) 16:10, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
During President Barack Obamaâs second term, Biden was in charge of the Ukraine portfolio, keeping in close touch with the countryâs president, Petro Poroshenko. Bidenâs brief was to sweet-talk and jawbone Poroshenko into making reforms that Ukraineâs Western benefactors wanted to see as part of Ukraineâs escape from Russiaâs orbit. But the Americans saw an obstacle to reform in Viktor Shokin, the top Ukrainian prosecutor, whom the United States viewed as ineffective and beholden to Poroshenko and Ukraineâs corrupt oligarchs. In particular, Shokin had failed to pursue an investigation of the founder of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky.XOR'easter ( talk) 16:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 Done I've reworded this sentence and added an additional clause explaining why the NYP claim was misleading, replacing "false" with "misleading" in the process, as I believe the original meaning is clearly kept. Other editors, feel free to adjust or restore the wording if you are still not content with it.
Jr8825 â˘
Talk
02:44, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
ec We're "talking past each other." I am not referring to the words that are there. I am referring to "missing words", the ones that are "not" there, the words that must be there for the whole statement to be false. The last part ("a prosecutor who was investigating the company") is indeed partially false, so we should add that this last part is false, and then add that in fact, "Shokin had failed to pursue an investigation of the founder of Burisma", and that is part of why he was fired.
What I'd like to see is that we hammer out better wording along those lines. In fact, not quoting would work better. I just happen to be traveling and am using my cellphone. So I can't help much.
I hope the new edit addresses my concerns. -- Valjean ( talk) 02:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: WP:SNOW closed as not moved. As is said multiple times in the discussion, reliable sources nearly unanimously call it a conspiracy theory, and the "recent reporting" comes from a tabloid infamous for fabricated stories (and this story seems to be highly fabricated). It should also be pointed out that a conspiracy theory doesn't stop being one because the President of the United States believes in it; after all, Trump was one of the most high-profile believers in the Obama birth certificate conspiracy theories. Sceptre ( talk) 21:30, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory â BidenâUkraine allegations â Recent reporting on this issue necessitates a likely different title. As more questions than answers been brought up and as the news will continue to report on new developments, it is more appropriate to rename for now. Aviartm ( talk) 20:05, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity? We need to be clear that there is no validity to these claims. See WP:FALSEBALANCE:
Conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, speculative history, or plausible but currently unaccepted theories should not be legitimized through comparison to accepted academic scholarship.We cannot omit the conspiracy theory if it is the entire subject, but we ensure we don't legitimize it. â Muboshgu ( talk) 20:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
The stories, sprung from the original NY Post article, mention a computer, but none of the sources provide any evidence of a computer. The words computer and FBI should not be in the same sentence. ËËËË â Preceding unsigned comment added by Tero111 ( talk ⢠contribs) 11:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I had a Finnish keyboard on and tried to improvise the tilde last time. Tero111 ( talk) 13:09, 16 October 2020 (UTC) No changes have been made to the two lines that them refer to Reference 54. NBC claims that there is an actual computer the FBI seized, but they are just quoting the NY Post article! The next line about FBI investigation is true, but only related to the conspiracy, not an actual laptop. Tero111 ( talk) 12:22, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
This adds more poison to this "story"...
We may be looking at the old classic Breitbart/Bannon/O'Keefe scam strategy that has so often been busted. These people are desperate. -- Valjean ( talk) 19:08, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
KEbabs 78.56.237.238 ( talk) 15:28, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
As this is a developing story, and one which has yet to really bear out, the word 'false' without a solid source is almost certainly going to lead to negative attention.
I suggest removing 'false' and adding a second explanatory paragraph to the intro suggesting the uncertain origin of the recent emails released by the Post. Pietrus69 ( talk) 17:04, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
I agree completely. Whoever put false accusations should put another word like uncertain or something. This story can go either way right now. I stated my opinion above, wasn't trying to be mean. It's just we shouldn't put false without seeing how this plays out first. DranzerX13 ( talk) 07:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change it to an âongoing political conspiracy.â It is intellectually dishonest to say that the allegations have been proven false already as the investigation is ongoing. Until proven otherwise it is neither true nor untrue. 2600:1011:B019:6773:99D6:5B2:477A:FBF ( talk) 18:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Biden admits to firing Ukraine Prosecutor. (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCSF3reVr10) â Preceding unsigned comment added by Dotafox2008 ( talk ⢠contribs) 03:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
You need to remove the words 'false allegations' as this is a) tautology and b) stated as proven, without citation. â Preceding unsigned comment added by Balancedcontent ( talk ⢠contribs) 05:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This discussion has been disrupted by
block evasion,
ban evasion, or
sockpuppetry from the following user:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus. |
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
There is much that needs to be added. This article is screaming bias. Please research and include information regarding:
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Monday said that Hunter Bidenâs laptop âis not part of some Russian disinformation campaign,â amid claims from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff suggesting otherwise.
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee is investigating Hunter Biden's emails.
A former business partner of Hunter Biden currently serving a prison sentence for fraud has reportedly released 26,000 emails detailing his business operations with Biden and Devon Archer, another business partner.
Journalist Maria Bartiromo asked Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, about a Business Insider report that described faint handwriting on a subpoena served last year to a Delaware business that was given a water-damaged MacBook Pro to repair but was never retrieved and a hard drive with its contents. The hardware purportedly contained data about foreign business dealings and other matters related to the son of former Vice President Joe Biden.
The subpoena appeared to show the FBI agent who served it was someone named "Joshua Wilson." There was a Joshua Wilson, according to a Star-Ledger report published last year, who was an FBI agent based in New Jersey who spent nearly five years investigating child pornography, but it remains unclear if this is the same Wilson and what exactly the bureau was investigating. 65.60.160.85 ( talk) 17:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective.You may also be interested to read this essay: Wikipedia:NPOV means neutral editing, not neutral content. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:16, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
questions remain
https://i.imgur.com/FEJj3te.png
soibangla ( talk) 23:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
How can you write the whole intro paragraph without citing any sources to say that it is fake.
Yet you deny my edit to state 'yet unproven allegations'. Any other thing that remotely hints that it might be true immediately gets redacted without a source. â Preceding unsigned comment added by WakkoYakko ( talk ⢠contribs) 07:02, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The first sentence is completely wrong. They are a series of allegations... not FALSE allegations. The Government is investigating them.
The BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory is a series of false allegations which assert that 2020 Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden engaged in corrupt activities while the former was Vice President of the United States and the latter worked for the Ukrainian gas company Burisma.[1] Skbigm ( talk) 15:37, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the 'debunked' status to 'under investigation'. The DOJ and the FBI have BOTH stated that Hunter Biden's emails are NOT of Russian origin, nor are they a part of a Russian conspiracy. They are legitimate sources of information.
References:
RE: The DOJ and the FBI have BOTH stated that Hunter Biden's emails are NOT of Russian origin, nor are they a part of a Russian conspiracy.
This is simply untrue. (Most likely disinformation that the OP heard on social media. Apparently it's a distortion of something Fox News said.) The truth is that the FBI has carefully avoided saying anything, or even confirming that there is an investigation. The DOJ has said nothing as far as I know, but in any case the DOJ would not be in a position to know about Russian actions. The one person who said that was John Ratcliffe, Trumpâs Director of National Intelligence, in an interview with Fox News. And he acknowledged that he knew âlittleâ about the Postâs material.
[14] --
MelanieN (
talk)
23:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
A user named Valjean removed my previous posting here (and on the Hunter Biden talk page) claiming that I violated BLP. The website I linked to was Washington Examiner, a mainstream conservative website which is rated as "No consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply" just below the highest grading at WP:RSP. WashingtonExaminer is not some fringe right-wing website (otherwise I wouldn't have posted it here). So now discussion on talk pages is being censored, not just article pages? Is it OK for me to restore this edit [18]?? Or maybe someone else can because Valjean threatened me on my talk page saying "Do you really want to get blocked as NOTHERE?" I am genuinely confused because all I did was post on a talk page and try to engage in honest good-faith discussion. Any help is appreciated, thanks. Yodabyte ( talk) 16:12, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
As written, the article does not just deny the NY Post story and the dubious allegation of Biden's causing Shokin's firing, but takes the significantly stronger position that any and all corruption allegations against the Bidens with regard to Ukraine, or even the idea that Hunter Biden was unqualified, constitute a conspiracy theory. Yet world socialist website (no right-wing source), while writing "This account is not very credible, but there does not as yet appear to be any substance to the charges by Trump & Co. that the vice president intervened to block the prosecution of his sonâs company in 2016. " also states "But Ukraine is where Hunter Biden has apparently cashed in most extensively, trading on his fatherâs name and position" and "In the search for board members with the right contacts, Zlochevsky recruited Devon Archer, Bidenâs business partner, the former president of Poland and ex-Stalinist Aleksander KwaĹniewski, and then Hunter Biden himself. Biden was brought on nominally to provide advice on corporate governance, although he never performed any actual legal work for the company". (article at https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/10/01/bide-o01.html) I think the article should be rewritten to clarify that it's about the dubious Shokin and NY Post claims, and not about any and all corruption related to the fact of Hunter Biden's employment at Burisma; from a certain perspective, his salary in and of itself was a bribe. 209.6.169.178 ( talk) 19:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
The claim that Hunter Biden was qualified to work at Burisma is unsourced (I think, [7] is after the sentence wiki states he was, but doesn't claim it) and dubious, and Burisma could've influenced US-Ukraine policy through Biden in ways other than firing Shokin (or attempted to, but failed); the article I linked certainly claims it as Burisma's motivation for hiring him. It reads to me as the sort of normal influence-peddling in capitalist democracies akin to the lobbyist ârevolving doorâ - generally legal, but often criticized as corrupt. Neither claim is nearly as dubious as the debunked notion that Biden induced the firing of Shokin on Burisma's behalf, nor does either on its own rise to the level of a conspiracy theory. The rest of the article is fine. 209.6.169.178 ( talk) 21:32, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
It was asserted that Hunter Biden's employment was suspicious because he had no expertise in the energy industry, though he was hired to consult on "transparency, corporate governance and responsibility, international expansion and other priorities" rather than on energy matters.That's at least got an inline source, though it seems a little bit WP:SYNTHâthe Bloomberg source does verify that "The company said that Hunter Biden would advise on 'transparency, corporate governance and responsibility, international expansion and other priorities'", but it doesn't use it to refute the claim that H. Biden was unqualified. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
I see a lot of agreement above that "false" belongs, but some good faith disagreement, and when I look at the lead I can see why long-time Wikipedians are expressing a preference for different wording because it appears to conflate the long-debunked Biden/Shokin claim with the new and merely dubious New York Post material. I'd suggest instead:
Sources that back this include:
{{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link){{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link){{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)Using the Financial Times homefully escapes the endless debate about the "liberal media" - the FT is owned by Nikkei and is as small-c conservative as you get.
What do people think? Guy ( help! - typo?) 16:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Who has confirmed that this has been thoroughly "debunked"? Shouldn't both sides of the argument be presented if some sources have claimed to have debunked the claim and other sources claim that it is true? The opening reeks of bias. â Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolandy55 ( talk ⢠contribs) 20:18, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
References
I am happy with either, just want to know opinions. Reaper7 ( talk) 17:37, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
On October 20, Fox News reported that the FBI and Department of Justice concur with the Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe that Hunter Bidenâs laptop and emails are not part of a Russian disinformation campaign. 2604:3D08:9A7E:E000:FDB2:22DE:E0C:CAB8 ( talk) 01:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
I hadn't seen this section yet and I just deleted it. See the edit summary. -- Valjean ( talk) 05:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
As I pointed out below, this claim is untrue. And Fox News did not report it. John Ratcliffe said in a Fox News interview that there is no Russian connection. The FBI and the DOJ have said nothing of the sort. -- MelanieN ( talk) 23:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Canât help thinking new Borat footage showing Giuliani seemingly mishandling his own "laptop" with an actress playing an underage girl makes it impossible to discuss any kind of laptop with a straight face from here on out. Hyperbolick ( talk) 03:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Letâs stipulate the Post story is 100% true. How would that show that âJoe Biden and his son Hunter Biden engaged in corrupt activities?â From what I can tell, the only âexplosiveâ part of this story is that Hunter may have introduced Joe to a Burisma board advisor. And that would establish...what, exactly? soibangla ( talk) 19:13, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Disruptive and responded to. â Muboshgu ( talk) 23:00, 21 October 2020 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
It seems the only authorised sources are left wing circle jerks which leads to extremely biased articles like this one... Can you stop being cucks so we can have an encyclopedia that reflects reality instead of this left wing fantasy you pretend we live in? 86.4.66.176 ( talk) 07:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
|
The FAQ on this talk page says, "The idea that Hunter Biden, a California resident under intense public scrutiny, would drop off an unencrypted laptop at a Delaware computer shop run by a Trump supporter, rather than use an Apple store or a local trusted repairer, is considered dubious by mainstream sources."
Has Hunter Biden said that he never had a laptop dropped off or sent for repair at that shop ("The Mac Shop" in Wilmington), and, consequently, that the computer could not have been his? If not, what has he said about that? -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
I edited the relevant section to include Ratcliff's comments regarding this not being a Russian misinformation campaign ect. It was reverted because the sources used were said to be unreliable despite the fact there is no dispute this is what Ratcliff said. I then undid the revert to include the link the original source which includes the actual video. Of course, this was immediately reverted. Ratcliff is the DNI of the United States and his statements are what they are regardless of whether the interview is made on Fox Business of CNN therefore the source itself is irrelevant as Ratcliff is clearly the verifiable source of the comments themselves which we can see and hear for ourselves. This is clearly an abuse of Wikipedia rules to censor a duly appointed official whose claims differ from the opposition narrative. Thanos5150 ( talk) 04:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
In an interview with Maria Bartiromo of Fox Business, US Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said of the emails that they "are not part of some Russian disinformation campaign." He continued to say "Unfortunately, it is Adam Schiff who said the intelligence community believes the Hunter Biden laptop and emails on it are part of a Russian disinformation campaign." and "Let me be clear: the intelligence community doesnât believe that because there is no intelligence that supports that. And we have shared no intelligence with Adam Schiff, or any member of Congress." [1]
First it was removed because the sources used were not "reliable" so I changed it to the original source including the actual interview with Ratcliff. Problem solved. Then you reverted it because "The concern is over whether including the information improperly implies that an official statement has been made on behalf of the FBI". What is it going to be next? Regardless, the problem with this is the edit does not claim it is an "official statement" nor does Ratcliff make this claim. He is however the DNI and this is what he is telling the American people in an interview which it stands to reason the words of the Director of Intelligence of the United States has as much weight if not more than CNN's "a US official and a congressional source briefed on the matter" and equally deserving to be included in this article if it is to be objective. Therefore, if this is really such a "concern" then say in the edit to the effect "While not an official statement from the FBI, in an interview with Fox Business DNI Ratcliff said...." So I have eliminated the first reason it was reverted and now the second. There is now no reasona whatsover not to include these comments from Ratcliff. Thanos5150 ( talk) 04:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
[DELETE] Thanos5150 ( talk) 05:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
My mistake. Sorry I missed that you reverted it back and said: "actually, this part I'm okay with, though no objections to this being reverted if others disagree. But Thanos please stop with the edit warring)". I have undid my undo to revert to your revert. Thanos5150 ( talk) 05:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
I can see Ratcliffe's comments being picked up by reliable sources, but generally as a footnote to the saga, rather than as a headline itself. The proper context of his statement seems to be as a rebuke to Schiff's comments - so I suggest we include it but framed in a way that makes it clear his comments aren't revealing new information about any investigations by the FBI/intelligence organisations. See this example from the Independent (UK). Jr8825 ⢠Talk 19:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
References
Inside the campaign to 'pizzagate' Hunter Biden. Pizzagate-style rumors in 2016 were largely confined to far-right message boards. This year, they are reaching the mainstream with help from a website boosted by Trump. -- Valjean ( talk) 01:02, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Article includes the sentence "a political scientist and disinformation expert at Johns Hopkins University, noted that the emails could have been forged or that forged material could have been mixed with genuine materials".
If these emails are not genuine emails wouldn't Hunter/Joe Biden/Biden's campaign come out and state that they are forged emails? As far as I'm aware nobody has done that more than a week after the NY Post article was published. Yodabyte ( talk) 19:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
The emails contain potential serious corruption with adversarial countries, why wouldn't Biden want to knock that down right away if these are forgeries, but when the underlying claims have been known to be false for over a year (which is the case here) there is every reason not to dignify them with a response. That's all. Guy ( help! - typo?) 11:02, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 "More than 50 former senior intelligence officials have signed on to a letter outlining their belief that the recent disclosure of emails allegedly belonging to Joe Bidenâs son âhas all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.â"
After checking Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, Politico is considered fully Reliable. 2601:2C0:C300:B7:F498:F707:531D:DF4C ( talk) 00:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
The BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory is a series of false allegations which assert that 2020 Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden engaged in corrupt activities while the former was Vice President of the United States and the latter worked for the Ukrainian gas company Burisma
I am curious how an article can be claimed as "a series of false allegations" when all the facts and research have not been completed.
Oak Flat 10-20-2020 â Preceding unsigned comment added by Oak Flat ( talk ⢠contribs) 16:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Just wondering what the reliable source is that the allegations are fake. CNN? A reliable source by WP's standards maybe. Maybe better to say "the allegations are false according to xxx" given that a lot of these 'reliable sources' are not neutral parties -- 2A00:23C7:8E0B:6E00:F45D:EDCC:F35:7C25 ( talk) 09:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
This is more of a notice, but I have begun a discussion about breaking CNN up how Fox News is broke up in Wikipedia RS. Here is the discussion. {This section is just a notice as this related to the article current discussions.} (Current Event WikiProject Coordinator) Elijahandskip ( talk) 13:35, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
The article needs to include information recently disclosed which suggests that a person or persons who where noted to be on the email chains of certain alleged Hunter Biden emails have substantiated that the messages where in fact authentic.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-china-email-source-verifies â Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:1217:49A9:C8B5:FB13:948E:E7A7 ( talk) 04:14, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Third neither is MSNBC or CNN. This shows the bias. Guitarguy2323 ( talk) 01:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
There is already a Trump-Ukraine scandal article that has most of the facts related to Giuliani and the Bidens. There us also a Hunter Biden article in Wikipedia.
I would propose that the current article is not notable. It can be summarized, with the minimal references in the Biden campaign article
/info/en/?search=Joe_Biden_2020_presidential_campaign
right under the Trump Ukraine thing. Make a section called "The 2020 Giuliani and Associates accusations." That way it is clear they all come from Giuliani and NY Post.
The current article makes it look like there is a valid conspiracy and an FBI investigation into some laptop. A very neutral description of this entire sequence of events is given by NPR here:
This matter is a trivial item in the big scheme, but some remnants of this will remain in Wikipedia into the Biden presidency, which is likely the outcome of the election. The actual Hunter Biden working for Burisma is well covered already. But currently the article we are discussing is only adding to conspiracy thinking.
Tero111 ( talk) 17:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
You may never see the entire interview, as Trump walked out because Stahl would not play along with the Giuliani concocted October surprise.
Here is the relevant part, but read the whole thing in the link.
"Lesley Stahl: (21:19) Youâre taking something that was investigated-
Donald Trump: (21:22) Lesley, let me ask you. You think itâs okay for the Mayor of Moscowâs wife to give him millions and millions of dollars, three and a half million dollars, to give his family three and a half? Do you think itâs okay for Hunter Biden to say that weâre giving the big guy 10% of this massive amount of money theyâre taking? Do you think itâs okay for all of these horrible things that youâve seen, where theyâre getting hundreds of thousands, and millions of dollars, where China gives them a billion and a half dollars to manage, the family, a billion and a half dollars, and then heâs supposed to negotiate? Let me tell you, itâs the second biggest scandal. The biggest scandal was when they spied on my campaign. They spied on my campaign.
Lesley Stahl: (22:06) Thereâs no real evidence of that.
Donald Trump: (22:07) Of course there is. Is itâs all over the place. Lesley, they spied on my campaign and they got caught."
LOWER DOWN
"Donald Trump: (24:03) Instead of, âWhy did Hunter get three and a half million dollars from Moscow?â Instead of, âWhy is an energy company paying your son $183,000 a month, or whatever theyâre paying him?â And he has no experience in energy. You discredit yourself. I donât have to discredit you.
Lesley Stahl: (24:21) So this story about Hunter and his laptop, some repair shop found it, the source is Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani.
Donald Trump: (24:33) I donât know anything about that. I just know itâs a laptop and they havenât-
Lesley Stahl: (24:35) And youâre making this one of the hottest, most important issues [inaudible 00:24:40]
Donald Trump: (24:43) I donât know about the two gentleman you mentioned.
Lesley Stahl: (24:43) Itâs an important issue-
Donald Trump: (24:47) Itâs a very important issue to find out whether or not a man is corrupt, whoâs running for president. Whoâs accepted money from China, and from Ukraine, and from Russia. Yeah, I think thatâs an important issue." Link: https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-unedited-60-minutes-interview-transcript Tero111 ( talk) 10:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Yes, thanks. I brought this up as mainly the Trump World view of the matter vs. The Press (Leslie, mainstream press). The press has little interest in this laptop that caanot be verified by any journalist in those papers and sites. Tero111 ( talk) 18:07, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
The article opens by saying:
Does that accurately frame the scope of the article? I would say not: I would say that in fact the scope is a series of unproven and speculative claims built on the false claim that Joe Biden engaged in corruption in Ukraine. Sources definitively refute any claim that Joe Biden intervened to benefit Burisma, but there is no definitive refutation of any claim of corruption by Hunter (nor has any such claim be credibly advanced by Ukraine or US prosecutors). Starting out by flat-out saying it's BS seems to me to be a significant source of the conservative apoplexy we see here - it's more nuanced than that, though admittedly not much.
Background fails TL;DR: I think we should split it into a couple of subsections:
This is also over-long IMO and could maybe even be retitled in line with the seemingly deliberate timing (why not raise it in 2019 when the laptop was handed to the FBI? why wait until a year later when no charges have been filed?).
I'd also be interested to know if there are any reality-based parts of the conservative narrative that remain substantially unaddressed.I don't see any, but the article is overly detailed and I may be reading stuff into it from knowledge of contest rather than what's actually written down. Guy ( help! - typo?) 11:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
The FBIâs subpoena of a laptop and hard drive purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden came in connection with a money-laundering investigation in late 2019, according to documents obtained by Fox News and verified by multiple federal law enforcement officials who reviewed them.
WSJ reported in November 2019:
Subpoenas issued to people with ties to President Trumpâs personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, indicate a broad federal investigation into possible money laundering, obstruction of justice and campaign-finance violations and show that prosecutors are probing Mr. Giulianiâs consulting businesses and other sources of income. [26]
and
Among the charges reportedly under consideration in the subpoenas are obstruction of justice, money laundering, conspiracy to defraud the United States, making false statements to the federal government, serving as an agent of a foreign government without registering with the Justice Department, donating funds from foreign nationals, making contributions in the name of another person or allowing someone else to use one's name to make a contribution, along with mail fraud and wire fraud. [27]
soibangla ( talk) 19:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | â | Archive 5 |
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=BidenâUkraine_conspiracy_theory&diff=983698064&oldid=983697931
Aviartm? soibangla ( talk) 18:51, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
It is making an extraordinary claim, requiring corroboration from reliable sources, and that doesnât mean sources simply reporting The Post reported this. No such corroboration exists. The article makes at least one clearly false assertion and allusions to other dubious if not false assertions. The material is clearly UNDUE and must be removed. soibangla ( talk) 19:13, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Corroboration is already underwaySure looks like debunking at this point. soibangla ( talk) 19:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
Is this Wikipedia policy or just an opinion? Just because a newspaper gets something wrong once doesn't mean that it is unreliable. Most newspapers make mistakes occasionally. It also isn't relevant to its accuracy if it is right or left-winged. To date, the only disputes about NY Post's article are that it was obtained through hacking. Nobody is disputing the accuracy of its contents. 12:17, 16 October 2020 (UTC) â Preceding unsigned comment added by Skb7 ( talk ⢠contribs)
I removed a claim that the computer-shop owner was a QAnon supporter, which I was unable to substantiate. A believer in the Seth Rich conspiracy theory, yes, but not QAnon (according to anything I could find, and presuming that there is even a difference anymore, cf. the conspiracy singularity). The original source in that passage was this Business Insider story, which doesn't mention QAnon specifically. If anyone has a more direct connection that I overlooked, that would be much appreciated! Cheers, XOR'easter ( talk) 00:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
This sentence currently exists in the article
"In its opening sentence, the New York Post story falsely asserted "the elder Biden pressured government officials in Ukraine into firing a prosecutor who was investigating" Burisma."
Given it is universally accepted that Biden did pressure Ukraine into sacking the prosecutor, this is a terrible sentence...being a direct contradiction of reality. I am aware that Bidens' reason was actually the exact opposite of what Republican propaganda claims, but it's still bad to say it didn't happen: it definitely did. 81.135.238.69 ( talk) 12:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
NB, a user/IP deleted this section shortly after I posted it. The edit summary they used was nonsense: to be clear (as if it isn't) I am specifically criticisng the sentence of the article I quote as being directly untrue and suggesting it is removed/changed. 81.135.238.69 ( talk) 16:10, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
During President Barack Obamaâs second term, Biden was in charge of the Ukraine portfolio, keeping in close touch with the countryâs president, Petro Poroshenko. Bidenâs brief was to sweet-talk and jawbone Poroshenko into making reforms that Ukraineâs Western benefactors wanted to see as part of Ukraineâs escape from Russiaâs orbit. But the Americans saw an obstacle to reform in Viktor Shokin, the top Ukrainian prosecutor, whom the United States viewed as ineffective and beholden to Poroshenko and Ukraineâs corrupt oligarchs. In particular, Shokin had failed to pursue an investigation of the founder of Burisma, Mykola Zlochevsky.XOR'easter ( talk) 16:19, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 Done I've reworded this sentence and added an additional clause explaining why the NYP claim was misleading, replacing "false" with "misleading" in the process, as I believe the original meaning is clearly kept. Other editors, feel free to adjust or restore the wording if you are still not content with it.
Jr8825 â˘
Talk
02:44, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
ec We're "talking past each other." I am not referring to the words that are there. I am referring to "missing words", the ones that are "not" there, the words that must be there for the whole statement to be false. The last part ("a prosecutor who was investigating the company") is indeed partially false, so we should add that this last part is false, and then add that in fact, "Shokin had failed to pursue an investigation of the founder of Burisma", and that is part of why he was fired.
What I'd like to see is that we hammer out better wording along those lines. In fact, not quoting would work better. I just happen to be traveling and am using my cellphone. So I can't help much.
I hope the new edit addresses my concerns. -- Valjean ( talk) 02:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: WP:SNOW closed as not moved. As is said multiple times in the discussion, reliable sources nearly unanimously call it a conspiracy theory, and the "recent reporting" comes from a tabloid infamous for fabricated stories (and this story seems to be highly fabricated). It should also be pointed out that a conspiracy theory doesn't stop being one because the President of the United States believes in it; after all, Trump was one of the most high-profile believers in the Obama birth certificate conspiracy theories. Sceptre ( talk) 21:30, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory â BidenâUkraine allegations â Recent reporting on this issue necessitates a likely different title. As more questions than answers been brought up and as the news will continue to report on new developments, it is more appropriate to rename for now. Aviartm ( talk) 20:05, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity? We need to be clear that there is no validity to these claims. See WP:FALSEBALANCE:
Conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, speculative history, or plausible but currently unaccepted theories should not be legitimized through comparison to accepted academic scholarship.We cannot omit the conspiracy theory if it is the entire subject, but we ensure we don't legitimize it. â Muboshgu ( talk) 20:58, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
The stories, sprung from the original NY Post article, mention a computer, but none of the sources provide any evidence of a computer. The words computer and FBI should not be in the same sentence. ËËËË â Preceding unsigned comment added by Tero111 ( talk ⢠contribs) 11:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I had a Finnish keyboard on and tried to improvise the tilde last time. Tero111 ( talk) 13:09, 16 October 2020 (UTC) No changes have been made to the two lines that them refer to Reference 54. NBC claims that there is an actual computer the FBI seized, but they are just quoting the NY Post article! The next line about FBI investigation is true, but only related to the conspiracy, not an actual laptop. Tero111 ( talk) 12:22, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
This adds more poison to this "story"...
We may be looking at the old classic Breitbart/Bannon/O'Keefe scam strategy that has so often been busted. These people are desperate. -- Valjean ( talk) 19:08, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
KEbabs 78.56.237.238 ( talk) 15:28, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
As this is a developing story, and one which has yet to really bear out, the word 'false' without a solid source is almost certainly going to lead to negative attention.
I suggest removing 'false' and adding a second explanatory paragraph to the intro suggesting the uncertain origin of the recent emails released by the Post. Pietrus69 ( talk) 17:04, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
I agree completely. Whoever put false accusations should put another word like uncertain or something. This story can go either way right now. I stated my opinion above, wasn't trying to be mean. It's just we shouldn't put false without seeing how this plays out first. DranzerX13 ( talk) 07:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change it to an âongoing political conspiracy.â It is intellectually dishonest to say that the allegations have been proven false already as the investigation is ongoing. Until proven otherwise it is neither true nor untrue. 2600:1011:B019:6773:99D6:5B2:477A:FBF ( talk) 18:18, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Biden admits to firing Ukraine Prosecutor. (source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCSF3reVr10) â Preceding unsigned comment added by Dotafox2008 ( talk ⢠contribs) 03:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
You need to remove the words 'false allegations' as this is a) tautology and b) stated as proven, without citation. â Preceding unsigned comment added by Balancedcontent ( talk ⢠contribs) 05:07, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This discussion has been disrupted by
block evasion,
ban evasion, or
sockpuppetry from the following user:
Comments from this user should be excluded from assessments of consensus. |
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
There is much that needs to be added. This article is screaming bias. Please research and include information regarding:
Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe on Monday said that Hunter Bidenâs laptop âis not part of some Russian disinformation campaign,â amid claims from House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff suggesting otherwise.
The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee is investigating Hunter Biden's emails.
A former business partner of Hunter Biden currently serving a prison sentence for fraud has reportedly released 26,000 emails detailing his business operations with Biden and Devon Archer, another business partner.
Journalist Maria Bartiromo asked Sen. Ron Johnson, the chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, about a Business Insider report that described faint handwriting on a subpoena served last year to a Delaware business that was given a water-damaged MacBook Pro to repair but was never retrieved and a hard drive with its contents. The hardware purportedly contained data about foreign business dealings and other matters related to the son of former Vice President Joe Biden.
The subpoena appeared to show the FBI agent who served it was someone named "Joshua Wilson." There was a Joshua Wilson, according to a Star-Ledger report published last year, who was an FBI agent based in New Jersey who spent nearly five years investigating child pornography, but it remains unclear if this is the same Wilson and what exactly the bureau was investigating. 65.60.160.85 ( talk) 17:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles are required to present a neutral point of view. However, reliable sources are not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective.You may also be interested to read this essay: Wikipedia:NPOV means neutral editing, not neutral content. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:16, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
questions remain
https://i.imgur.com/FEJj3te.png
soibangla ( talk) 23:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
How can you write the whole intro paragraph without citing any sources to say that it is fake.
Yet you deny my edit to state 'yet unproven allegations'. Any other thing that remotely hints that it might be true immediately gets redacted without a source. â Preceding unsigned comment added by WakkoYakko ( talk ⢠contribs) 07:02, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
The first sentence is completely wrong. They are a series of allegations... not FALSE allegations. The Government is investigating them.
The BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory is a series of false allegations which assert that 2020 Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden engaged in corrupt activities while the former was Vice President of the United States and the latter worked for the Ukrainian gas company Burisma.[1] Skbigm ( talk) 15:37, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the 'debunked' status to 'under investigation'. The DOJ and the FBI have BOTH stated that Hunter Biden's emails are NOT of Russian origin, nor are they a part of a Russian conspiracy. They are legitimate sources of information.
References:
RE: The DOJ and the FBI have BOTH stated that Hunter Biden's emails are NOT of Russian origin, nor are they a part of a Russian conspiracy.
This is simply untrue. (Most likely disinformation that the OP heard on social media. Apparently it's a distortion of something Fox News said.) The truth is that the FBI has carefully avoided saying anything, or even confirming that there is an investigation. The DOJ has said nothing as far as I know, but in any case the DOJ would not be in a position to know about Russian actions. The one person who said that was John Ratcliffe, Trumpâs Director of National Intelligence, in an interview with Fox News. And he acknowledged that he knew âlittleâ about the Postâs material.
[14] --
MelanieN (
talk)
23:32, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
A user named Valjean removed my previous posting here (and on the Hunter Biden talk page) claiming that I violated BLP. The website I linked to was Washington Examiner, a mainstream conservative website which is rated as "No consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply" just below the highest grading at WP:RSP. WashingtonExaminer is not some fringe right-wing website (otherwise I wouldn't have posted it here). So now discussion on talk pages is being censored, not just article pages? Is it OK for me to restore this edit [18]?? Or maybe someone else can because Valjean threatened me on my talk page saying "Do you really want to get blocked as NOTHERE?" I am genuinely confused because all I did was post on a talk page and try to engage in honest good-faith discussion. Any help is appreciated, thanks. Yodabyte ( talk) 16:12, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
As written, the article does not just deny the NY Post story and the dubious allegation of Biden's causing Shokin's firing, but takes the significantly stronger position that any and all corruption allegations against the Bidens with regard to Ukraine, or even the idea that Hunter Biden was unqualified, constitute a conspiracy theory. Yet world socialist website (no right-wing source), while writing "This account is not very credible, but there does not as yet appear to be any substance to the charges by Trump & Co. that the vice president intervened to block the prosecution of his sonâs company in 2016. " also states "But Ukraine is where Hunter Biden has apparently cashed in most extensively, trading on his fatherâs name and position" and "In the search for board members with the right contacts, Zlochevsky recruited Devon Archer, Bidenâs business partner, the former president of Poland and ex-Stalinist Aleksander KwaĹniewski, and then Hunter Biden himself. Biden was brought on nominally to provide advice on corporate governance, although he never performed any actual legal work for the company". (article at https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2019/10/01/bide-o01.html) I think the article should be rewritten to clarify that it's about the dubious Shokin and NY Post claims, and not about any and all corruption related to the fact of Hunter Biden's employment at Burisma; from a certain perspective, his salary in and of itself was a bribe. 209.6.169.178 ( talk) 19:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
The claim that Hunter Biden was qualified to work at Burisma is unsourced (I think, [7] is after the sentence wiki states he was, but doesn't claim it) and dubious, and Burisma could've influenced US-Ukraine policy through Biden in ways other than firing Shokin (or attempted to, but failed); the article I linked certainly claims it as Burisma's motivation for hiring him. It reads to me as the sort of normal influence-peddling in capitalist democracies akin to the lobbyist ârevolving doorâ - generally legal, but often criticized as corrupt. Neither claim is nearly as dubious as the debunked notion that Biden induced the firing of Shokin on Burisma's behalf, nor does either on its own rise to the level of a conspiracy theory. The rest of the article is fine. 209.6.169.178 ( talk) 21:32, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
It was asserted that Hunter Biden's employment was suspicious because he had no expertise in the energy industry, though he was hired to consult on "transparency, corporate governance and responsibility, international expansion and other priorities" rather than on energy matters.That's at least got an inline source, though it seems a little bit WP:SYNTHâthe Bloomberg source does verify that "The company said that Hunter Biden would advise on 'transparency, corporate governance and responsibility, international expansion and other priorities'", but it doesn't use it to refute the claim that H. Biden was unqualified. GorillaWarfare (talk) 23:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
I see a lot of agreement above that "false" belongs, but some good faith disagreement, and when I look at the lead I can see why long-time Wikipedians are expressing a preference for different wording because it appears to conflate the long-debunked Biden/Shokin claim with the new and merely dubious New York Post material. I'd suggest instead:
Sources that back this include:
{{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link){{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link){{
cite news}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (
link)Using the Financial Times homefully escapes the endless debate about the "liberal media" - the FT is owned by Nikkei and is as small-c conservative as you get.
What do people think? Guy ( help! - typo?) 16:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Who has confirmed that this has been thoroughly "debunked"? Shouldn't both sides of the argument be presented if some sources have claimed to have debunked the claim and other sources claim that it is true? The opening reeks of bias. â Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolandy55 ( talk ⢠contribs) 20:18, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
References
I am happy with either, just want to know opinions. Reaper7 ( talk) 17:37, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request to
BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
On October 20, Fox News reported that the FBI and Department of Justice concur with the Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe that Hunter Bidenâs laptop and emails are not part of a Russian disinformation campaign. 2604:3D08:9A7E:E000:FDB2:22DE:E0C:CAB8 ( talk) 01:44, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
I hadn't seen this section yet and I just deleted it. See the edit summary. -- Valjean ( talk) 05:47, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
As I pointed out below, this claim is untrue. And Fox News did not report it. John Ratcliffe said in a Fox News interview that there is no Russian connection. The FBI and the DOJ have said nothing of the sort. -- MelanieN ( talk) 23:38, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Canât help thinking new Borat footage showing Giuliani seemingly mishandling his own "laptop" with an actress playing an underage girl makes it impossible to discuss any kind of laptop with a straight face from here on out. Hyperbolick ( talk) 03:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
Letâs stipulate the Post story is 100% true. How would that show that âJoe Biden and his son Hunter Biden engaged in corrupt activities?â From what I can tell, the only âexplosiveâ part of this story is that Hunter may have introduced Joe to a Burisma board advisor. And that would establish...what, exactly? soibangla ( talk) 19:13, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Disruptive and responded to. â Muboshgu ( talk) 23:00, 21 October 2020 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
It seems the only authorised sources are left wing circle jerks which leads to extremely biased articles like this one... Can you stop being cucks so we can have an encyclopedia that reflects reality instead of this left wing fantasy you pretend we live in? 86.4.66.176 ( talk) 07:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
|
The FAQ on this talk page says, "The idea that Hunter Biden, a California resident under intense public scrutiny, would drop off an unencrypted laptop at a Delaware computer shop run by a Trump supporter, rather than use an Apple store or a local trusted repairer, is considered dubious by mainstream sources."
Has Hunter Biden said that he never had a laptop dropped off or sent for repair at that shop ("The Mac Shop" in Wilmington), and, consequently, that the computer could not have been his? If not, what has he said about that? -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 23:59, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
I edited the relevant section to include Ratcliff's comments regarding this not being a Russian misinformation campaign ect. It was reverted because the sources used were said to be unreliable despite the fact there is no dispute this is what Ratcliff said. I then undid the revert to include the link the original source which includes the actual video. Of course, this was immediately reverted. Ratcliff is the DNI of the United States and his statements are what they are regardless of whether the interview is made on Fox Business of CNN therefore the source itself is irrelevant as Ratcliff is clearly the verifiable source of the comments themselves which we can see and hear for ourselves. This is clearly an abuse of Wikipedia rules to censor a duly appointed official whose claims differ from the opposition narrative. Thanos5150 ( talk) 04:07, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
In an interview with Maria Bartiromo of Fox Business, US Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe said of the emails that they "are not part of some Russian disinformation campaign." He continued to say "Unfortunately, it is Adam Schiff who said the intelligence community believes the Hunter Biden laptop and emails on it are part of a Russian disinformation campaign." and "Let me be clear: the intelligence community doesnât believe that because there is no intelligence that supports that. And we have shared no intelligence with Adam Schiff, or any member of Congress." [1]
First it was removed because the sources used were not "reliable" so I changed it to the original source including the actual interview with Ratcliff. Problem solved. Then you reverted it because "The concern is over whether including the information improperly implies that an official statement has been made on behalf of the FBI". What is it going to be next? Regardless, the problem with this is the edit does not claim it is an "official statement" nor does Ratcliff make this claim. He is however the DNI and this is what he is telling the American people in an interview which it stands to reason the words of the Director of Intelligence of the United States has as much weight if not more than CNN's "a US official and a congressional source briefed on the matter" and equally deserving to be included in this article if it is to be objective. Therefore, if this is really such a "concern" then say in the edit to the effect "While not an official statement from the FBI, in an interview with Fox Business DNI Ratcliff said...." So I have eliminated the first reason it was reverted and now the second. There is now no reasona whatsover not to include these comments from Ratcliff. Thanos5150 ( talk) 04:53, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
[DELETE] Thanos5150 ( talk) 05:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
My mistake. Sorry I missed that you reverted it back and said: "actually, this part I'm okay with, though no objections to this being reverted if others disagree. But Thanos please stop with the edit warring)". I have undid my undo to revert to your revert. Thanos5150 ( talk) 05:35, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
I can see Ratcliffe's comments being picked up by reliable sources, but generally as a footnote to the saga, rather than as a headline itself. The proper context of his statement seems to be as a rebuke to Schiff's comments - so I suggest we include it but framed in a way that makes it clear his comments aren't revealing new information about any investigations by the FBI/intelligence organisations. See this example from the Independent (UK). Jr8825 ⢠Talk 19:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
References
Inside the campaign to 'pizzagate' Hunter Biden. Pizzagate-style rumors in 2016 were largely confined to far-right message boards. This year, they are reaching the mainstream with help from a website boosted by Trump. -- Valjean ( talk) 01:02, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Article includes the sentence "a political scientist and disinformation expert at Johns Hopkins University, noted that the emails could have been forged or that forged material could have been mixed with genuine materials".
If these emails are not genuine emails wouldn't Hunter/Joe Biden/Biden's campaign come out and state that they are forged emails? As far as I'm aware nobody has done that more than a week after the NY Post article was published. Yodabyte ( talk) 19:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
The emails contain potential serious corruption with adversarial countries, why wouldn't Biden want to knock that down right away if these are forgeries, but when the underlying claims have been known to be false for over a year (which is the case here) there is every reason not to dignify them with a response. That's all. Guy ( help! - typo?) 11:02, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/19/hunter-biden-story-russian-disinfo-430276 "More than 50 former senior intelligence officials have signed on to a letter outlining their belief that the recent disclosure of emails allegedly belonging to Joe Bidenâs son âhas all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.â"
After checking Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources, Politico is considered fully Reliable. 2601:2C0:C300:B7:F498:F707:531D:DF4C ( talk) 00:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
The BidenâUkraine conspiracy theory is a series of false allegations which assert that 2020 Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden and his son Hunter Biden engaged in corrupt activities while the former was Vice President of the United States and the latter worked for the Ukrainian gas company Burisma
I am curious how an article can be claimed as "a series of false allegations" when all the facts and research have not been completed.
Oak Flat 10-20-2020 â Preceding unsigned comment added by Oak Flat ( talk ⢠contribs) 16:49, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Just wondering what the reliable source is that the allegations are fake. CNN? A reliable source by WP's standards maybe. Maybe better to say "the allegations are false according to xxx" given that a lot of these 'reliable sources' are not neutral parties -- 2A00:23C7:8E0B:6E00:F45D:EDCC:F35:7C25 ( talk) 09:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
This is more of a notice, but I have begun a discussion about breaking CNN up how Fox News is broke up in Wikipedia RS. Here is the discussion. {This section is just a notice as this related to the article current discussions.} (Current Event WikiProject Coordinator) Elijahandskip ( talk) 13:35, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
The article needs to include information recently disclosed which suggests that a person or persons who where noted to be on the email chains of certain alleged Hunter Biden emails have substantiated that the messages where in fact authentic.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-china-email-source-verifies â Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:1217:49A9:C8B5:FB13:948E:E7A7 ( talk) 04:14, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
Third neither is MSNBC or CNN. This shows the bias. Guitarguy2323 ( talk) 01:16, 18 October 2020 (UTC)
There is already a Trump-Ukraine scandal article that has most of the facts related to Giuliani and the Bidens. There us also a Hunter Biden article in Wikipedia.
I would propose that the current article is not notable. It can be summarized, with the minimal references in the Biden campaign article
/info/en/?search=Joe_Biden_2020_presidential_campaign
right under the Trump Ukraine thing. Make a section called "The 2020 Giuliani and Associates accusations." That way it is clear they all come from Giuliani and NY Post.
The current article makes it look like there is a valid conspiracy and an FBI investigation into some laptop. A very neutral description of this entire sequence of events is given by NPR here:
This matter is a trivial item in the big scheme, but some remnants of this will remain in Wikipedia into the Biden presidency, which is likely the outcome of the election. The actual Hunter Biden working for Burisma is well covered already. But currently the article we are discussing is only adding to conspiracy thinking.
Tero111 ( talk) 17:03, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
You may never see the entire interview, as Trump walked out because Stahl would not play along with the Giuliani concocted October surprise.
Here is the relevant part, but read the whole thing in the link.
"Lesley Stahl: (21:19) Youâre taking something that was investigated-
Donald Trump: (21:22) Lesley, let me ask you. You think itâs okay for the Mayor of Moscowâs wife to give him millions and millions of dollars, three and a half million dollars, to give his family three and a half? Do you think itâs okay for Hunter Biden to say that weâre giving the big guy 10% of this massive amount of money theyâre taking? Do you think itâs okay for all of these horrible things that youâve seen, where theyâre getting hundreds of thousands, and millions of dollars, where China gives them a billion and a half dollars to manage, the family, a billion and a half dollars, and then heâs supposed to negotiate? Let me tell you, itâs the second biggest scandal. The biggest scandal was when they spied on my campaign. They spied on my campaign.
Lesley Stahl: (22:06) Thereâs no real evidence of that.
Donald Trump: (22:07) Of course there is. Is itâs all over the place. Lesley, they spied on my campaign and they got caught."
LOWER DOWN
"Donald Trump: (24:03) Instead of, âWhy did Hunter get three and a half million dollars from Moscow?â Instead of, âWhy is an energy company paying your son $183,000 a month, or whatever theyâre paying him?â And he has no experience in energy. You discredit yourself. I donât have to discredit you.
Lesley Stahl: (24:21) So this story about Hunter and his laptop, some repair shop found it, the source is Steve Bannon and Rudy Giuliani.
Donald Trump: (24:33) I donât know anything about that. I just know itâs a laptop and they havenât-
Lesley Stahl: (24:35) And youâre making this one of the hottest, most important issues [inaudible 00:24:40]
Donald Trump: (24:43) I donât know about the two gentleman you mentioned.
Lesley Stahl: (24:43) Itâs an important issue-
Donald Trump: (24:47) Itâs a very important issue to find out whether or not a man is corrupt, whoâs running for president. Whoâs accepted money from China, and from Ukraine, and from Russia. Yeah, I think thatâs an important issue." Link: https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-unedited-60-minutes-interview-transcript Tero111 ( talk) 10:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
Yes, thanks. I brought this up as mainly the Trump World view of the matter vs. The Press (Leslie, mainstream press). The press has little interest in this laptop that caanot be verified by any journalist in those papers and sites. Tero111 ( talk) 18:07, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
The article opens by saying:
Does that accurately frame the scope of the article? I would say not: I would say that in fact the scope is a series of unproven and speculative claims built on the false claim that Joe Biden engaged in corruption in Ukraine. Sources definitively refute any claim that Joe Biden intervened to benefit Burisma, but there is no definitive refutation of any claim of corruption by Hunter (nor has any such claim be credibly advanced by Ukraine or US prosecutors). Starting out by flat-out saying it's BS seems to me to be a significant source of the conservative apoplexy we see here - it's more nuanced than that, though admittedly not much.
Background fails TL;DR: I think we should split it into a couple of subsections:
This is also over-long IMO and could maybe even be retitled in line with the seemingly deliberate timing (why not raise it in 2019 when the laptop was handed to the FBI? why wait until a year later when no charges have been filed?).
I'd also be interested to know if there are any reality-based parts of the conservative narrative that remain substantially unaddressed.I don't see any, but the article is overly detailed and I may be reading stuff into it from knowledge of contest rather than what's actually written down. Guy ( help! - typo?) 11:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
The FBIâs subpoena of a laptop and hard drive purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden came in connection with a money-laundering investigation in late 2019, according to documents obtained by Fox News and verified by multiple federal law enforcement officials who reviewed them.
WSJ reported in November 2019:
Subpoenas issued to people with ties to President Trumpâs personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, indicate a broad federal investigation into possible money laundering, obstruction of justice and campaign-finance violations and show that prosecutors are probing Mr. Giulianiâs consulting businesses and other sources of income. [26]
and
Among the charges reportedly under consideration in the subpoenas are obstruction of justice, money laundering, conspiracy to defraud the United States, making false statements to the federal government, serving as an agent of a foreign government without registering with the Justice Department, donating funds from foreign nationals, making contributions in the name of another person or allowing someone else to use one's name to make a contribution, along with mail fraud and wire fraud. [27]
soibangla ( talk) 19:27, 22 October 2020 (UTC)