Can you be more specific? What specific claims were labeled as disinformation by whom?
This matters because what was covered at the time was that the laptop was known not to have a good chain of custody. At the time, journalists at the NYT, WaPo, and others reported that they were able to verify some of the emails but that large amounts of data were hard to validate and the lack of a clean forensic history made it hard to confirm validity for many of the files because there were clear signs of access and modification after it had left Hunter Biden’s control. Nothing which has come out since then has changed that, and the general consensus outside of movement conservatives seems to be that the main thing politicizing this did is to make it harder for the DOJ and other investigators to prove anything to a legal standard.
Nope. The New York Times and others ran headlines that front lined that it was Russian disinformation. They didn't talk much about how the emails were verified. In fact Glenn Greenwald quit because his editor tried to suppress his story on it.
If that was true, you’d be able to provide a source. Instead, you’re linking to things like this story which do not say what you’re claiming:
> No concrete evidence has emerged that the laptop contains Russian disinformation.
> John Ratcliffe, the director of national intelligence, also told Fox Business Network that the “laptop is not part of some Russian disinformation campaign.”
1) Would/could a reputable news agency validate chain of custody/authenticity of those emails at the time the rag first dropped them?
2) Though it is beside the pint of the discussion of disinformation, I'm interested to hear from someone I assume is actally human tell me if the email contents would affect an individual's choice in the 2020 election. The alleged corruption of a politician's son would stack against the overtly corrupt and anti-American behavior of the Republican candidate?
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/16/us/politics/hunter-biden-...