[ad_1]
However, the situation in the media market is constantly changing: if you want to support quality business journalism and want to be part of the Portfolio community, subscribe to Portfolio Signature articles. Know more
Ukrainian sex, drugs and energy business
The New York Post recently wrote about Hunter Biden introducing his father, Joe Bident, to a Ukrainian energy company and then less than a year after the meeting. Joe Biden, who served as vice president of the Obama administration, fired a prosecutor who was investigating the Ukrainian company in question.
The Post looked at several emails showing that Joe Biden’s son had accepted money from the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, and He also asked company management to use Hunter’s father’s influence to help his situation.
Namely, Pozsarsky, a member of Burisma’s board of directors, first wrote to Hunter Biden in 2014 that he wanted his advice on how to “use his influence” to benefit the company. In 2015, Pozsarsky According to the email, he likely also met with Joe Biden, who was vice president, a year after Hunter Bident was elected to Burisma’s board of directors.. For the position, the young Biden hired a monthly salary of $ 50,000 (approximately HUF 15.5 million).
Correspondence found in a laptop repair shop leaked from a soaked MacBook Pro. The machine also includes a 12-minute recording of that Joe Biden’s son uses crack cocaine and has sex with an unknown woman. I’m not sure who exactly owns the laptop, but it has a label from the Beau Biden Foundation, it’s the name of a child protection foundation named after Joe Biden’s late son.
The data was first sent to Rudy Giuliani, attorney for the former New York mayor, Steve Bannon, a former adviser to President Trump, who passed it on to the New York Post. The FBI also seized the data after the service center notified authorities of its existence.
Joe Biden got involved
The fact that Hunter Biden had a drug problem and accepted money from the Ukrainian company is not new, also came up during the Trump-Biden presidential debate, but the new information is that according to the correspondence, Joe Biden also met with Vagyim Pozsarski.
Joe Biden continued to deny meeting with the director of the Ukrainian energy company before and after the story appeared., his campaign issued a statement stating that the meeting did not take place according to Joe Biden’s “official calendar.”
If Joe Biden did not meet unofficially with the Ukrainians, it is somewhat steep because eight months later, Pozharsky thanked the vice president for meeting, Biden. blackmailed Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko by withdrawing a $ 1 billion grantIf you don’t fire Attorney General Viktor Sokin. Many wanted to launch a criminal investigation against the Bursima board of directors, including Hunter Bident and Vagyim Pozsarsky.
I looked at them and said I was leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired by then, he will not receive the money. Well the mother of the bitch got fired
Joe Biden said about the incident in 2018.
There is no evidence that Sokint was fired by Biden for threatening his son’s company, formally requesting the prosecutor’s dismissal for failing to take strong enough action against the political and economic corruption that dominated Ukraine.
The removal of the Attorney General has been previously requested by the IMF and various European officials, so it would be surprising if the idea actually came out of Biden’s head.
Although Biden’s role in the story is unclear, his Democratic presidential candidate was ousted by opponents, President Donald Trump regularly tweeted about the matter, and even Péter Szijjártó, Hungary’s foreign minister, ordered the presidential candidate. to clarify his role in the Hunter Biden scandal:
By the way, Joe Biden’s chances of a presidential candidate were not significantly worsened by the incident., Biden still leads 5-6 percentage points, according to the latest national IBD survey, and 8.9 percentage points, according to surveys added by Realclearpolitics.
The reaction of social media is dangerous
Corruption accusations, if justified, if not, cannot be considered a novelty in the elections at all, However, the reaction from social media platforms is unprecedented.
Facebook and Twitter intervened almost immediately after the publication of the NEW YORK post article to remove the story from social media.
Links to all articles have been banned, as have compromising images in the article. It has never happened before that social media platforms, together, have erased an article of a mainstream press product from their surfaces.
Officially, Twitter has taken action against the material because it comes from a “hacked source” and has been banning the posting of such content since 2018.
The rationale for Facebook is even more troubling:
The largest social media site claims the story was removed because they couldn’t confirm its authenticity.
Many commentators, on the other hand, see the incident as further proof that community leaders are strongly left-wing and have already intervened in the presidential elections by removing compromising material about Biden and his son from their surfaces.
Facebook is used by 2.4 billion people and Twitter by 330 million.
However, the fact that Twitter is referring to user terms that prohibit hacking is defensible. The intervention of Facebook and its reason for being is particularly worrying.
Critics point out that stories of Donald Trump’s cooperation with the Russians, for example, were spread by the community without any intervention, although it was later shown that while the Russians did stir up the spirits around the 2016 election, they did not. made at Trump’s request. .
Precisely because of the Russian intervention, many people criticized social media for not acting harshly enough against fake news, but perhaps they went a bit too far in removing an article from the mainstream media that was critical to the outcome of the elections without a trace. .
The incident raises a number of issues of concern for the future:
- Are you beyond social sites? In each case, will the content of an article that appears in the main media be verified?
- If you do not examine the content of all articles, What decides in which cases they do this?
- Nevertheless How can you verify that content produced from exclusive inside information is authentic?
- No way why they feel they have the right to monitor and censor the articles of other registered and long-established media providers?
The cast COMMUNITY SITES SUCH INTERVENTION MAY BRING DANGEROUS CONSEQUENCES TRUST IN THE PRESS AND DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS LINK, especially if it is found that the surface actor REALLY supports consciously or offensively the actions of some political actors.
Cover image: Getty Images
[ad_2]
