That's not how basic fact checking works. You don't just single source a story on the basis of that sources "trust me."

That's literally been the last 4 years of journalism surrounding this administration. Not only that, but the sources almost never are actually named.

It hasn't but people like to pretend it has

Good journalists tend to not rely on on one anonymous source, they check with other sources and available evidence. The thing is this white house is extremely dishonest and corrupt and leaks like a seive hence a lot of anonymous sources

So there is one shady person who says he is real but who can’t prove anything and other people in the emails deny them. Of course if the emails are fake then the forgers would include a confederate as one of the people in the chain.

Is the shady person you’re referring to Tony Bobulinski?

If so, he is the documented primary business partner in the suspected deals who has provided verified emails, he’s a US citizen with a history of military service who put his real name on the line.

It doesn’t get less shady than that. Unless you’re referring to someone else.

This is among the most naive comments in this thread. You clearly know very little about the about the history of military personnel, their credibility, and their political affiliations. You should look into Seal Team Six as an example. Some of them have turned out to be rabid crackpots.

Being associated with the military confers absolutely zero marginal credibility over any other citizen. If anything, it's the opposite since there's a known conservative bias in military and law enforcement - dovish liberalism threatens their values and their power.

> and other people in the emails deny them.

No they haven't. Neither Hunter Biden, Jim Biden, James Gilliar or Rob Walker, have denied that the emails and text messages sent to Tony Bobulinski are real.

Bobulinski has audio recording talking to one of Biden family partners saying "if you go public with this story, you will bury us all".

Here's an audio source[1] for the people downvoting this.

[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxE2nlDjYt8

"evidence" presented by Tucker Carlosn on Fox. you've already lost me there.

That's not how truth works. If something is not correct, state why it is not correct. You may not like Fox or The Guardian or the NYT or Daily Wire or Vox but that doesn't affect whether their content is true.

Also European, but again: that's not how truth works.

Ahh yes, Tucker Carlson "I have the evidence but it was lost in the mail" totally wouldn't allow another to present a one-sided account without challenge and would certainly present evidence in context.

Tucker Carlson has said they made copies anyway.

FWIIW it appears that UPS located the mail.

I'm not under any obligation to wait for the broken clock to be right twice a day when there are plenty of other, perfectly good clocks. Tucker Carlson's journalistic integrity and reputation absolutely play a role in my judgement of the information he reports.

You are wasting your time. People have arrived at the conclusion and are just trying to reverse engineer a "rational" reason for the conclusion. I mean it shouldn't be that hard to convince ppl what in Biden's long career and the millions resulting from it aren't tied up in some corrupt or at the very least shady activity.

True. But it still needs to be said.