(It was the Trump government FBI, by the way. In case your timeline is a bit mixed up?)
Citation needed. Even Wikipedia lists it as an abandoned laptop that was trawled for data. Trash as far as I know is legitimate object of search (e.g. police does it).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controvers...
I don't know man, you could have just googled that yourself.
Then someone found an archived copy of all but one of the tweets, and they all turned out to be pictures of Hunter Biden's penis.
Yes, he left his images on laptop. That's not revenge porn, as far as I know.
> The smoking gun email in the "Part 1" Twitter Files
Don't quote me on that, but from my memory not only were links to Hunter deleted, but so were discussions of it from even reputable journalist. I think it was a Washington Post that discussed Hunter's laptop, and it got buried or deleted.
That's only Part 1.
They also marked Trump tweets as fake, even though they found some exonerating information and vice versa.
Plus the weekly meetings with FBI/OGA (alias for CIA), around misinformation spreading tweets, etc.
You basically have a government agency labeling stuff as misinformation for deranking/deletion. If that doesn't raise any First Amendment issues, I'm not sure what will? Capturing journalist and keeping them in horrible conditions? Water torture and organ transfer of said journalists?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controvers...
That's a very strange definition of revenge porn. It was made inadvertently by Hunter Biden, it wasn't used for blackmail and it is related to a bulk of other interesting email.
"revenge porn - noun - revealing or sexually explicit images or videos of a person posted on the internet, typically by a former sexual partner, without the consent of the subject and in order to cause them distress or embarrassment."
It's not a question of who took the photos. It's a question of whether the people sharing them had the permission of the subject to share them.
While Blackmail may be a component of some revenge porn, it's not required by this or other definitions.
By point is, having naked pictures on your laptop don't make docs and other stuff found as revenge porn.
The Biden campaign in 2020(they were not in power, Trump admin was) sent a list of tweets to Twitter asking them to take a look alleging that they violated Twitter's rules on revenge porn. Twitter took down those tweets. Matt Taibibi implied this was government/Twitter censorship, and the right wing went ape shit over it. People found the archived versions of those tweets, mainly from politician Republican influencers, and they were nothing except pictures of Hunter's penis. Nothing to do with his business dealings or emails on his laptop that were leaked.
The Republican operatives who privately received the leaked laptop contents didn't even blur the private parts. Are they revenge porn? Arguably. Was this an example of government censorship, or censorship of political discourse? No. The Trump Whitehouse was also reporting problematic tweets to Twitter contacts for potential violation of Twitter terms. Nobody is claiming the Biden laptop business dealings, emails etc. were revenge porn.
You're misrepresenting the story.
One big omission is this:
> On October 14, 2020, the New York Post published BIDEN SECRET EMAILS, an expose based on the contents of Hunter Biden’s abandoned laptop:
> Twitter took extraordinary steps to suppress the story, removing links and posting warnings that it may be “unsafe.” They even blocked its transmission via direct message, a tool hitherto reserved for extreme cases, e.g. child pornography.
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598831212310601728 https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598831435288563712
> and they were nothing except pictures of Hunter's penis
It wasn't. https://nypost.com/2020/10/14/email-reveals-how-hunter-biden... Find me a picture of penis in this news or prove that mtaibbi had somehow distorted this.
They treated a legitimate news, that was obtained by gray means as a child porn and de-ranked it.
https://twitter.com/mtaibbi/status/1598827602403160064
This shows that they were pornography:
https://twitter.com/Schneider_CM/status/1598832424754073601
Yet Matt Taibbi used those to spread baseless propaganda without giving the context behind the removal of those tweets. That clouds the rest of the claims too. Matt isn't interested in the truth. He's being a political hack serving partisan interests.
And even he was forced to concede that he couldn't find anything from the govt about the laptop.
Definition of revenge porn from a quick googling is:
>Revenge porn is the distribution of sexually explicit images or videos of individuals without their consent
This fits the description 100%.