Emma-Jo Morris got the scoop of a lifetime when she broke the Hunter Biden laptop story. Initially derided by the pro-Biden intelligence community, the liberal media, and social media executives, they tried to bury the story long enough to elect the rapidly deteriorating Delaware Democrat president. The election interference was coming from inside the house, the perpetrator: the Democratic Party. And yet, multiple federal investigations and congressional hearings are being held about the laptop's contents, now confirmed to be genuine.
Everything Ms. Morris reported was later determined accurate, confirmed in outlets from The New York Times and The Washington Post, albeit years later.
We knew it was true.
This is the NY Post reporter who used authentic docs to report on Joe Biden's role in Hunter's business deals in Ukraine and China before the 2020 vote.
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) July 20, 2023
CIA and @NatashaBertrand smeared her with lies that it was "Russian disinformation," then Big Tech censored her reporting. https://t.co/cmUIcGjUxc
Morris was on the Hill on July 20 to testify about how Silicon Valley, the feds, and the intelligence community colluded to censor her story, curb its reach, and lockout The New York Post, for which she served as deputy politics editor at the time, from access to their social media accounts. Still, some people refuse to believe that the laptop is authentic, leading to this person questioning if Morris thought it was Russian disinformation, the initial and obvious pivot deployed when this story was first published. Her response was perfect:
We didn’t need some genius high tech analysis on the handful of emails we reported on; the whole contact list was there.
— Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) July 21, 2023
After we confirmed the subpoena, we called Hunter’s lawyer and the people on the emails.
Verifying the material was actually not that deep. https://t.co/dq62lnRr8A
Recommended
“We didn’t need some genius high tech analysis on the handful of emails we reported on; the whole contact list was there,” she replied. “After we confirmed the subpoena, we called Hunter’s lawyer and the people on the emails. Verifying the material was actually not that deep.”
She later took this person to school:
Another common/ignorant/security state propagated talking point against my work on the laptop from hell is that somehow the reporting is less legit because I got the original material from someone with a political motive. I’ll make a little thread here to address that claim. 🧵
— Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) July 21, 2023
There is no rule in journalism that the motive of a source matters. In fact, most, if not every source will have their own motivation for their actions that doesn’t necessarily come out of purity and virtue.
— Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) July 21, 2023
What matters to a journalist in weighing whether a story should be done is two questions:
— Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) July 21, 2023
1. Is this information true?
2. Is this information newsworthy and of public interest?
That’s pretty much it. If the answers to those q’s is “yes,” usually, you’re good.
If you are able to get the full story from a source, their motivation is irrelevant.
— Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) July 21, 2023
In this case, I had the entire HD in my possession. There was no room for manipulation by a politically motivated source. I just had to make sure what I was reporting on was legit. Did that.
Question to people making this point: if source motivation matters, how was the NYT able to publish Trump taxes, which were mailed to them from an anon source? We can’t even imagine motive, because we don’t know who the person was! How’s that for a “credible” source?
— Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) July 21, 2023
There is literally no one less credible than someone who’s identity the journalist doesn’t even know. But it didn’t matter. Because they somehow verified the docs. And they were of public interest. So, good.
— Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) July 21, 2023
For the record, if MSNBC contributor Dan Goldman handed me Don Jr’s laptop, and it looked the same as Hunter’s, I’d run it.
— Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) July 21, 2023
Thank you for this question. This would fall under “fair use,” which basically means, you don’t need permission if it’s being used for informing the public about something important. https://t.co/ikWuCyOsXs
— Emma-Jo Morris (@EmmaJoNYC) July 21, 2023
You people are honestly unbelievable.
— Sour Patch Lyds 🌺🐊 (@sourpatchlyds) July 21, 2023
"Here is an entire mountain of evidence that's literally been corroborated by the FBI that makes you dude look bad."
"Um ACKSHUALLY they're probably wrong, you just wanted a big story, probably."
And this person still doesn’t get it. Also, if we talk about bubbles, please stop implying that liberals don’t live in one. It makes you look like an idiot.
Short rant. I am so frustrated by trump/MAGA supporters who have lost touch with reality. They are so lost in their echo chamber and believe the most ridiculous lies. I have to wonder if it is cognitive dissonance we're just utter stupidity.
— Kate Gillespie (@kateg_tweets) July 20, 2023
Join the conversation as a VIP Member