Think about it. What happens if somebody is prosecuted for owning or distributing that content if it is there? The information and the victims and the PRODUCER (Hunter) would all be included and implicated in the criminal case.
It’s Biden’s DOJ. It’s obvious they will never prosecute anybody for owning illicit material from Hunter’s laptop or phone because HE would be implicated.
If anything an anon or two going down and bringing the Biden crime family and their associates with them would be a good thing.
All they can try and do is convince us not to know about it. Think about it.
Imagine the noise publicly if people were prosecuted for owning illicit material from Hunter’s own devices.
On the other hand, it’s also possible they’ve decided it’s time to get rid of the Biden’s and so they are rehashing the leaks. But I sort of doubt that and I believe the former is more likely.
I’m not telling anybody to DO anything, but to simply use some real world logic and be cognizant of the circumstances. There ARE glowies here, from multiple departments and multiple countries. We know this, every country worth its salt has entire departments dedicated to this sort of online propaganda, and they’re reasonably open about it. So we can be pretty sure they’re always trying to convince us or de-convince us of SOMETHING.
In this case, I believe they’re trying to convince us to simply not look or know about the extent of the damage.
Let the chips fall where they may.
If anyone is equipped to deal with Hunter's data, it's 4chan. Some things are best left to the experts.
There’s a lot of overlap between internet forums and there are lots of computing experts here, as well.
And, there are a lot of people here who could inadvertently end up in more trouble than they know how to deal with -- just like the innocents that were lured inside the Capitol on J6.
And what would the headlines look like?
“MAN CHARGED WITH CP FOR OWNING IMAGES OF HUNTER BIDEN FUCKING HIS UNDERAGE NIECE”
Imagine
Like the MSM/three-letter-agency-of-your-choice wouldn't totally neglect to mention Hunter Biden's name.
BTW: username checks out.
<LoneWulf checking out...>
I don’t think they’d get far trying to hide that. At the very least, the defense attorney would use the facts of the case, eg. Hunter Biden and the context of “possession”, as a defense, and it would be public and enormous news, partly because we’d be talking about it and broadcasting the case ourselves. I know I would be.
Possession IS 90% of the law however context and intent STILL MATTER. In every case, these sorts of accusations have to pass a two-pronged legal test: the subjective and the objective test. The objective test in this sense would be the possession. The subjective test in this sort of case would be the context and intent.
This information would be submitted to the court as motions ON PUBLIC RECORD and we would therefore be hearing about it, whether ourselves through PACER or otherwise.
Please try and insult me again though, you seem like a great team player. Your username checks out too. My username is “people” as in We, The People, so please, come again some time, if you’re so annoyed.