NPR chief admits dismissing Hunter Biden laptop story was a mistake

[seafoam1 2,882]

Even NPR has to fess up about being lying, scumbags. Taxpayer funded BS news. 

NPR CEO Katherine Maher conceded during her congressional testimony on Wednesday that her organization missed the mark in its lack of serious coverage of the Hunter Biden laptop story during the 2020 election. 

Maher and PBS CEO Paula Kerger were grilled by House Republicans on the newly formed Delivering on Government Efficiency (DOGE) subcommittee regarding accusations of biased news coverage backed by federal funding. 

"I do want to say that NPR acknowledges we were mistaken in failing to cover the Hunter Biden laptop story more aggressively and sooner," Maher told Rep. Michael Cloud, R-Texas.

[Engorgeous George 2,252]

She is blinded by partisanship.  I find her sort of hot.  

[seafoam1 2,882]

And NPR wasn't "mistaken". They were negligent in their jobs and they did it on purpose.  They had a political agenda.

[Strike 5,360]

So what?  They ALWAYS do this.  Bury a story when it benefits them and fess up years later when it doesn't matter.  Guess what?  They all admit Covid may have come from a lab now too.  But unfortunately all the evidence has been destroyed that we might have used to prevent the NEXT Covid from happening.  All in the name of politics. 

[The Real timschochet 6,558]

Meaningless story. Once again: 

1. The laptop story wasn’t covered up. 
2. There was no censorship. 
3. it wasn’t an important story which is why it wasn’t overly reported (even so we were all aware of it.) 

4. It would have had no impact on the outcome of the election one way or the other. 
5. Joe Biden is not guilty of any corruption. 
 

Time to let this go, fellas. There was nothing there, there still isn’t. 

[kilroy69 1,235]

Npr. are a bunch of partisan hacks. My hope is they have their federal funding slashed. They always make a false claim that they only get 1 percent of their budget from the federal government. That is a blatant lie.  It is really along the lines of 25-30 percent through CPB grants. If the federal government stopped giving those grants there is ZERO chance that NPR could continue. As it is they do quarterly fund drives to shore up their finances. This would put them in a hole they would likely never be able to recover from. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,182]

It’s great that Trump took away the security clearances of the intel officials that participated in the cover up of the now confirmed Hunter Biden laptop story, but I would like to see some indictments. May be hard to convict,  but lawfare is warranted in this situation as a warning to others. 

[seafoam1 2,882]

26 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Meaningless story. Once again: 

1. The laptop story wasn’t covered up. 
2. There was no censorship. 
3. it wasn’t an important story which is why it wasn’t overly reported (even so we were all aware of it.) 

4. It would have had no impact on the outcome of the election one way or the other. 
5. Joe Biden is not guilty of any corruption. 
 

Time to let this go, fellas. There was nothing there, there still isn’t. 

Liberal crack smoker says what? What's up with the massive trolling from this dumbass. 

[RLLD 4,183]

44 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Meaningless story. Once again: 

1. The laptop story wasn’t covered up. 
2. There was no censorship. 
3. it wasn’t an important story which is why it wasn’t overly reported (even so we were all aware of it.) 

4. It would have had no impact on the outcome of the election one way or the other. 
5. Joe Biden is not guilty of any corruption. 
 

Time to let this go, fellas. There was nothing there, there still isn’t. 

1) The laptop story was covered in such a manner as to manipulate voters into not seeing it as valid; so agree with your literal point, but maybe your point is a little disingenuous.

2) There was not literal censorship, there was activist journalistic manipulated to render the laptop story as inconsequential.

3) It was rendered "unimportant" on purpose by the media.

4) Hard to argue with this point, I also have doubts it would have moved the needle on the election. But why risk it?  So media stepped in to collaborate with the Democrat party to discredit it

5) I remain confident based on the whistleblowers, IRS documents, bank records, laptop contents and investigation overall that Biden was absolutely selling influence to benefit financially. If you think that is not "corruption" that is fine for you, I assume Trump is now free to replicate everything documented that Biden did, right?

[edjr 6,579]

1 hour ago, The Real timschochet said:

Meaningless story. Once again: 

1. The laptop story wasn’t covered up. 
2. There was no censorship. 
3. it wasn’t an important story which is why it wasn’t overly reported (even so we were all aware of it.) 

4. It would have had no impact on the outcome of the election one way or the other. 
5. Joe Biden is not guilty of any corruption. 
 

Time to let this go, fellas. There was nothing there, there still isn’t. 

troll/bot. you clowns that reply as if this is supposed to be serious. sad

[Engorgeous George 2,252]

I have enjoyed NPR over the years.  I have also been surprised that they continue to recieve government funding.  This question or debate has been going on for 40 years.  Their funding survives every time though funding of such is not, in my view, even remotely within the government's proper purview particularly while we are running deficits.  In the past when I share that view i get the very standard "well it is only a drop in the bucket, a tear in a salty ocean" response.  That, of course, does not address the issue of government funding of such an entity.  Let them stand or fall on their own merit.    

 

Tis reminds me.I have not financially supported NPR in many years.  I use to.  I no longer do.  When I use to it was without regard for their clear political bent.  I did so as their programming and analysis was thought provoking and well written, which I enjoyed.  Threre is still much excellence coming from them which now fights its way through an increasingly thick bias fog, yet the intellegence of the construction of their analysis remains, generally, above what one can consume elsewhere in many cases.  Of course I am a creature of habit and have not ventured into the wide universe of podcasts so perhaps one can find equally insightful commentary in that universe.

[jbycho 752]

9 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I have enjoyed NPR over the years.  I have also been surprised that they continue to recieve government funding.  This question or debate has been going on for 40 years.  Their funding survives every time though funding of such is not, in my view, even remotely within the government's proper purview particularly while we are running deficits.  In the past when I share that view i get the very standard "well it is only a drop in the bucket, a tear in a salty ocean" response.  That, of course, does not address the issue of government funding of such an entity.  Let them stand or fall on their own merit.    

 

Tis reminds me.I have not financially supported NPR in many years.  I use to.  I no longer do.  When I use to it was without regard for their clear political bent.  I did so as their programming and analysis was thought provoking and well written, which I enjoyed.  Threre is still much excellence coming from them which now fights its way through an increasingly thick bias fog, yet the intellegence of the construction of their analysis remains, generally, above what one can consume elsewhere in many cases.  Of course I am a creature of ahbit and have not ventured into the wide universe of podcasts so perhpas one can find equally insightful commentary in that universe.

Who's that 200 year old lady on that channel? Is she still trying to garble out quaint little diddies? Or did she finally kick the bucket? 

[Engorgeous George 2,252]

3 minutes ago, jbycho said:

Who's that 200 year old lady on that channel? Is she still trying to garble out quaint little diddies? Or did she finally kick the bucket? 

Garrison Keillor 

[The Real timschochet 6,558]

Funding for NPR should absolutely be cut. Not the government’s role. I don’t need or want taxpayers to fund my entertainment. 

[kilroy69 1,235]

25 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

Garrison Keillor 

hahaha I loved the prairie home companion. He was funny. So were the car talk guys. That is when I got hooked on NPR. Then like a bad drug dealer it just went south from there. 

[Frozenbeernuts 2,223]

2 hours ago, Strike said:

So what?  They ALWAYS do this.  Bury a story when it benefits them and fess up years later when it doesn't matter.  Guess what?  They all admit Covid may have come from a lab now too.  But unfortunately all the evidence has been destroyed that we might have used to prevent the NEXT Covid from happening.  All in the name of politics. 

Wait until you find out that there's a decent chance all modern outbreaks were potentially man made.

Kind of like cancer. Put a cancer causing agent in one product you own, then sell the treatment to cancer with another.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,223]

2 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Meaningless story. Once again: 

1. The laptop story wasn’t covered up. 
2. There was no censorship. 
3. it wasn’t an important story which is why it wasn’t overly reported (even so we were all aware of it.) 

4. It would have had no impact on the outcome of the election one way or the other. 
5. Joe Biden is not guilty of any corruption. 
 

Time to let this go, fellas. There was nothing there, there still isn’t. 

These outlets flat out called the laptop disinformation. Why would they lie that hard if it wasn't important?

Zuckerberg admitted that he targeted the laptop story to remove it from FB at the direction of the FBI. That's a cover up.

Your little liberal mind has no idea what's coming. I hope you have a plan when the world you have constructed in your mind comes crashing down around you.

[Engorgeous George 2,252]

I seem to recall some polls stating that the laptop story, if released and reported upon, would ahve swayed a numberof votes in the 2020 election.  I amy be remembering that wrongly,or I may not have been fully cognizant of the agendas behind those polls but that is my recollection.  Now whether the information may have changed enough votes to effect teh outcome of that election, well that is another matter and one upon which I have no opinion.  I do think that those suppressing the story had an opinion on its importance, though.

[jbycho 752]

3 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I seem to recall some polls stating that the laptop story, if released and reported upon, would ahve swayed a numberof votes in the 2020 election.  I amy be remembering that wrongly,or I may not have been fully cognizant of the agendas behind those polls but that is my recollection.  Now whether the information may have changed enough votes to effect teh outcome of that election, well that is another matter and one upon which I have no opinion.  I do think that those suppressing the story had an opinion on its importance, though.

Of course it was important. If the contents got out and they logically tied those 10% for the big guy kickbacks to Joe, serious shlt would have hit the fan. But it was suppressed. 

[Mike Hunt 272]

2 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

And NPR wasn't "mistaken". They were negligent in their jobs and they did it on purpose.  They had a political agenda.

Squid won`t believe that for a second.  They would never do that.

[Dizkneelande 1,093]

6 minutes ago, Mike Hunt said:

Squid won`t believe that for a second.  They would never do that.

87 editors every single one of them is a registered Democrat 

[jbycho 752]

3 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

87 editors every single one of them is a registered Democrat 

But don't you dare use the word 'systemic' when it comes to that. 

Liberals own the word 'systemic'. It's set aside for RACISM!!! 

[Engorgeous George 2,252]

3 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

87 editors every single one of them is a registered Democrat 

87 seems like a high number for editors for a single organization.  Of course I have never worked in a news room nor at a radio station.  The number just shocks me.  Now the 100% of them being registered democrats does not shock me as like begets like.  I note our society is not very tolerantof like begetting like in institutions dominated by certain currently disfavored demographics, but that aphorism seems true of us as a species.

[jerryskids 6,688]

Tim thinks that because he believes it wouldn't have impacted the election, it's OK that media outlets, sometimes at the... suggestion of the FBI, suppressed the story.

[jbycho 752]

5 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

87 seems like a high number for editors for a single organization.  Of course I have never worked in a news room nor at a radio station.  The number just shocks me.  Now the 100% of them being registered democrats does not shock me as like begets like.  I note our society is not very tolerantof like begetting like in institutions dominated by certain currently disfavored demographics, but that aphorism seems true of us as a species.

I have no problem if likes want to be with and set up something to be able to work with likes. Not in the least. 

Just don't claim to be unbiased in your views if they are political leaning likes. 

[kilroy69 1,235]

14 minutes ago, Dizkneelande said:

87 editors every single one of them is a registered Democrat 

There is ZERO chance you can have an unbiased news org with that type of balance. Then they will turn around with a straight face and tell you they have never seen bias at NPR. It is a joke. 

[jbycho 752]

There needs to be no grants or federal funding to go to NPR.

We should have a real national public radio though that has zero political leanings and zero special interest in their mission statement. 

When it comes to politics and special interest thinking, report it, don't discuss it. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,182]

Jeffrey Goldberg has a show on PBS. No bias that she’s aware of. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,992]

4 hours ago, seafoam1 said:

And NPR wasn't "mistaken". They were negligent in their jobs and they did it on purpose.  They had a political agenda.

100%.  Notice how these liberals always "apologize" and admit their "mistakes" long after everyone involved can't get in trouble anymore?

[EternalShinyAndChrome 3,992]

1 hour ago, Mike Hunt said:

Squid won`t believe that for a second.  They would never do that.

For sure...because NPR told him so! 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,182]

This guy Gill from Texas is a superstar.  Future looks bright. 

[Nomad99 719]

10 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Meaningless story. Once again: 

1. The laptop story wasn’t covered up. 
2. There was no censorship. 
3. it wasn’t an important story which is why it wasn’t overly reported (even so we were all aware of it.) 

4. It would have had no impact on the outcome of the election one way or the other. 
5. Joe Biden is not guilty of any corruption. 
 

Time to let this go, fellas. There was nothing there, there still isn’t. 

We are coming for your guns....well sort of....actually, we...the gun grabbers & 2A Nazi's are in favor of the president pardoning his son so he isn't brought up on charges for violating gun laws.....the whole computer stuff is so Clinton'esque......

[Frozenbeernuts 2,223]

So weird that a laptop which held nothing significant would receive a gag order from the FBI. Which I don't think they are supposed to do with an investigation. Especially a national security investigation. Oh well I guess it's easier for some to pretend like FBI agents jeopardizing their freedom to stop a story was over nothing. Makes complete logical sense.

https://x.com/JudiciaryGOP/status/1907098410215199072?s=19

[Dizkneelande 1,093]

1 hour ago, Frozenbeernuts said:

So weird that a laptop which held nothing significant would receive a gag order from the FBI. Which I don't think they are supposed to do with an investigation. Especially a national security investigation. Oh well I guess it's easier for some to pretend like FBI agents jeopardizing their freedom to stop a story was over nothing. Makes complete logical sense.

https://x.com/JudiciaryGOP/status/1907098410215199072?s=19

And nobody will go to jail 

[SaintsInDome2006 440]

On 3/27/2025 at 9:41 AM, Hardcore troubadour said:

It’s great that Trump took away the security clearances of the intel officials that participated in the cover up of the now confirmed Hunter Biden laptop story, but I would like to see some indictments. May be hard to convict,  but lawfare is warranted in this situation as a warning to others. 

Guys - y'all - they didn't have security clearances. You don't keep your clearance when you leave your USG job unless you're granted one for some purpose. I don't think any of the people Trump took "clearances" from were doing anything for the government currently.

Also, about indictments:

• The data came in under a Trump appointed AG.
• Trump appointed the prosecutor who handled the case.
• The two judges who heard the case were Trump appointed.
• Current AG Pam Bondi could still indict: Burisma, Zlochevsky, Blue Star, BHR, and any of the various financial entities who received the funds.

If no one is indicted you will have to think seriously if Pam Bondi is really a Deep State plant.