By Ian Haworth • Apr 7, 2022

With every day that passes, it becomes increasingly clear that there is far more truth to the infamous “Hunter Biden laptop story” than the legacy media ever dared to admit.

Even though investigatory crosshairs are now closing on the business dealings of the entire Biden family, with some media figures acknowledging that there might be something of interest to discover, there is a parallel viewpoint that must be protected: that the Hunter Biden “faux scandal” had no impact on the election.

“They now think that if only the ‘media’ had told us about the laptop at the time …Trump would have won. But for the censoring of the New York Post, Trump would have won,” said Jonah Goldberg, who went on to describe the notion that the lack of coverage of the Hunter Biden scandal had any impact on the 2020 election as a “preposterous counterfactual.”

And Goldberg is not alone. For example, during the same event, staff writer for The Atlantic, Anne Applebaum, claimed that the Hunter Biden laptop story was “irrelevant,” and uninteresting.

This viewpoint mirrors messaging prior to and in the immediate aftermath of the 2020 election. For example, Sen. Schumer described Hunter Biden as “irrelevant” and a “distraction” in January 2020, while multiple pundits called the story “Russian misinformation” after the election took place.

However, as data from the time shows, Hunter Biden is not only relevant, but potentially pivotal.

In November 2020, the Media Research Center commissioned The Polling Company to survey 1,750 Biden voters in seven swing states (Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin).

A massive 45.1% of Biden voters polled said they were “unaware of the financial scandal enveloping Biden and his son, Hunter,” adding that “full awareness of the Hunter Biden scandal would have led 9.4% of Biden voters to abandon the Democratic candidate.”

And it’s this 9.4% change that could have been hugely consequential when we consider Biden’s winning margins in six of these swing states. Biden won Arizona by 0.3%, Georgia by 0.23%, Michigan by 2.8%, Nevada by 2.4%, Pennsylvania by 1.2%, and Wisconsin by 0.63%. A swing of 9.4% would have handed each of these states to former President Donald Trump, giving him 79 additional electoral votes.

His total in this scenario? 311 electoral votes, 41 votes over the 270 electoral votes required to win the presidential election.

So even while the Democratic Party and their media accomplices cling to the notion that Hunter Biden remains an “irrelevant” and “uninteresting” “distraction,” the fact remains clear: one act of baseless censorship helped win the election for Joe Biden.

That seems pretty relevant to me.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/how-the-c...d-joe-biden-win