Nearly 100% of the people I've seen investigate the data have made the affirmative claim that it was almost certainly directly off of Hunter's physical laptop, a conclusion very much at odds with your weird illogic.
Once again, you're not actually listening to the nature of the objection, because
I am not disputing the data came from the laptop. That is not the nature of the dispute we're having.
There are enormous holes in what we know, and extensive evidence of tampering, that leave open the possibility that
the data on the laptop was compromised. That's the nature of the dispute.
Silvanus has only the argument from incredulity. No evidence nor analysts have claimed Russian involvement, the expert claim it was came from no first hand knowledge, and the FBI has opened investigations into Hunter Biden. There is no good reason left to dispute the laptops authenticity.
No evidence or analysts have conclusively pointed to criminality by Hunter Biden, either; the analysts have been very clear in stating that the timestamps could've been tampered, and the email verifications don't mean very much.
The analysts gave cautious conclusions, and were very explicit about the limitations they faced. They were clear that the verifications and timestamps are not conclusive at all, and
only even applied to a small portion of the data. Yet you've taken that and concluded that
all the information is
definitely 100% authentic.
