Those issues could be addressed in the article. In open debate. That's the way the first amendment works.
There are reasons to not think its purely garbage storage, as many have pointed out. Not to mention a business partner, and someone who was sentenced to jail who has released their gmail account to the public.
> Those issues could be addressed in the article. In open debate.
We learned this doesn't work all that well with the Comey letter eleven days before the 2016 election. "We've reopened the Hillary investigation" turned into "oops, nothing new" a few days after the election.
"A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes."
Biden could have addressed this story months ago. He knew about it. You'd think the democrats would have learned not to nominate a second clinton who refuses questions. They still think its easy to stomp on a story than address it.
> Those issues could be addressed in the article. In open debate.
It's a non-tabloid newspaper. What I want and expect from such a publication is to only see stories for which the basic underlying facts have already been verified. There might still be disagreements over the implications of those facts and how to act on them, which I want and expect to see covered.
You’ve gotten some downvotes so figure I’d paste the actual text of the first amendment here so people know exactly what you’re referring to:
> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
You might want to actually read the first amendment:
Congress shall make no law [emphasis added] respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
(In various ways that aren't very relevant to the current discussion, this generally applies to states as well.)
There are reasons to not think its purely garbage storage, as many have pointed out. Not to mention a business partner, and someone who was sentenced to jail who has released their gmail account to the public.