Because i distinctly recall the head of what to that point I though was a credible journalistic organization saying she didnt want to "waste people's time" with that.
Performatively pretending the above didn't happen is intellectually dishonest.
Your hyperbolic and partisan language makes it obvious you aren't simply a neutral observer, and implies that you had a horse in that race, and you're still mad that he lost.
Or else you aren't American, in which case your investment in the Trumpist narrative is just kind of pathetic. Like Americans giving a shit about the British royal family.
There literally is a NYT article alluding the whole store is fake and should be dismissed, and (post election ) NYT article admitting it is not. Your prefered the definition of "bury" must exclusively involve shovels and earthwork.
Also this, verbatim: https://x.com/NPRpubliceditor/status/1319281101223940096?
Not quite sure what de
Archer was quite explicit in his testimony that if anything, Hunter was basically scamming them with the illusion of access.
Which, well, is bad, but if anything, the situation reflects that Joe never let his son influence him to do anything corrupt, which turns it entirely into a bunch of TMZ level drama about Hunter's drug and prostitution habits.
And I still heard about the laptop plenty before the election. If that is a buried story, then plenty of widely published and discussed stories would be buried by your definition.
The amount of attention it has received has always been silly.