In the critical weeks before Election Day, Big Tech and the legacy media took extreme measures to bury the unfolding story of Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s personal ties to his son Hunter’s notorious business deals in China, Ukraine, and elsewhere. Facebook and Twitter suppressed a New York Post story even before a fact-check, and legacy media outlets refused to cover the story even as evidence mounted. According to a blockbuster new poll, this unprecedented suppression of a bombshell story arguably cost President Donald Trump his reelection.
A Media Research Center (MRC) poll conducted by McLaughlin & Associates found that 36 percent of Biden voters were not aware of the evidence behind claims that Joe Biden was personally involved in his son Hunter’s business deals with China. Thirteen percent of those voters (4.6 percent of Biden’s total vote) said that if they had known the facts, they would not have voted for Biden.
Such a shift away from Biden would have given Trump the election, according to MRC’s analysis of the preliminary — and contested — election results predicting a Biden win. Had the Biden-China story seen the light of day, Trump would have won the election with 289 electoral votes.
“It is an indisputable fact that the media stole the election,” MRC President Brent Bozell argued. “The American electorate was intentionally kept in the dark. During the height of the scandal surrounding Hunter Biden’s foreign dealings, the media and the big tech companies did everything in their power to cover it up.”
Bozell noted that Twitter and Facebook limited sharing of The New York Post‘s bombshell report, while legacy media outlets largely ignored it. After the Post story failed to get the kind of traction many expected it would, Hunter Biden’s former business partner, Tony Bobulinski, came forward with firsthand knowledge — and evidence — tying Joe Biden to the notorious deals.
Democrats, former intelligence officials, and even the Biden campaign claimed — without evidence — that the story was “Russian disinformation.” Not only did numerous sources debunk that claim, but Vladimir Putin himself came out to vouch for Hunter Biden.
Even so, many media outlets refused to cover the story in the lead-up to the election.
“Now we know the impact of that cover-up,” Bozell argued. He noted that “4.6% of Biden voters say they would not have voted for him had they been aware of evidence of this scandal. This story would have potentially changed the outcome of this election. The media and Silicon Valley were fully aware of this, so they actively tried to prevent it from reaching the American public. The American people deserved to know the truth; now it’s too late.”
MRC and McLaughlin surveyed 1,000 actual voters (including early voters).
“At the time you cast your vote for President, were you aware that evidence exists in emails, texts, eyewitness testimony and banking transactions that the FBI has been investigating since last year directly linking Joe Biden to a corrupt financial arrangement between a Chinese company with connections to the Chinese communist party and Hunter Biden’s business, which may have personally benefitted Joe Biden financially?” the survey asked.
Perhaps surprisingly, 73 percent of respondents said they had heard about the allegations, while only 27 percent said they had not heard of them — a rather impressive showing for conservative media breaking through the Big Tech and legacy media efforts to bury the story. Yet 36 percent of Biden voters said they had not heard of the allegations.
MRC and McLaughlin asked that subset of Biden voters, “If you had been aware of this actual evidence in emails, texts, testimony and banking transactions being investigated by the FBI, would you have…” still voted for Biden?
Not surprisingly, most of the Biden voters said they would still have voted for Biden (86.9 percent) if they had known about the story. Yet a handful (5.6 percent) said they would have voted for a third-party candidate, while some said they would have not voted for any presidential candidate (4.7 percent), not voted at all (1.7 percent), or even voted for Donald Trump (1.1 percent).
In other words, 13.1 percent of the voters who did not know about the scandal (4.6 percent of Biden’s overall vote) said they would not have voted for Biden if they had known about the allegations.
It is impossible to know whether or not this survey accurately represents Biden voters, much less whether or not the knowledge of the corruption scandal would have had the same impact in each state, including swing states.
However, MRC applied this 4.6 percent drop in Biden votes to the most closely-contested states and concluded that a knowledge of the Biden-China corruption scandal among Biden voters alone would have turned Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin red, giving Trump a 289-vote margin in the Electoral College and handing him the presidency.
While Trump is currently contesting the reported preliminary results of the election, it is unlikely that he will be able to switch enough margins in enough states to pull ahead of Joe Biden, to whom most media outlets already refer as the “president-elect.”
It is quite plausible that the Big Tech and legacy media efforts to suppress the Biden-China scandal may cost Trump the election. This is utterly unconscionable, considering the legacy media’s rush to publish any salacious Trump-Russia rumor for years, even when those rumors turned out to be unverified and untrue.
Editor’s Note: Want to support PJ Media so we can continue telling the truth about the Biden-Harris campaign? Join PJ Media VIP TODAY and use the promo code LAWANDORDER to get 25% off your VIP membership.
Tyler O’Neil is the author of Making Hate Pay: The Corruption of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Follow him on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.