CBS investigative journalist Catherine Herridge said her reporting team conducted extensive forensic verification of Hunter Biden laptop data before the network aired a story on the material following the 2022 midterm elections, despite the information being ready earlier.

Herridge described the internal process, editorial decisions, and resistance she encountered while attempting to pursue additional reporting related to the laptop, including material she said raised serious questions that CBS declined to cover.

Herridge explained that the decision to delay the story until after the midterms was made even though the reporting and verification were complete.

Trump's Sovereign Wealth Fund: What Could It Mean For Your Money?

“We eventually broadcast a story about the Hunter Biden laptop after the midterm elections in 2022 we commissioned a forensic review,” Herridge said.

She stated that she personally obtained and retained a verified copy of the data.

“I got a copy of the laptop data. I have it. I have it here still. I went to a lot of effort to get the cleanest copy of the laptop data, the same data that was provided to the FBI, because I didn’t want to have any professional journalistic risk for CBS News.”

Herridge said the forensic review was central to her approach because she wanted the reporting to meet the highest standards before going on air.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

“I wanted this thing to be totally locked down when we did the story,” she said.

According to Herridge, the story aired after the elections despite her objections.

“We did it after the midterms. I argued against that because it was ready before the midterms. And my training is that you should always do the story when it’s ready to go. You should not be dictated by the political cycle.”

After the initial broadcast, Herridge said she believed additional reporting opportunities remained, particularly involving the contents of text messages contained in the laptop data.

“Once we got the laptop story on the morning news, I felt that there was so much there that we could still do,” she said.

Herridge described finding text messages containing racial language that she believed warranted further coverage.

“For example, in the text messages, there’s, unfortunately, the use of the N word, the liberal use of the N word, and I thought this was worthy of a story, but I was told that it was not something that interested CBS News.”

Herridge said she continued to push for further forensic analysis, including a review of emails associated with the laptop.

“Then I asked for a forensic review of the laptop, and we found that there were more than half a dozen emails that were likely used by Joe Biden,” she said.

Herridge stated that she viewed that finding as newsworthy. “I thought that was a story,” she said.

According to Herridge, CBS leadership responded by raising concerns about the scope and timeline required to fully examine the email contents.

“But the answer that came back was, well, we need to know what the content is of the emails, but that was going to be a years long process, so there was no way,” she said.

Herridge said she was repeatedly discouraged from continuing the reporting.

“So there just, there were just, there were a lot of reasons I was told not to do it, not to pursue it.”

Herridge said she devoted a significant portion of her time at CBS to following the Hunter Biden laptop story and became increasingly aware of what she described as internal contradictions within the organization.

“I spent a lot of my time at CBS following the Hunter Biden story, and one of the things that really struck me is is this kind of disconnect,” she said.

She cited conversations with senior leadership that she said conflicted with the actions of other executives and producers.

“I didn’t understand how a senior executive like George Cheeks could tell me that this was a high priority for the network and for his boss, and yet the executives at CBS news show producers, anchors, could refuse,” Herridge said.

Herridge said she ultimately concluded that some within the organization believed they held greater authority than network leadership.

“I came to the conclusion that they must have felt that they were more powerful than George cheeks, which was astonishing to me,” she said.

“I’d never worked at a place where a directive from the top would be so defied.”

WATCH:

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Objectivist. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.