January 27, 2025
Disturbing Questions about the Intelligence Community
By John Green
In the run-up to the 2020 election, 51 “intelligence experts” signed a letter claiming that the Hunter Biden laptop bore all the hallmarks of a Russian disinformation operation. In recent months, we’ve learned that the letter was just a piece of campaign subterfuge, organized by Antony Blinken, to insulate candidate Biden from evidence on the laptop of corruption.
Since the 2020 election, we’ve learned that the FBI validated the laptop as authentic, and its contents have not been tampered with. The evidence on the laptop was even of such fidelity that it was used by the DoJ to prosecute Hunter Biden for tax evasion. The 51 knew that the letter — not the laptop — was complete disinformation, yet went along with Blinken’s plan to provide plausible deniability to candidate Biden until after the election.
We are justifiably outraged that the 51 used their credentials to dishonestly influence an election. We should also consider the implications of having people of such limited integrity serving in the Intelligence Community (I.C.).
Graeme Wood, writing for The Atlantic, points out that the 51 included professionals who had built careers in the I.C. by objectively assessing data and providing rigorous analysis. Yet they skipped the discipline of their profession when they flagged the Hunter Biden laptop as Russian disinformation. Wood writes,
Why these titans of intelligence were willing to risk their hard-won credibility on the possibility that Hunter Biden might not be a slimeball is deeply mysterious.more
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2025/01/disturbing_questions_about_the_intelligence_community.html
