A former CIA chief of station refused to sign the infamous October 2020 letter published by Politico. The letter strongly suggested Hunter Bidenβs laptop was Russian disinformation. Dan Hoffman didnβt sign because there was no evidence to support the statements.
βI remember I got the letter Oct. 18, 2020, and at first glance, it seemed natural to lay the blame at the Kremlinβs doorstep,β said Hoffman. βRemember, Vladimir Putin is in the Kremlin, and heβs well known for cloak-and-dagger espionage operations. But at the same time, there was no evidence, and the letter noted there was no evidence. And I just felt like we needed to do the forensics.β
The letter claimed the Hunter laptop βhas all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.β
Fifty-one former intel officials signed the letter, but Mr. Hoffman said others refused.
βThere were many others who β who didnβt sign it,β Hoffman added. βLook, when I was at CIA, we would sit in Michael Morellβs office when we had a particularly difficult, challenging intelligence issue, and we would hash out all the evidence that we have, the intelligence we had, and then Michael would draw analytical conclusions with some level of confidence β low, medium, or high β and bring it to the White House. We didnβt have that debate about this laptop issue. We werenβt invited to debate it.β
Twitter locked the NY Postβs account and press secretary Kayleigh McEnanyβs. They didnβt unlock them until after the election. It most likely swayed the election, judging from the polls indicating that as many as 10% of the Biden voters would have voted differently had they known.
The House Judiciary Committee and House Intelligence Committee are demanding documentsΒ from Secretary of State Antony Blinken after former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell testified about the letter.
U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, then senior advisor to the Biden campaign, was the impetus of the public statement.
βBased on Morellβs testimony, it is apparent that the Biden campaign played an active role in the origins of the public statement, which had the effect of helping to suppress the Hunter Biden story and preventing American citizens from making a fully informed decision during the 2020 presidential election,β the House Judiciary Committee members added.
βAlthough the statementβs signatories have an unquestioned right to free speech and free associationβwhich we do not disputeβtheir reference to their national security credentials lent weight to the story and suggested access to specialized information unavailable to other Americans,β the letter added. βThis concerted effort to minimize and suppress public dissemination of the serious allegations about the Biden family was a grave disservice to all American citizensβ informed participation in our democracy.β