This post is a great demonstration of what I mean when I say that Donald Trump being the target has clouded people's judgment about it.
What does that matter? Something has either been properly vetted or it hasn't. And for intel pros to express a view on something that hasn't been properly vetted is reckless.
It doesn't become less reckless by complaining that they weren't given enough time. If they had properly vetted it (and weren't being disingenuous), they'd have never written that letter.
As DNI Ratcliffe pointed out at the time, they had no reason to believe the laptop was a Russian op.
What in the world does "contemporaneously accurate" mean?
They were wrong. Are you aware of something that was cited as having been pulled from the hard drive that was fabricated? Because you seem to be suggesting you are.
Whether or not the intel people knew what they were suggesting was false only they can say. That does matter -- it's the difference between knowingly lying and making a false declaration due to insufficient evidence. But the only two explanations here are dishonesty and irresponsibility. And neither one of them is good.
Did you notice that arguments their lawyer made are (a) they have a 1A right to say whatever they want (even if it's false) and (b) they included the words "all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation" as a caveat?
While that's a tepid defense on its own, it seems important to note that the "earmarks" caveat was missing when their letter was cited by Joe Biden as proof that the laptop was a "Russian plant" and "garbage". Here....
Keep in mind when you watch that video two things: (1) Joe Biden almost certainly knew when he said it that the laptop was genuine...unless he was so derelict as to not even ask his own son about it, and (2) the genesis of the letter was
his own campaign. Mike Morell has testified that he was approached by Antony Blinken about putting it out.
I'm certainly not defending anything and everything Donald Trump has ever said or claimed. I'm more than happy to call out his bullshit when he's spewing it. Have in the past, will in the future.
But, in this instance, what you're saying is precisely backwards. The laptop was authentic. And I'm not aware of anything that has been reported as coming from it that was not authentic. The Russians didn't have the first thing to do with it.
So, yes, the 51 intel vets are being punished for having propagated disinformation.....even if their defense is that they tacked on a disclaimer. The entire purpose of the letter was to provide cover for the Biden campaign and the media to denounce it as fraudulent.
But the laptop wasn't fraudulent. Their suggestion that it was a "Russian information operation" was.
