LISTEN HERE:
A former high-ranking intelligence officer responsible for monitoring threats in the 2020 election claims that there was no evidence at the time to suggest that Hunter Biden’s laptop was part of a Russian disinformation campaign, despite arguments made by supporters of then-candidate Joe Biden. Prior to the election, a public letter was penned by 51 former national security officials asserting that the information on the laptop exhibited all the hallmarks of a Russian information operation. Signatories included notable figures such as former CIA Director John Brennan, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former CIA Director and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.
However, Chris Porter, the former National Intelligence Officer for Cyber, maintains that the assertions made by Biden supporters did not match the actual intelligence of the time. Porter was troubled by the letter, given his role as the intelligence officer overseeing U.S. intelligence community analysis of foreign threats to the 2020 elections. He stated that the letter did not accurately represent the threat as understood by intelligence officials.
Porter added that while the situation was reminiscent of something Moscow might have attempted, the eventual unclassified report released to the public revealed that despite an extensive influence campaign, there was no evidence to suggest that the Hunter Biden laptop situation specifically was Russian disinformation. Porter, who has nearly a decade of experience as a CIA analyst and who has held positions as one of the most senior cyber intelligence analysts until 2022, expressed his disapproval of senior officials throwing their weight around and insinuating Russian involvement based on politically scandalous information.
According to Porter, senior officials should not engage in domestic politics without clear and compelling evidence to support their claims. The contention that the Hunter Biden laptop story was Russian disinformation wasn’t based on actual intelligence available at the time.
Michael Morell, the former Deputy CIA Director who worked on the public letter and sought support from ex-intelligence officials, submitted a draft of the letter to the CIA’s Prepublication Classification Review Board (PCRB) before making it public. Testimony provided by Morell to congressional committees revealed that the letter was orchestrated by the Biden campaign in order to discredit stories pertaining to Hunter Biden’s laptop.
Morell communicated the urgency of the situation to the PCRB in an email sent on October 19, 2020, stating that it ‘needs to get out as soon as possible.’ On the same day, the PCRB granted its approval of the letter as written.
The speed of the PCRB’s review and approval process surprised a former senior intelligence official, who claimed it could range from hours to months, depending on the length of the document and any questionable elements it may have contained. However, the official speculated that if one’s goal was to help remove Trump from office and secure a position as a boss after his exit, the process could be expedited more quickly.
The CIA, in a statement, refuted the idea that political motivations played a role in the PCRB’s decision making. The organization emphasized that political considerations held no influence in the CIA Pre-Publication Review Board’s established process, which seeks to determine whether information submitted by current and former officers contains classified information. The statement also noted that the PCRB is entirely comprised of staff officers who conduct the reviews.
Shortly after the letter was published, then-presidential candidate Joe Biden cited it in the final 2020 presidential debate to address criticisms from then-President Trump. Biden mentioned the support of 50 former national intelligence officials in validating his argument that Trump’s accusations were part of a Russian disinformation operation.
At that time, then-Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe asserted that Hunter Biden’s laptop was not a component of a Russian disinformation campaign, a position similarly held by the FBI.
Rebekah Koffler, a former U.S. intelligence official, argued that the review process is known to be biased and politicized among former intelligence officers. Koffler, previously a DIA intelligence officer and author of ‘Putin’s Playbook: Russia’s Secret Plan to Defeat America,’ believed that the true purpose of the letter was to suppress information about Hunter Biden’s corruption and to prevent Trump’s reelection.
Koffler also pointed to the high-profile signatories of the letter as an indication of its underlying agenda. Having experienced the PCRB process firsthand while seeking approval for her book, Koffler claims that it is unusual for anything to be approved within a single day.
According to Koffler, the expedited approval process in this case was a clear example of the PRB process being weaponized to influence the election. Despite this assertion, the CIA maintained that the role of the PCRB is solely to review materials submitted by current and former officers to determine the presence of classified information.
This revelation highlights the ongoing tensions and potential political biases within intelligence agencies, particularly during election seasons. While it is essential for intelligence officials to remain impartial in their analysis and reporting, incidents such as this one with the Hunter Biden laptop letter raise questions about the neutrality of these officials and the potential impact of their actions on electoral outcomes.
In light of these developments, it is paramount that thorough investigations continue to be conducted into the actions and motivations of intelligence agencies and former officials when engaging with politically contentious material. Ensuring the unbiased nature of future intelligence work is necessary in order to maintain the integrity of both the intelligence community and the democratic process.