Senate passes bill requiring the Biden administration to declassify intelligence on COVID-19 origins

It's been over a year. Let us see what the Intelligence says.

My guess is that you're more likely to find the preserved bodies of aliens locked up in Area 51 than to ever know the precise origin of the virus.  Wouldn't it be a hoot if it really WERE American soldiers?

Wouldn't it be a hoot if it really WERE American soldiers?

Chinese government propaganda at it's finest, with absolutely no basis in reality since none of the solders tested positive for the virus. 

the-scientist

According to the unfounded accusation, which  reports  say has been widely shared on the popular Chinese social media platform Weibo, the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 was introduced to China when 300 US military members arrived in the Wuhan region for the  Military World Games  in mid-October and infected the local population. None of the servicemembers who made the trip have tested positive for the virus.

The rumors seemed to begin when Chinese respiratory specialist Zhong Nanshan stated at a February   press conference   that “though the COVID-19 was first discovered in China, it does not mean that it originated from China,” planting the seeds of doubt.

On Thursday (March 12), Zhao Lijian, the spokesperson of China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs,   took to Twitter , a social platform banned in China, to ask, “When did patient zero begin in US? How many people are infected? What are the names of the hospitals? It might be US army who brought the epidemic to Wuhan. Be transparent! Make public your data! US owe us an explanation!” 

Wouldn't it really be a hoot if the virus really originated in the Wuhan labs and was accidentally released infecting the people that worked there; and then spread uncontrolled throughout Wuhan due to the Chinese government cover up. Also, that China allowed the virus allowed the virus to escape to the international community by their cover up.

Even if it came from a wet market the cover up still allowed the virus to escape to the international community.

China is too far down the rabbit hole to ever come clean at this point. No matter what is found they will deny it and blame the US.

It may be too late, but lets see what the CIA is worth these days.

My comment was obviously tongue-in-cheek, and I don't disagree that your suggestions are quite possible.  I have always said that the "cover-up" (the silencing of the whistle-blowing doctor) was the wrong thing to do.  However, there is more than one possibility on the table and I'm not able to say, and in fact NOBODY is able to say, what the actual answer is.  I do disagree that the virus was INTENTIONALLY spread. 

Very good, xxJefferson, or whatever name you're using today.  Considering all the nasty cartoons I've posted about your hero, Trump, I guess I deserve that one.  My answer is sitting on my desk - here is a photo of it.

No matter what is found they will deny it and blame the US.

Just today, China was intimating that the virus originated at Fort Dedrich, Maryland.

Speculating on a source is not the exclusive right of America.  Recently Americans were "intimating" that the virus was CREATED in a Wuhan lab and DELIBERATELY released by China to infect the world and kill millions of people, including its own citizens. 

Are these people American diplomats representing the government?

If you want examples of American diplomats "intimating" (speculating with falsehoods, but without determining truths) look no further than Pompeo.  

All I've seen from Pompeo is that he believes that based on the evidence it was a lab leak.  But please show me where he claimed it was deliberately released. 

I was really thinking of his accusation made of espionage wherein he could come up with no proof such as concerning the closing of the Houston Chinese Consulate (and breaking into it contrary to International protocol). 

Now that I think about it, if the government never made such an accusation, then individuals who do are simply trying to pour gasoline onto a fire.  However, I do not believe China wishes to make America its enemy, but I DO believe that the American government wants to promote China as being an enemy for the purpose of creating a fiction that it believes will unite the American people. 

It's been over a year. Let us see what the Intelligence says.

Good idea;  get some facts and follow them to a logical conclusion.   Much better than partisan-sourced speculation.

get some facts

Those nasty facts that Biden is so reluctant to release. Where can I find you if they're ever released?

Look Vic, if the facts show that COVID-19 originated from Wuhan labs and/or show that the labs were engaged in gain-of-function research on COVID-19 I will be happy to blame China and whoever else is responsible.

I do not run from or distort facts.    I follow the facts because they more often than not give the best approximation of truth and truth is what I care about.   In contrast to those who seek to sculpt their own truth for partisan purposes.

The 'nasty facts' for you and yours is that both Biden and Democratic leadership WANTED this bill to pass or it NEVER would have made it to the floor. Oh and there is ONE other fact, the bill passed by UNANIMOUS CONSENT. 

Time for China Joe to squirm.

The so-called lab-leak theory, initially derided by critics of the Trump administration as a conspiracy theory and censored on Facebook between February and Wednesday

Facebook has this to say now:

"In light of ongoing investigations into the origin of COVID-19 and in consultation with public health experts, we will no longer remove the claim that COVID-19 is man-made from our apps," a Facebook spokesperson said in a statement. "We’re continuing to work with health experts to keep pace with the evolving nature of the pandemic and regularly update our policies as new facts and trends emerge."

Loosely translated: Since the guys we like are not claiming this is bullshit anymore, we won't scrub it from our apps anymore either. We continue to promote the same position as liberals and socialists, and would wear shit on our head if it was the most politically expedient thing to do at the time.

This is an example of why Facebook factchecking needs to stop. There has never been a time during the pandemic that there was a greater probability of the virus coming from a wild animal or the wet market. That's just the line that was being sold.

A big turnaround for Facebook, but what of all those comments that were censored as "misinformation?"

So if Fauci was wrong and Covid 19 came out of a lab in Wuhan what should be done ? Do you think China had a diabolical plan to spread a global pandemic ? To what end ?

How does the Kansas song go...dust in the wind?

So if Fauci was wrong and Covid 19 came out of a lab in Wuhan what should be done ?

The first thing to know is if we (any US institution) funded such risky research and promptly end it. The other thing that would then be on the agenda is to call out all the deniers of such a possibility. That would mean most of our derelict news media. As for China - they have nuclear weapons and that is what prevents them from any accountability. We all know it and most importantly CHINA KNOWS IT.

Do you think China had a diabolical plan to spread a global pandemic ? 

I think it began as an accident. (Like Chernobyl)  I can only look back at the CCP's actions post the outbreak. They quarantined their own people, while allowing others to leave China for other parts of the world. That's what I know.

To what end ?

That's a matter of opinion.


Now I have a question for you: Why did the media and others label the lab leak idea a conspiracy theory?

Why did the media and others label the lab leak idea a conspiracy theory?

I don't know. I think all kinds of conspiracy theories develop when ever there is a major disaster.

The problem is that "conspiracy theory" carries a damning connotation. The correct term would be logical possibility. In this case there were two.


According to the Britannica:

Conspiracy theory , an attempt to explain harmful or tragic events as the result of the actions of a small powerful group. 

britannica

My opinion on the pandemic was pretty much informed at the first time I heard of the virus in January of last year. I'm a channel surfer, so I can't say which news station it was. Regardless, the first information I heard on the virus was, to say the least, bullshit. Some doctor being interviewed, telling viewers that there was nothing to see, as the virus was not nearly as contagious or deadly as the SARS epidemic, while showing numbers indicating that more people had already died in a months time, than did in the entire SARS epidemic. 

Wonder why people question the narrative? Because it stinks on its face. I had never heard of Wuhan, but my inquiring mind wondered if there was a virology lab there, so I did a google search that day. I'll be damned, there was. I don't know where the damn thing originated, but I do know that neither did or does anyone else, from what we've been told. Makes no sense to immediately cross out the virology lab, sitting in the heart of the outbreak, as a source though. But that's the world we live in. I think you are making a logical leap to exclude the lab as a point of origin, but saying it's a possible source is instead coined as conspiracy or misinformation. 

Cherry-picking!    You chopped off the critical explanation of your source:

Conspiracy theory , an attempt to explain harmful or tragic events as the result of the actions of a small powerful group. Such explanations reject the accepted narrative surrounding those events; indeed, the official version may be seen as further proof of the conspiracy .

Conspiracy theories increase in prevalence in periods of widespread anxiety, uncertainty, or hardship , as during wars and economic depressions and in the aftermath of natural disasters like tsunamis, earthquakes, and pandemics. This fact is evidenced by the profusion of conspiracy theories that emerged in the wake of the September 11 attacks in 2001 and by the more than 2,000 volumes on U.S. Pres. John F. Kennedy’s assassination. This suggests that conspiratorial thinking is driven by a strong human desire to make sense of social forces that are self-relevant, important, and threatening.

The content of conspiracy theories is emotionally laden and its alleged discovery can be gratifying. The evidentiary standards for corroborating conspiracy theories are typically weak , and they are usually resistant to falsification . The survivability of conspiracy theories may be aided by psychological biases and by distrust of official sources.

LOL   Rings true to me.

Right you are:  @3.1.7

Contrary to the lie that one person told and others with malice believed the only flights China allowed after January 23rd were humanitrian flights.  You can check the truth of that with any organizations who determiee those statistics. 

Surely you don't believe that China would use its nuclear weapons for anything less than an invasion of its territory, and/or in return for incoming nuclear missiles from elsewhere. 

Is it 'misinformation' if the media reflects the official statements of the Director of the National Intelligence Agency? 

What do you mean by "reflects?"


Brennan, Clapper and Comey all lied to congress without consequence. Official statements are not what we are looking for.

Proof?

Thank you for giving me a cue.

Let's start with Clapper:

1. He Lied Because He ‘Simply Didn’t Understand’ The Question

In an apology   letter   to Sen. Dianne Feinstein written about four months after the hearing, Clapper said he gave the “clearly erroneous” answer because he “simply didn’t think of” the call-record collection.

Even though Clapper had received the committee’s questions the day before his testimony, he maintains he did not realize that Wyden was asking about Section 215 of the Patriot Act, and was answering a question regarding a different program, specifically Section 702 of FISA.

“I didn’t realize what he was talking about,” Clapper   said   at the University of Chicago last May. He repeated the lie again to CNN’s John Berman on Tuesday after news broke that the Trump administration is planning to end the NSA’s spying program.

“I didn’t lie, I made a big mistake and I just simply didn’t understand what I was being asked about. I thought of another surveillance program, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act when I was being asked about Section 215 of the Patriot Act at the time, I just didn’t understand that,” Clapper said.

2. He Lied In the ‘Least Untruthful Manner’

Clapper told MSNBC not that he didn’t understand the question as previously explained, but that Wyden’s question about whether the NSA spies on Americans was a gotcha question equivalent to, “When are you going to stop beating your wife?”

“I responded in what I thought was the most truthful, or least untruthful manner by saying, ‘no.”

3. He Lied to Congress About Leaking Details On the Steele Dossier

A report from the House Intelligence Committee published last May shared that Clapper had leaked to CNN’s Jake Tapper details of a briefing regarding the Christopher Steele dossier given to President Obama and then-President-elect Donald Trump.

“Clapper flatly denied ‘discussing[ing] the dossier [compiled by Steele] or any other intelligence related to Russia hacking of the 2016 election with journalists,” the committee wrote. Clapper then backtracked when asked specifically about his discussions with Tapper. “Clapper subsequently acknowledged discussing the ‘dossier with CNN journalist Jake Tapper,’ and admitted that he might have spoken with other journalists about the same topic.”

To recap: Clapper leaked information about the dossier briefing to Tapper, lied to Congress about leaking, and was then given a contributor contract with CNN a few months later. As Mollie Hemingway   reported , these lies would all eventually prove to be a set-up scheme by Clapper and then-FBI director James Comey to give legitimacy to the fabricated dossier.

4. He Lied about His Communication with CNN

In an attempt to run interference for Clapper’s lies to Congress, The   Washington Post fact checker   unknowingly published yet another lie from Clapper. In a statement to the Post, Clapper said, “The first time I had any interaction with Jake Tapper was on May 14.”

This statement conflicts with both the statements Clapper made to the House Intelligence Committee, and what House Democrats said in their own report about how Clapper talked to Tapper while in office.

We know that President Obama was briefed on the dossier on January 5, 2017, and President-Elect Trump was briefed on January 6, 2017. The transcript of the congressional intelligence committee’s interview of Clapper exposes that his communications with journalists revolved around those January briefings.

HOUSE INTEL: Did you confirm or corroborate the contents of the dossier with CNN journalist Jake Tapper?

MR. CLAPPER: Well, by the time of that, they already knew about it. By the time it was — it was after — I don’t know exactly the sequence there, but it was pretty close to when we briefed it and when it was out all over the place. The media had it by the way. We were kind of behind the power curve, because the media, many media outlets that I understood had that, had the dossier for some time, as did people on the Hill.

thefederalist


Now Brennan:

1) In 2011, Brennan, then the country’s chief counterterrorism adviser, had sworn to Congress that scores of drones strikes abroad had   not   killed a single noncombatant — at a time when both the president and the CIA were both receiving numerous reports of civilian collateral deaths.

2) In 2014, John Brennan, now as CIA director, lied emphatically that the CIA had not illegally accessed the computers of U.S. Senate staffers who were then exploring a CIA role in torturing detainees. Or as he told Andrea Mitchell: “As far as the allegations of the CIA hacking into Senate computers, nothing could be further from the truth. . . . We wouldn’t do that. I mean, that’s just beyond the, you know, the scope of reason in terms of what we do.” Brennan’s chronic deceptions drew the ire of a number of liberal senators, some of whom echoed the   Washington Post ’s call for his immediate resignation. After months of prevarications, but only upon release of the CIA inspector general’s report, Brennan apologized to the senators he had deceived.

3) Brennan, in May 2017, as an ex-CIA director, again almost certainly did not tell the truth to Congress when he testified in answer to Representative Trey Gowdy’s questions that he neither knew who had commissioned the Steele dossier nor had the CIA relied on its contents for any action. Yet both the retired National Security Agency director, Michael Rogers, and the former director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, have conceded that the Steele dossier — along with the knowledge that it was a Clinton-campaign-funded product — most certainly   did   help shape the Obama’s intelligence communality interagency assessments and actions, often under the urging of Brennan himself. There are also numerous reports that, despite his denials about knowledge of the dossier, Brennan served as a stealthy conduit to ensure that it was disseminated widely, at least in the sense of meeting in August 2016 with Senator Harry Reid to brief the senator about its unverified contents in hopes that he would pressure the FBI to further its investigations, which Reid did in a call two days later to James Comey.

The list of Brennan’s unprofessional and bizarre behavior could be expanded, such as his weird tweet in reaction to the Trump firing of compromised FBI deputy director Andrew McCabe (who would shortly be recommended for criminal referrals for misleading federal investigators by the nonpartisan inspector general): “When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history. You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America . . . America will triumph over you.” Andy McCabe was not “scapegoated” but found to be likely mendacious enough by the inspector general to warrant a DOJ investigation.

Brennan in 2009 falsely claimed that intelligence agencies had not missed evidence suggesting that Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, a.k.a. the “underwear bomber,” might blow up a U.S. airliner. In 2010, he offered a surreal redefinition of jihad (e.g., “Nor do we describe our enemy as “jihadists” or “Islamists” because jihad is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam, meaning to purify oneself or one’s community”), this from a careerist whose transition from the Bush administration into the Obama administration drew the ire of liberals for his prior prominent defense of enhanced interrogations followed by convenient formidable criticism of them. In 2011, his official statements about the Osama bin Laden raid were contradictory.

nationalreview


James Comey:

During that December 2018 hearing, Rep. Trey Gowdy posed this question to Comey: “Late July of 2016, the FBI did, in fact, open a counterintelligence investigation into, is it fair to say the Trump campaign or Donald Trump himself?”

“It’s not fair to say either of those things, in my recollection,” Comey retorted. “We opened investigations on four Americans to see if there was any connection between those four Americans and the Russian interference efforts. And those four Americans did not include the candidate.”

Comey later reiterated this claim, stating, “I was briefed sometime at the end of July that the FBI had opened counterintelligence investigations of four individuals to see if there was a connection between those—any of those four and the Russian effort.”

However, contrary to Comey’s claim that the FBI had not opened a counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign, the IG report makes clear that the FBI did just that when it launched Crossfire Hurricane on July 31, 2016 .   While in August 2016 the FBI did initiate four separate investigations into individuals connected to the Trump campaign, the IG report explained that Crossfire Hurricane was an “umbrella counterintelligence investigation” that did not identify any subjects or targets. Instead, Crossfire Hurricane sought “to determine whether individual(s) associated with the Trump campaign are witting of and/or coordinating activities with the Government of Russia.”

In fact, as the IG report explained, “some of the early investigative steps taken by the Crossfire Hurricane team immediately after opening the investigation were to develop profiles on each subject; send names of, among others, individuals associated with the Trump campaign to other U.S. government intelligence agencies for any further information.” The IG report further noted that the FBI had classified Crossfire Hurricane “as a ‘sensitive investigative matter,’ or SIM,” “because it involved a campaign and ‘people associated with a campaign.’”

The details included in the IG missive on the various investigative steps taken further illustrates the targeting of the Trump campaign, and possibly even Trump himself. Horowitz reported “that in August 2016, a supervisor of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation participated on behalf of the FBI in a strategic intelligence briefing given by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) to candidate Trump and his national security advisors. The FBI viewed the briefing of candidate Trump and his advisors as a possible opportunity to collect information potentially relevant to the Crossfire Hurricane and Flynn investigations.”

The IG report added that after the briefing, the FBI “supervisor memorialized the results of the briefing in an official FBI document, including instances where he was engaged by Trump and Flynn, as well as anything he considered related to the FBI or pertinent to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.”

So, not only did the Obama administration’s FBI target the Trump campaign in the heat of the 2016 presidential election, but they used an intelligence briefing of candidate Trump to gather “evidence,” and even memorialized Trump’s comments in official FBI documents related to the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

Average Americans writhe at the idea of the FBI investigating a political opponent. But when the revelation is buried in nearly 500 pages of bureaucratic bloviation, the impact is not nearly the same as, say, the FBI director verbally acknowledging on television that his organization had launched an investigation into the Republican presidential candidate’s campaign. That might not be treason, but “not treason” isn’t exactly a standard of conduct to celebrate.

thefederalist




Three strikes and you're out!

What do you mean by "reflects?"

Would you prefer 'reports' Vic? 

Brennan, Clapper and Comey all lied to congress without consequence.

Sounds like the Trump DOJ were incompetent. 

Official statements are not what we are looking for.

So is it your posit that the media shouldn't have relied on statements by the Director of the National Security Agency? 

Maybe there should also be an investigation as to how and why a modern, scientifically advanced, tachnologically adept, "superior" nation that considers itself the number one nation in the world, that was aware in January 2020 of the infection on its shores, was capable of suffering almost 600,000 deaths and was incapable of controlling the virus until it could do so only by massive numbers of vaccine injections.

was incapable of controlling the virus until it could do so only by massive numbers of vaccine injections.

So how should this nation have controlled it? It was iimpossible to make everyone follow the safety protocols then...or to get the shots now

Why?  Was the nation not of one mind when Pearl Harbour was attacked by Japan?  Was the nation not of one mind when the WTC was attacked?  If there were an actual military invasion of the USA wouldn't there be a coordinated defence applied?  Was the virus not such a common enemy that required such a concerted universally applied solution?  I will echo the words of California Governor Newsom when speaking of the recent mass shooting.."What the hell is wrong in the United States of America? What the hell is wrong with us?"

We're a nation founded on freedom....you know, the old "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" thingy.

Your nation isn't. Bad things will befall you if you buck the system. Just ask Dr. Li Wenliang.

nytimes

"Your nation isn't"

My nation isn't?  Only a person who is brain dead or willfully blind would not comprehend what my avatar means.  I'm merely a guest in China, and even though I'm married to a Chinese resident citizen I have to regularly renew my temporary residence visa.  Since I have to spell it out for you in capital letters:  I AM A CANADIAN, I WAS BORN IN CANADA. MY NATION IS CANADA, I AM NOT A CITIZEN OF ANY OTHER COUNTRY.  Over the years I spent a lot of my time in the United States, even owned a condo in Florida, but that does not make me an American.  GOT IT, Greg?

that was aware in January 2020 of the infection on its shores

So Pelosi and De Blasio should be held accountable for encouraging attendance of Chinese new year festivities in March? Trump's travel ban should have been accepted without question? 

Freedom. Your suggested investigation would lead to freedom. There are trade offs, obviously, when living in our society. You hope people abide by some common sense or moral compass, but there is a chance they will not. This is going to sound callous, but maybe the herd needed thinning a bit. I know some good people, some close friends, that were taken down by this, so I am not suggesting that it hasn't affected a wide array. That said, I'd rather retain the bundle of sticks I still have, than deliver more control to the central government. The vast majority of people took it seriously, stayed at home, social distanced, masked up, etc. Then there are the elected elite. People like Newsome and Pelosi should have been removed immediately for violating lockdown orders they demanded California residents live by. But no. (Note: those two aren't the only ones and indiscretions aren't limited to violation of quarantine orders) The pigs are taking the windfalls for themselves and sleeping in the farmer's house, while the rest of the animals quarrel amongst themselves about which side is better. I'm not very high on delivering more power to the people who are barely accountable as it is. 

I don't disagree with your comment, but I'd like to point out that where I am it did not take a government threat for the citizens to be more concerned with the wellbeing of all than the wellbeing of themselves which led to a quick containment of the virus, and at least Pelosi was not following the suspicion that just because they are Asian, and live in a Chinatown, does not mean they are virus-spreaders to be harrassed and attacked as has been happening in the USA for a while now.

Your government told you what you needed to do...or else.

My government?  I replied to that ignorant comment above in 4.1.3.  As well, I have enough common sense and intelligence to know what to do without having to be told.

Maybe not Buzz. Maybe the Chinese are generally more caring than Americans. Would not surprise me if they were. Still want to hold on to my bundle of sticks though.

I think you are giving Pelosi too much credit. 

If I were Biden I wouldn't release any information the right wing demands. He doesn't have to release it anyway. He's president, he can do whatever he wants to do. 

I wouldn't release any information the right wing demands

Protecting China to "own the right". No surprise. 

The former guy said that presidents can do anything they want. So.....yea, the GOP can go pound sand. 

Trump never said such a thing

Yea, he kinda did...

Too bad they did not demand accountability when Trump caused the deaths of over 500,000 Americans or an investigation into the capitol riot.