So what you're saying is that we shouldn't put our trust into people who pride themselves on being master manipulators and deceivers?

The head of a underpants subscription telemarketing firm is probably trusting his underlings more than the head of the CIA.

Magical Mormon underpants?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temple_garment

Or, in a parallel universe, there's an old president who preemptively pardoned the person who might have been involved in GOF research leading to a lab leak.

It is an interesting angle, because now he could potentially be subpoenaed by Congress or anyone else, and it seems unlikely that he would perjure himself over anything after 2014.

All he needs to do is commit a federal crime right away.

That pardon means that person is available for subpoena and cannot decline to answer any question.

Unless there's another crime outside the scope of the pardon. For example, crimes within the statute of limitations prior to the pardon, new crimes after the pardon, or state level crimes during the period of the pardon.

We shouldn’t be confident in this specific assessment because the agency making it isn’t either:

> The agency made its new assessment with “low confidence,” which means the intelligence behind it is fragmentary and incomplete.

> the main intelligence agency changes its position radically

When did the CIA come out against lab leak? Everyone's been spitballing low- and moderate-confidence guesses.

And, an equally interesting question: why should we be confident in any claim they are making now?

Normally I would disregard their findings. However, the FBI, former head of the CDC, and Congressional panel all came to the same conclusion: Covid was made in a lab.

Even if the lab leak theory is true, why Trump was so confident about it? Does he have sources that CIA does not? I would be so confident in it only in the case if I myself caused that virus leak...

Only one lab in the world doing GoF experiments on this specific furin cleavage site AND a random natural mutation happens within a few KM of this lab on this specific furin cleavage site. What are the odds of this happening? Very close to zero.

Trump wasn't confident in the theory. He is not confident in anything. He does not care about the truth or falsity of anything he says. He only cares about it serving his interests.

Don’t you people tire of this? Do you really not realize why he just won every contest we have?

He was the president at the time - yes - he had better info than you. The people saying it wasn’t a lab leak had motivation to do so - and the head of that group just took a president pardon for their efforts.

A narcissist like Trump doesn't have better information than I do.

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.

“I have better information than the president of the United States… HE is a narcissist”

Yep. Just checking to make sure I’m following along correctly.

The president has access to information that I do not. It's wasted on him. You know this as well as I.

Well, if there is one thing about Trump that everyone would agree on, it is that he is very self confident in everything he says.

He has the voices in his head.

Considering what is known about that agency's activities under Reagan, I think everyone lost confidence about any claims they made before I was even born.

That's just it. It was a very long time ago. Not many CIA employees are still there.

That's not reason to trust it. But "a bad thing happened in the 80s and that's all I need to know" isn't a compelling argument either.

I'm missing the part where there has been institutional reform since then. Otherwise, the mandate and policies that fostered those affairs are still in place, no?

The agency has been through several reforms since then, most notably the complete reorg after 9/11.

Like I said, that's not the same as knowing that they're following the rules now. But it isn't the same organization by any stretch.

Essentially goes back to the start, bunch of rich nepo kids playing spy. See Sidney Gottlieb for a fun story.

Yes that's what I thought but it does say it was an analysis project started by Biden. The timing is suspicious, true.

But yeah this topic is extremely politicised (not just by the US mind you, but also by China). So it's hard to say what's the truth. I doubt we'll ever find it.

The lab leak theory does make sense though IMO. I wouldn't be surprised if it were true. But yeah, I take this at face value. And to be honest I'm just really happy that this is all behind us.

Doesn't feel like a radical change in position to me. They said they weren't sure either way previously. In this statement they're explicitly calling it "low-confidence."

The FBI & Energy Department have both said that they think it's a lab leak.

In fact the government has been quietly acknowledging that the lab leak has merit for about two years now.

Changes its position radically? The FBI came out saying it had moderate confidence in the lab leak theory in 2023, right in the middle of the Biden administration [0]. The DOE came out with their own assessment a few days earlier [1]. The CIA's position was hiterto "we're not yet sure", and now it's "we still aren't sure but we're leaning towards lab leak". That's not a radical shift, it's a very slight shift in the direction that other three-letter agencies have been leaning for years.

There were almost certainly some politics involved in the decision to release the report now, but it's not like the CIA were staunch advocates for zoonotic origins up until now, and again: Biden's FBI and DOE were already leaning this way!

[0] https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/28/politics/wray-fbi-covid-origi...

[1] https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/26/politics/covid-lab-leak-wuhan...

I would like to jump on the band wagon and point out that this is an absolutely minuscule shift in position.

> The C.I.A. has said for years that it did not have enough information to conclude whether the Covid pandemic emerged naturally from a wet market in Wuhan, China, or from an accidental leak at a research lab there.

From "we don't know if it was a lab leak or spread from the market" to "we think it maybe is". Sure, they started this investigation with Biden, but just released it a couple of days ago AND they have even low confidence on it. So, why release it if the confidence is low? Why now? The answer is: new government, new conclusions.

They went from uncertain to low certainty. It's hard to imagine a smaller shift in position than that, and thus the dog-pile. You're trying to drag me into some other debate entirely.