Thread by @OptimisticCon

This is going to be really unpopular, & it's no excuse about the evident corruption at FBI & DOJ.
But it's true.
1. Ratcliffe did his job, even if it was weak sauce. His job was to make an *intel* statement on the propaganda statement from the "51 officials."
Such a... 1/13

https://twitter.com/HansMahncke/status/1505302179833434117

...statement by the DNI had to be about *intel.* It cd NOT legitimately be about confirming/vouching for laptop origin or contents. Not intel's lane.
Nor could he state it wasn't Russian disinfo. He could say there was no intel to support that assessment.
His assessment... 2/13

...on that matter - whether there was intel to support the 51's statement - was definitive. No other assessment would have been.
2. FBI might well have said more than "we have nothing to add to DNI's comments." It's not what folks would have wanted; i.e., full-throated... 3/13

...endorsement of NY Post story about laptop & contents. FBI couldn't do that. FBI doesn't litigate such evidence in public.
But FBI could have acknowledged having the laptop & made a pro forma statement about not being able to discuss it further.
My guess:... 4/13

...that's where the corruption kicked in. Not addressing the laptop at all benefited Biden.
Any affirmative statement about having it would have kept story alive & prompted lots of questions about it before the election. That would have benefited Trump.
We know what FBI... 5/13

...chose to do.
3. FBI was never going to say it wasn't Russian disinfo. Neither was DNI. At most, Ratcliffe's answer was the justifiable statement: there was no intel to support that assertion by the 51.
4. The slimy thing here was the 51 & media publishing their... 6/13

...asinine claim about Russian disinfo. Everyone involved in that knew DNI & FBI/DOJ would be constrained in what they could say. Even if it might affect the election, it's not actually the job of fed agencies to repudiate things said by private citizens.
5. If I'd been... 7/13

...Ratcliffe, I would have had no fear of saying the profile of the laptop situation didn't look like any Russian disinfo op I'd ever seen. But that's b/c I'm an intel professional & competent to render such a judgment & discuss it in abstract. My bottom line would still... 8/13

...have been exactly what Ratcliffe said.
6. Media are badly at fault here for not pursuing the story. FBI I think took advantage of its lawful reticence about evidence & investigations to give Biden an assist.
The core problem is the 51 who gutted intel like a fish... 9/13

...to make an (absurd) analytical statement that would seem to justify media ignoring the laptop (& larger Biden story).
The 51 didn't have "intel" any more than the DNI did. In a formal sense, all they did was purport to analyze the NY post story.
In doing so... 10/13

...they abused the reputation of the IC for political effect.
It was convenient for the "deep state" to do things this way. Whoever was responding to the crisis created by the Hunter Biden laptop knew it would be outside the lane & legit practices of both the DNI and FBI... 11/13

...to publicly *refute* the 51's claim.
That's the cheap, disgusting core of the matter. The 51 could get away with it, for long enough to get past the election, & that's *because of* agency standards that normally are a net positive.
In this case the standards served to... 12/13

...keep a lie (by the 51 & their collaborators) from being exposed.
We can hope the public will learn the obvious lesson from that. I think a lot of people have.
13/13