A bombshell report by The Wall Street Journal has revealed that key FBI and Pentagon scientists were sidelined during a crucial 2021 intelligence briefing to President Joe Biden about the origins of COVID-19. These scientists, who supported the lab-leak theory, were allegedly prevented from presenting their findings, fueling accusations of political bias in handling the pandemic’s origins.
In August 2021, the intelligence community was tasked with presenting its findings to President Biden regarding the origins of the virus. Despite the FBI’s conclusion with “moderate confidence” that a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) was likely, the agency was excluded from the briefing. Pentagon scientists, who provided genomic analyses suggesting human engineering, were also sidelined.
Jason Bannan, a microbiologist who worked at the FBI for nearly 20 years, told The Journal that he was prepared to brief Biden but was never given the chance. “Being the only agency that assessed that a laboratory origin was more likely, we anticipated the FBI would be asked to attend the briefing,” said Bannan. “I find it surprising that the White House didn’t ask.”
This exclusion appears to have been part of a broader effort to prioritize the zoonotic origins theory, which posits that the virus jumped from animals to humans naturally, over the lab-leak hypothesis. Critics argue this narrative shift served to deflect blame from the Chinese government and American institutions involved in gain-of-function research at the WIV.
The sidelining of dissenting voices was not limited to the FBI. Scientists at the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) who conducted genomic analysis of the virus faced similar roadblocks. Their work indicated that the virus’s spike protein showed evidence of human engineering, consistent with gain-of-function research.
These scientists—John Hardham, Robert Cutlip, and Jean-Paul Chretien—highlighted that the virus’s genomic features were inconsistent with natural evolution. However, their findings were glossed over in the final intelligence community report.
The Pentagon trio’s insights were further suppressed when their superiors ordered them to cease sharing their work with the FBI. Proposed edits to the final report that emphasized the lab-leak theory were also excluded from the briefing presented to Biden.
The exclusion of lab-leak evidence coincided with a broader effort by the Biden administration and certain scientific institutions to downplay the theory. Early in the pandemic, social media platforms censored discussions of a potential lab leak, often labeling them as conspiracy theories.
The National Intelligence Council (NIC), which prepared the final report for Biden, reportedly included a chart comparing COVID-19 to past zoonotic outbreaks. FBI scientists objected, arguing the chart overlooked critical differences in the virus’s contagiousness and genomic structure. Despite these objections, the NIC’s report ultimately concluded with “low confidence” that the virus resulted from a cross-species leap.
Former CIA Deputy Director Avril Haines, who led the briefing, defended the process, claiming divergent viewpoints were fairly represented. However, critics, including Bannan, argue the suppression of dissenting evidence undermines the credibility of the findings.
Bannan and other experts have criticized the apparent sidelining of subject-matter specialists. “The scientists who had the subject matter expertise were silenced,” one source familiar with the investigation told the New York Post.
This pattern of suppression extended to specific theories. For example, FBI scientists pointed to research by WIV scientist Yu Ping, which suggested the virus originated in Yunnan province. The zoonotic origins theory, however, faced a significant obstacle: the initial outbreak occurred 1,000 miles away in Wuhan, home to the WIV.
Pentagon experts also clashed with proponents of the natural origins theory. Their findings indicated that techniques described in a 2008 WIV paper were used to engineer the virus’s spike protein—evidence strongly pointing to lab manipulation.
Calls to revisit the dismissed evidence are growing. “What ended up on the intelligence community’s cutting-room floor needs to be re-examined,” Bannan insisted.
The controversy over the origins of COVID-19 is not new. In 2020, then-President Donald Trump stated he had seen evidence suggesting a lab leak, a claim dismissed by many as politically motivated. However, as more evidence emerges, the lab-leak theory has gained traction among scientists and intelligence experts.
FBI Director Christopher Wray said in February 2023 that the bureau continues to assess the lab-leak theory as the most likely explanation. “The Chinese government… has been doing its best to try to thwart and obfuscate the work here,” Wray said. “And that’s unfortunate for everybody.”
The Wall Street Journal report has reignited debates about the pandemic’s origins and the role politics played in shaping the narrative. Critics argue that the suppression of evidence not only hindered scientific inquiry but also eroded public trust in government institutions.
As calls for transparency grow, many believe a thorough re-examination of the excluded evidence is essential. Whether this leads to new conclusions or accountability for the mishandling of the investigation remains to be seen.
The origins of COVID-19 continue to be a contentious issue, with far-reaching implications for science, public health, and global politics. The sidelining of critical evidence raises serious questions about the integrity of the processes used to uncover the truth. For now, the debate rages on.
1 Comment
The ‘LAB-LEAK’ not only seems the most likely origin of the “free-running virus” (which it should not be) and puts the finger of suspicion clearly to WuHan. Now, we might wonder: What are the Pentagon and FBI trying to find in this now famous “gain-of-function”? – And doing such ‘weapons’ research’ together with “old friend China? That is almost as bad as doing it together with Bandera-Fanatics! – and they’ve done that, too!
What exactly were they doing together with the “Red Army”? -And what with the admirers of Hitler’s Chief Collaborator in Ukraine? – The thought of it disturbs my sleep.