Unjust Insinuations: Pfeiffer’s Baseless Remarks on Biden Laptop Scandal

It’s curious to see prominent figures such as Larry Pfeiffer, who famously contributed his signature to the Hunter Biden laptop letter in October 2020, persistently suggesting without a shred of plausible substantiation that ‘the Russians played some role’ in the affair regarding the purportedly incriminating laptop. Pfeiffer, who held the former position of chief of staff to then-CIA director Michael Hayden (a co-signer of the laptop letter), made this unmerited claim on a recent episode of the SpyTalk podcast. Oddly enough, this happened in a wider conversation where Pfeiffer, an ex-intelligence officer, attempted to downplay the importance of the recently declassified information by CIA Director John Ratcliffe and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.

Shady actions of Hunter Biden, son of Joe Biden, have been the subject of multiple New York Post stories shedding light on some mysterious business happenings in China and Ukraine. Much to everyone’s surprise, these stories were significantly suppressed by social media and subjected to self-censorship by mainstream media. Unabashedly, these media outlets only conceded the laptop’s validity after Biden’s election victory, ironically proving that there is indeed such a thing as ‘belated honesty’.

It is noteworthy that whistleblowers from the IRS had previously let slip that the FBI had confirmed the authenticity of the contentious laptop no later than November 2019; a generous timeframe considering its existence was only made public close to a year later. Untroubled by the liberals’ claim was Pfeiffer who, on the August podcast episode, rather nonchalantly commented, ‘I signed the letter at the time’ he further added that there were unnamed others who veiled their identities whilst signing the infamous document.

Pfeiffer continued, saying he had engaged with four people the most during the signing of the scandalous letter, namely Marc Morell, Marc Polymeropoulos, Kristin Wood, and Nick Shapiro. For the record, Kristin Wood had served the CIA as an officer, and Nick Shapiro had been a staunch ally of former CIA director John Brennan for quite some time.

Perplexingly, Pfeiffer stated, “It’s public record that in those emails it said, hey, by the way, we think this will help Biden, give him a talking point in the debate that’s coming up.” Indeed, the manner of writing the letter was cleverly planned so as not to directly endorse a candidate, and stopped short of explicitly asking for votes to be cast in favor of Joe Biden.

An odd conclusion was reached in a report released by Biden’s ODNI in March of 2021. It asserts that ‘Russian state media, trolls, and online proxies,’ which included those directed by Russian intelligence, lead a campaign of negative content targeting Joe and Hunter Biden. Yet, it strategically omitted any reference to the laptop story about Hunter Biden, and failed to reach any publicly known conclusions.

Interestingly, even a number of media figures such as MSNBC’s Chris Hayes and NPR initially declared in early 2021 that the ODNI report had shrugged off the Biden laptop story. Hilariously, they soon were retracting their ill-conceived claims.

Fast forward to the January 2017 assessment by the CIA, FBI, and NSA, they concluded with such ‘high confidence’ that Putin had ordered an influence campaign in 2016, and that Russia worked to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, smear the former Secretary of State Clinton, and adversely affect her electability and potential presidency and developed a clear preference for Trump.

Strikingly, the CIA’s recent review concluded that the earlier judgement that Putin ‘aspired’ to help Trump clinch the victory ‘did not merit the ‘high confidence’ level that CIA and FBI attached to it.’ This suggests that the confidence earlier placed in the notion that Russia favored Trump in their pursuit of information warfare was grossly overstated.

The January 2017 ICA report itself made it clear that the distinction between support and aspiration made a significant difference, suggesting a possible twist of narrative aimed to undermine the Trump campaign.

Adding interesting yet confusing cherry on top, the ODNI’s ‘Intelligence Community Directive 203′ stresses the need for confidence levels in its analytic products. It talks about indications and explanations being necessary for uncertainties associated with significant analytic judgements, specifically the occurrence likelihood an event or development, and the associated analysts’ confidence.

This is substantial information, especially considering the petty discourse regarding President Trump and his alleged connections to Russian efforts. It shows a general trend of liberal-leaning media and intelligence services insinuating unwarranted connections and spinning narratives to influence public opinion in a way beneficial to their own agendas.

With the directive in mind, it becomes clear that certain elements within the intelligence community are keen on emphasizing their ‘confidence’ in certain judgements, irrespective of the quality or lack thereof, of the evidence supporting those judgements.

Reflecting on these events and the bizarre insistence on preaching their version by Biden and his team, it paints a clear picture of the blatant distraction tactics used by them to redirect attention from serious questions regarding credibility.

Fearing exposure of their unflattering reality, evidence hints at desperate attempts by these elements within intelligence agencies and media outlets who apparently scored an ‘own goal’ by admitting to the authenticity of the laptop after a secured election victory, only raising more questions.

Finally, it’s impossible to not wonder if Pfeiffer too continues to murmur ‘the Russians played some role’ in an effort, albeit futile, to further obscure the undeniable truth underlying this whole saga.