Former Attorney General William Barr told Fox News reporter Brian Kilmeade that the 51 intelligence officers who published a letter weeks before the 2020 election claimed that the New York Post’s story about Hunter Biden’s laptop are “political whores.”
In an interview on his radio show, Kilmeade played a clip of a young college student from the University of Chicago asking the editor of The Atlantic, “Do you think the media acted inappropriately when they dismissed Hunter Biden’s laptop as Russian disinformation?
“My problem with Hunter Biden’s laptop is I think it’s totally irrelevant,” The Atlantic editor answered.
Kilmeade was in disbelief that the editor responded so bluntly, reflecting that it was Democrats in 2016 that were accusing Trump of Russian collusion.
The Daily Wire reports:
“This was far more consequential than that,” Barr declared. “All the media platforms and the mainstream media essentially agreeing to keep this out of the news and keep the American people ignorant of business deals. Putting aside the issue of whether there was criminality — I’m not addressing that, but propriety, ethics, cashing in on the office. Potentially giving grounds for blackmail and so forth, of course the American people were entitled to know about that before the election.”
“And they said, ‘Well, it’s just disinformation,’” Kilmeade remarked. “What about the 51 intel experts, from Michael Hayden, who served in a Republican administration, to Leon Panetta, some guy that comes off as somewhat balanced, former Republican, former CIA director, to Mike Morell, all saying this is classic Russian disinformation. You never believed that. And why would 51 people, many very respected, put their name on a letter like that?”
“Because they’re political whores,” Barr said bluntly. “And it was wrong for them even to put out a letter because they didn’t know the facts. They had zero information; they did it as a political ploy to help Biden win the election.”
Barr later stated, “One of the funniest things about this whole thing is the media saying, ‘We’re finally now able to authenticate it.’ That could have been authenticated within one or two hours. As you say, there are emails there, you call up people, even people who are tangential, and say, ‘Did you send this email?’ And they’d say yes, and then it would start verifying that this was authentic. And that could have been done quickly. Less than 24 hours they could have had a good idea whether it was authentic or not. How long did it take them?
