Report Corruption
Newsroom /

Inconclusive: Intelligence Report on COVID-19 Origins Comes Up Short.

All Signs Point to Wuhan. So Why Can’t We Get a Consensus?

Photo for: Inconclusive: Intelligence Report on COVID-19 Origins Comes Up Short.

Key Points

  • Assessment unable to conclude whether virus came from animals or a Wuhan lab, according to US media

213 million COVID-19 cases. 4.5 million deaths world-wide. Why can’t we get an answer?

After a 90-day effort, President Biden finally has the intelligence report on the origins of COVID-19. Did it escape from the Wuhan lab? Did it jump from animals to humans? We still don’t know. The report was “inconclusive” and there’s no consensus in the intelligence community. More information may be declassified, but this is all we have for now.

The absence of a solid conclusion doesn’t mean that there isn’t strong evidence for the lab leak theory. In fact, former Trump Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe is all but certain that’s exactly what happened.

“All the intelligence is on one side of the ledger. It all points to the origins of the Wuhan virus being from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. There’s no intelligence that points to this being naturally occurring,” Ratcliffe told Fox News’ Laura Ingraham.

“None of [the intelligence] points to that this was some naturally occurring virus…unfortunately, many of us in the intelligence community that were there at the time really felt like the Wuhan Institute of Virology was more than just a probability it was always close to a certainty and I still feel that way having seen all of the intelligence,” Ratcliffe added.

The lab leak theory, once a fringe favorite, is now considered a very likely scenario – even by scientists who toured the Wuhan lab for the World Health Organization. “Dr. Peter Ben Embarek, who led a team of international scientists on a WHO mission to China in January, admitted he now considers the possibility a “probable hypothesis,” the New York Post reports.

At the time, the Chinese were far from transparent with Embarek and his team, restricting access to certain books and documents. “It’s probably because it means that there is a human error behind such an incident, and they are not very happy to admit it,” Embarek says.

“I don’t know any credible scientists that are still promoting the idea that this was naturally occurring,” Ratcliffe tells Ingraham, before switching topics.

“It seems like we’re giving a free pass to China,” Ingraham says.

And she’s absolutely right.