Tom Cotton Criticizes Liberal Media’s Dismissal of Lab Leak Theory Following CIA Announcement

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., criticized the liberal press on Saturday following the release of a new CIA assessment suggesting that the COVID-19 pandemic likely originated from an accidental lab leak in China. Cotton stated, “I’ve said from the beginning that Covid likely originated in the Wuhan labs. Communist China covered it up and the liberal media covered for them. I’m pleased the CIA concluded in the final days of the Biden administration that the lab-leak theory is the most plausible explanation of Covid’s origins and I commend Director Ratcliffe for fulfilling his promise to release this conclusion. Now, the most important thing is to make China pay for unleashing a plague on the world.”

The CIA’s assessment, released by new director John Ratcliffe, was made with “low confidence” as part of a review conducted during the Biden administration. The agency noted that while the lab-leak theory is plausible, the so-called “natural origin” theory remains a possibility. A CIA spokesperson explained, “CIA assesses with low confidence that a research-related origin of the COVID-19 pandemic is more likely than a natural origin based on the available body of reporting. CIA continues to assess that both research-related and natural origin scenarios of the COVID-19 pandemic remain plausible.”

CIA RELEASES NEW ANALYSIS ON COVID ORIGINS FAVORING LAB LEAK THEORY

Cotton, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee, stood out early in 2020 for proclaiming a connection between the pandemic and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, known for its experiments on bat coronaviruses. This institute is located in the same city where the outbreak began, leading to speculation about a potential lab-related origin. Initially, Cotton suggested that COVID could have been a purposeful Chinese bio-weapon, but the prevailing theory among proponents has shifted towards an accidental leak that was subsequently covered up by the Chinese Communist Party.

Cotton’s assertions regarding the lab’s connection to the virus were met with skepticism from many in the liberal media, who labeled them as “fringe,” “a conspiracy theory,” and “debunked.” In a notable turn of events, The Washington Post issued a correction to a 2020 article that used the term “debunked,” acknowledging the lack of a conclusive determination about the virus’s origins.

Other media outlets and fact-checkers have also re-evaluated their initial dismissals of the lab theory, with some journalists admitting that partisan politics influenced their opposition to the theory.

NEW CIA BOSS RATCLIFFE SAYS BIDEN-ERA REPORT BACKING LAB-LEAK THEORY RELEASED TO ‘RESTORE’ TRUST

“I just used common sense,” Cotton said in 2021. “The Chinese Communist Party pointed to an open-air food market as the origin of this virus but they didn’t even sell bats in that market… This virus didn’t emerge in some remote rural village or mountain next to a cave full of bats. It emerged in a city larger than New York, just down the road from labs where we know they were conducting very dangerous research into coronaviruses.”

Ratcliffe, confirmed as CIA director last week, has long advocated for the lab leak theory. In an interview with Breitbart, he emphasized that the assessment of COVID’s origins is part of a broader strategy to “address the threat from China.” He also expressed a desire for the CIA to “get off the sidelines” and take a definitive stance.

In a March 2023 article co-authored with Cliff Sims, Ratcliffe accused the Biden administration of attempting to suppress the growing consensus around the lab leak theory, claiming they were withholding intelligence that could clarify the virus’s origins. He also expressed skepticism about the CIA’s claim of insufficient evidence to reach a conclusion.

In 2023, FBI Director Christopher Wray stated that the bureau believes the lab theory is the most plausible explanation for the pandemic’s origins, while the Department of Energy, during the Biden administration, also expressed “low confidence” in this theory.