David Priess vs. Bret Baier, Priess's Waterloo edition

David Priess made a huge mistake by agreeing to getting interviewed by Bret Baier. Baier pressed Priess on the now-infamous intelligence analysts' statement that said the original Hunter Biden laptop story "had all the earmarks" of a Russian disinformation campaign. Baier asked Priess "You signed on to this open letter that was published by Politico. Why did you sign on to that?" After that, the fight started.

The article continued, saying "Priess replied that he and the other signatories' expertise brought them to the conclusion that Hunter's laptop story had 'all the classic earmarks' of being Russian interference. He cited that the signatories did not claim it was 'disinformation' or false, but that it seemed like a machination Moscow would partake in."

At that point, Baier understood that he was being fed a load of BS so he replied "It was not true" before noting that "Biden said later that October 'There are 50 former national intelligence folks who said that what this he's accusing me of is a Russian plant.'"

This is proof positive that the Intelligence Community, aka the IC, was weaponized against then President Trump.

Here's the entire contentious interview:

When prompted to respond, Priess said he would let Biden "speak for himself" and reiterated he stands by signing onto the letter and the view the laptop development had the earmarks of a Russian interference operation; "the way it was disseminated and propagated through media. Those words are still true. It has all the classic earmarks," he said.

Baier then pressed Priess to consider whether the letter affected anything, like the trajectory of the race.

"I don't know if it affected anything. We don't analyze American political environments. What we are trying to do is point out that this has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information campaign. Not to say it's Russian disinformation, but to say that the propagation through American media and international media has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information campaign, because we've seen it over and over and over again. [The Kremlin] loves to sow these kind of divisions and exacerbate them. That's not American. That's Russian."

Let's get this perfectly clear. The intent of these 50 agents was to affect the trajectory of the 2020 presidential race. Unfortunately, they succeeded.