"Officials said the agency was not bending its views to a new boss, and that the new assessment had been in the works for some time."
The Department of Energy concluded with low confidence that it was a lab leak.
The FBI concluded with moderate confidence that it was a lab leak.
The CIA's new report also concludes that they have low confidence that it was a lab leak.
It's important to note that low confidence is a positive number, not a negative number.
The wet market theory loses some credibility given some data points, but the lab leak theory remains plausible.
China has had lab leak origins in the past, so this would not have been unprecedented.
China obstructed and delayed the investigation.
Whether it leaked from a lab or not, China covered it up. China covering it up is not necessarily evidence that it was a lab leak. If there was any truth to it (which they may not even know), they probably wouldn't want it reflecting poorly on the state. China is big on "social harmony", so you don't have the right to know.
Whatever happened wasn't necessarily intentional. China made some deeply embarrassing and shameful decisions around this time and they won't want to promote them, but they were also not alone in making mistakes.
If China concluded it was a lab leak internally and shared that, there wouldn't have been as much need for the world to speculate, analyze and investigate so much which only hurt China's reputation more.
Coincidences occur, serendipity occurs. Most people have experienced one. As a result, proximity to the lab is not solid proof, but it is not the only datapoint either.
If China was more transparent and cooperative, there could have been more information to make higher confidence conclusions with.