Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was grilled for 14 hours by the coronavirus pandemic subcommittee in January. During the lengthy interview, Fauci acknowledged that he was unaware of any scientific studies showing that mask wearing on children was effective or that the six-foot social distancing guidelines that effectively closed schools, churches and businesses were effective in curbing the spread of the coronavirus. Fauci also acknowledged that the lab leak claim was not a conspiracy theory. Previously proposed.
Blaze TV’s “Cover-up” appeared before the committee on Monday to recount those confessions and his role in overseeing the funding of lethal gain-of-function experiments.
“Because I said so.” That has never been enough for Americans, and it never will be enough.
Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio)
Fauci said: It begins, “Intentionally or not, you have become so powerful that any voice that disagrees with you has been banned and censored repeatedly on social media and most traditional media. This is why so many Americans are outraged – because this is fundamentally un-American.”
“‘Because I said so.’ That has never been enough for Americans, and it never will be enough,” Wenstrup added. “Americans don’t want to be brainwashed. They want to be educated.”
The hearing could have been educational, but the Democratic committee members chose the latter, praising Fauci, defending his favorite causes and attacking his political opponents.
Meanwhile, Republican lawmakers have tried to corner Dr. Fauci with low-powered firepower, with little success.
Here are five key takeaways from the Fauci hearing.
1. It’s not that effective after all
When asked directly by Wenstrup whether the vaccine “stopped the virus from being transmitted,” Fauci replied, “That’s a complicated question, because initially, the first iterations of the vaccine were effective. They weren’t 100% effective, they weren’t highly effective, but they clearly prevented transmission and then subsequent transmission.”
“I have absolute confidence in the safety and effectiveness of this vaccine.”
“But it’s important to note that what we didn’t know initially, but which has become clear as the months have gone on, is that you have a relatively limited duration of protection against infection and transmission, but you have a much longer duration of protection against severe illness, hospitalization and death,” Fauci said. “Initially, the feeling was that it was, in fact, preventing infection and transmission.”
After discovering Fauci
Not Denied Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) questioned Dr. Fauci about the strict COVID measures he has promoted throughout the pandemic, but also about vaccination mandates and the effectiveness of vaccines.
Fauci reiterated that “it clearly prevented a certain percentage of people from getting infected, but the prevention did not last long.”
Fauci has been one of the most visible and consistent voices of the “safe and effective” mantra.
Claimed “I am extremely confident in the safety and effectiveness of this vaccine and would like to encourage everyone who has the opportunity to get vaccinated so that we can lay a veil of protection over the country and bring an end to the pandemic,” he said in December 2020.
2. Fauci: An innocent victim
Republicans in Congress slammed the former NIAID director for funding dangerous experiments that may have triggered the pandemic and for spreading lies for years, while Democrats portrayed Fauci as an innocent victim and, as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) did, used the opportunity to attack former President Donald Trump and other Republicans.
Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) told Fauci, “You’re a human being just like us.”[s] Better.”
“I’ve seen your dedication not just to science but to the benefit of society as a whole,” Dingell said.
“You were a hero to so many people for 54 years.”
After praising Fauci, Dingell gave him the opportunity to air his grievances about the criticism and threats he has faced.
Democratic Reps. Dingell, Robert Garcia (California), Jill Tokuda (Hawaii), Catherine Kastl (Florida), Raul Ruiz (California) and Kweisi Mfume (Maryland) have written hagiographies as well.
“We owe you an apology for dragging you through the mud,” Mfume said.
“You’ve been a hero to so many people for 54 years,” Mfume continued. “You’re a world-renowned scientist and an American patriot.”
Mfume made no mention of Americans harmed by the vaccine, instead speaking abstractly of “thousands of American lives.” [that] He said they “might have been saved” if they hadn’t believed so-called conspiracy theories during the pandemic.
After paying tribute to Fauci, Rep. Garcia asked, “Should the American people listen to America’s brightest and best doctors and scientists, or should they listen to podcasters, conspiracy theorists and crazy Facebook memes?”
“Listening to these people will only harm people by denying them life-saving interventions,” said Fauci, one of the so-called experts.
Warned Against the use of ivermectin to fight COVID-19.
Fauci blamed unvaccinated people for an estimated 200,000 to 300,000 deaths in the United States alone.
3. Fauci neglected his “inner circle”
Oversight committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) said Fauci’s “close aides” have a “pattern of troubling behavior” and that he
David M. Mollensa senior scientific adviser to the NIAID director, and Fauci’s former chief of staff were named as possible culprits.
Comer pressed Fauci about whether Morels violated NIH policy by using a personal email address for official business, and Fauci seemed ready to denounce his former adviser and frequent contact, suggesting that Morels did indeed violate NIH policy by using a personal email address to avoid transparency.
“Does deleting records to purposefully evade FOIA violate NIAID policy?”
“Yes,” Fauci replied.
“It was wrong, inappropriate and in violation of policy.”
“On April 28, 2020, Dr. Morens edited EcoHealth’s press release regarding the grant termination. Does this violate policy?” Comer asked.
“It was inappropriate for him to do that on behalf of a grant recipient, especially from a conflict of interest standpoint,” Fauci said.
“On March 29, 2021, Dr. Morens edited the letter that Dr. Daszak was planning to send to NIH. Does this violate policy?” Comer asked.
“Yes, that’s right,” Fauci replied.
“On October 25, 2021, Dr. Brady provided Dr. Daszak with advice on how to mislead NIH regarding EcoHealth’s delayed progress reporting. Does this violate policy?” Comer asked.
“That was wrong, that was inappropriate and that violated policy,” Fauci said.
“On December 7, 2021, Dr. Morens wrote to the Chairman of the Board of EcoHealth, informing Dr. Daszak that he would like to ‘please give us a word.’ Does this violate policy?” Comer asked.
“They shouldn’t have done that, and it was wrong,” Fauci said. “I don’t know the specific policy, but I think it was a violation of policy. They shouldn’t have done that.”
4. Fauci denies funding gain-of-function research
Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) asked Fauci whether the National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
“I wouldn’t consider this a risky gain-of-function study.”
“I wouldn’t describe it that way,” Fauci said, contradicting the NIH description. “The National Institutes of Health, through grants to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, funded emerging infectious disease surveillance and feasibility research. I wouldn’t describe it as dangerous gain-of-function research.”
In another part of his testimony on Monday, Fauci said
Said “By regulatory and operational definition, [Proposed Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens]NIH did not fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”
Lesko quoted NIH Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak as acknowledging that “the Wuhan Institute of Virology did not provide us with the data and research notes that we requested.” [which] It has certainly hindered our ability to understand what is actually going on in the experiments that we’ve been discussing.”
Acknowledging the institute’s notorious lack of transparency, Lesko asked Fauci how he could be so sure that the National Institutes of Health had not funded gain-of-function research on coronaviruses in China, given the reporting shortcomings by its subcontractor, EcoHealth Alliance.
Fauci reiterated that the NIH does not fund the deadly research in question, which is the specialty of EcoHealth Alliance subcontractors.
5. Downplaying the possibility of a lab leak
Fauci on Monday called the idea that a lab leak was covered up “absurd.”
In his opening statement, Fauci said he was informed on January 31, 2020, “through calls with Jeremy Farrar, then director of the UK’s Wellcome Trust, and then with Christian Anderson, a distinguished scientist at the Scripps Research Institute, that they and Eddie Holmes, a world-renowned evolutionary biologist in Australia, were concerned that the genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 indicated that the virus may have been engineered in a laboratory.”
The next day, Fauci said he participated in a conference call with approximately a dozen international virologists to “discuss this possibility and the possibility of a release from an animal reservoir.”
Despite indications to the contrary, Fauci maintained that “the accusation that I bribed scientists with millions of dollars in grants to change their minds is completely false and completely absurd. I have no involvement in the content of the published papers,” referring to a study published in the journal Nature in March 2020 called “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2.”
“The second issue is the false accusation that I tried to cover up the possibility that the virus originated in a laboratory. In fact, the truth is just the opposite,” Fauci continued. “I have repeatedly said that I am completely open to either possibility, and would be happy to accept conclusive evidence to prove or disprove either theory.”
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) then asked Fauci whether he had downplayed the lab leak claims because he funded the experimental virus at the Wuhan lab, a claim Fauci acknowledged, but Sen. Raul Ruiz raised doubts in his closing remarks.
Fauci responded dismissively, indignant at suggestions that he was trying to downplay the possibility that he had a fingerprint on a study that has killed millions of Americans.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censorship and sign up for our newsletter to get stories like this directly to your inbox. Register here!
