Wednesday, June 9, 2021

Today In Faucigate

Or should it be Sciencegate--since that's what Fauci claims it's really all about?

Fauci is flailing. He's attempting scare tactics, invoking the Dread Variants--which turn out to be most threatening to ... those who got vaxxed. Go figure, except that knowledgeable people in the field--immunologists and virologists, not amateurs like Fauci--actually DID figure that out. And tried to tell us about it.

His other tactic is to double down on wearing the mantle of science--woops, Science. With a capital "S", so it'll seem as big as Fauci's ego. Here's the money quote, but you can indulge yourselves with more at Red State (Fauci Loses It Big Time, Rants Attacking Him Is 'Attacking Science'). Here's Fauci whining to the utterly fatuous Chuck Todd:

“It’s very dangerous, Chuck, because a lot of what you’re seeing as attacks on me quite frankly are attacks on science because all of the things that I have spoken about consistently from the very beginning have been fundamentally based on science….If you are trying to get at me as a public health official and a scientist, you’re really attacking not only Dr. Anthony Fauci, you’re attacking science. And anybody that looks at what’s going on, clearly sees that. You have to be asleep not to see that. That is what’s going on. Science and the truth are being attacked.”

Yes, that's losing it big time, and it's an embarrassment to any real scientist who are left out there. If it's down to this, I have to suspect he may be a short timer now.

Beyond this silliness, however, there were two items at ZeroHedge that are worth considering. Someone dug up a video of Peter Daszak from 2016 explaining how gain of function research works--and he's explicitly talking about how his "Chinese colleagues" do it. Here's the transcript--I've added the beginning and ending sentences to what appears at the link: Fauci Pal Daszak Admits "Chinese Colleagues" Developing "Killer" Coronaviruses. Note that what Daszak is describing is supposedly how GOF research is used to develop vaccines:

As an example. First of all, we're only looking at viral families that include those that have gone into people from animals. So we narrow it down straightaway.

Then when you get a sequence of a virus, and it looks like a relative of a known nasty pathogen, just like we did with SARS. We found other coronaviruses in bats, a whole host of them, some of them looked very similar to SARS. So we sequenced the spike protein: the protein that attaches to cells. 

Then we ... well I didn’t do this work, but my colleagues in China did the work. You create pseudo particles, you insert the spike proteins from those viruses, see if they bind to human cells. At each step of this you move closer and closer to: this virus could really become pathogenic in people.

So you narrow down the field. You reduce the costs, and you end up with a small number of viruses that really do look like killers.

Then you look in people and you say: The people who live in the region where this animal lives, that are exposed to that virus, do we see antibodies specific ...

Here's the problem with that when you come to SARS Cov 2--Covid. What Daszak's Chinese "colleagues" actually did with virus "backbone" from the "viral family" of coronaviruses is, they inserted four amino acids in a row into the genomic sequence--a process something like forcing magnets to touch. That's what he means by referring to "pseudo-particles." In other words, they created a virus that would never have developed in nature on its own--but which, as other virologists have stated, was "exquisitely" suited to binding exceptionally strongly to human cells. 

In Daszak's words: They create a virus that "could really become pathogenic in people." Please note--this really pathogenic virus could only ever be a lab creation, not a natural development. That's why, when Nobel winning virologist David Baltimore saw the genomic sequence, he called it a "smoking gun." That also means that you will never find in nature antibodies specific to lab creations--only to the viral family.

Did Daszak know back in 2016 that that was what his Chinese "colleagues" were doing, creating viruses that really had no relevance at all to legit vaccine development? We don't know, but what we do know is that when this was pointed out in January, 2020, he and Fauci immediately launched into coverup mode--rather than calling out the reckless lab work in Wuhan.

The next ZeroHedge piece is a republication from Epoch Times by two redoubtable veterans of the Russian Hoax, Jeff Carlson and Hans Mahncke:

Emails Reveal How Influential Articles That Established COVID-19 Natural Origins Theory Were Formed

This is an important article because it pulls together much of what has been coming out over the past week regarding the machinations of Fauci and Daszak at the very beginning of the Covid Panic. Kristian Andersen also emerges as a key player in the coverup of the Wuhan lab origins of Covid--or perhaps it would be more accurate to describe what happened as the suppression of the entire question of the relation of Covid to the Wuhan labs.

The article is carefully and soberly written, providing a wealth of detail. The two authors don't offer much in the way of speculation, sticking to just the facts, so to speak. That being the case, I refer readers to the article for the details and will indulge in a bit of speculation on my own.

What we see from the article is that the entire coverup of Covid origins took shape from about January 31, 2020 to February 6, 2020. In actual fact, it's likely that the operative narrative was agreed upon over a longish weekend: Friday Jan 31 to Monday Feb 3. It was during this time period that someone got to Andersen. Whereas on Jan 31 Andersen was insisting to Fauci in an email that 

SARS-CoV-2 has “unusual features” that “potentially look engineered” and that

the genome of SARS-CoV-2 appears “inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory”.

by Feb 4 Andersen was writing 

“I do wonder if we need to be more firm on the question of engineering. The main crackpot theories going around at the moment relate to this virus being somehow engineered with intent and that is demonstrably not the case. Engineering can mean many things and could be done for either basic research or nefarious reasons, but the data conclusively show that neither was done.”

Note the wording. "Engineered with intent." Andersen appears to be initially suggesting that the tack to take is to argue that Covid was not released intentionally, but in reality there were plenty of reputable scientists to say that there might have been and accidental release. In other words, set up a bit of a straw man. But Andersen understands that, too, and so he concludes by maintaining that "the data conclusively show" NO ENGINEERING WHATSOEVER, NO WAY, NO HOW. That is a complete 180 turn from what he was committing to writing to Fauci just days before.

Interestingly, another coverup participant, Trevor Bedford, sees the difficulties and is quoted with a more cautious suggested wording than Andersen's:

The NASEM response was also shaped by Trevor Bedford, a computational biologist who suggested: 

“1. I wouldn’t mention binding sites here. If you start weighing the evidence there’s a lot to consider for both scenarios. 

2. I would say ‘no evidence of genetic engineering’ full stop.”

"Data conclusively show" means you looked at both sides and came to a conclusion that you're willing to defend come what may. "No evidence" means, well, I didn't see any but, who knows?

The article leaves no doubt at all regarding the rather creepy Daszaks manipulations and pressure tactics. Daszak is shown enlisting support for the anti-science no-engineering narrative from people who, basically, owe him--and who then turn around and say, Hey, I've got no conflicts.

What interests me, however is Kristian Andersen's role. Obviously, the fact that he deleted his entire twitter account suggests that he's had some conversations with a lawyer and is taking steps to try to limit his legal liability. However, the big question to me is, How did Andersen get involved in this coverup to begin with? Consider: If Andersen was ready to stand up to Fauci on Jan 31, that strongly suggests that he doesn't think he has anything to hide. So, then, why did he change his tune so quickly?

We know that Fauci and Daszak had plenty to hide. However, I don't see why anyone would go out on a limb for them, with so much at stake--a pandemic that could potentially kill millions. I would argue that Fauci and Daszak must have had the backing of influential players--people in the Intel Community (including DoD) and politicians. To get Andersen to change his story, to lie for them and to attack and impugn people whom Andersen knew to be honorable scientists, Fauci and Daszak must have had some stronger argument than, 'Hey, fall on your sword for us, we're your friends.'

Next question: What's the state of the coverup in DC? What, in particular, is DoJ and the FBI doing? I have no reason to be optimistic in that regard. The only hope I have there is the possibility that Merrick Garland will be alarmed at all the information that's coming out and will feel he needs to do something to save himself.

If I'm somebody like Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Ron Johnson, Mitch McConnell, my move would probably be to try to get Fauci, Daszak, and Andersen in front of a Senate committee and ask them questions that would force them to take the 5th. I think that at this point--especially after all the yacking Fauci has done--that's a very real possibility. Or they might induce them to refuse to testify at all. It's political theater and that's fine--it could prove to be quite effective.

Public opinion is now against the coverup. I don't see that changing. That's the state of play for now.


  1. There was another ZH article that linked to this tweet, that explains the funding Anderson got after he adopted and promoted the part line.

    Here’s the ZH link.

    Andy S.

  2. Are you sure Mitch McConnell is not part of this? He was part of the election hoax.

    1. I'm n ot sure of anything. Except maybe that Mitch is capable changing sides when it suits.

    2. It’s so difficult to trust or believe anyone now.

  3. It had been very easy to know who to trust; the scientists at major universities who don't have a stake in promoting the vaccines, and doctors who have treated hundreds to thousands of patients with HCQ cocktails or other anti-virals.

  4. Don't know if anyone cares, but here a short YouTube clip on what is supposed to be happening naturally, but cannot with the four positive amino acids in a row.

  5. I'm waiting for a crafty state attorney to pop Fauci's arrogant bubble with charges of attempting to practice medicine without a licence.

    It may sound far fetched but in Florida, regardless of the means of communication, simply presenting yourself as a qualified medical professional while offering medical advise is a felony.

    On second thought, that would take a state standing up to a federal agency... Ha! Nevermind!!!

  6. “Someone dug up a video of Peter Daszak from 2016 explaining how gain of function research works--“ that would be the twenty-year-old Natalie Winters of National Pulse -

    She sometimes co-hosts Bannon’s Warroom.

  7. We don't need these guys in front of the ball less wonders who make up our Senate--we need Nuremberg trials for these mass murderers.

    I suggest starting with Fauci, Birx--where is she?--and the 27 signaturees of The Lancet letter. And the Lancet editorial board. Then the tech people who censored anything that didn't jibe with WHO or CDC or state regulations.

    Let's get going!

  8. "It's political theater and that's fine--it could prove to be quite effective."

    Hahahahaha...oh stop!! You're killing me!! Hahahaha... Republicans in Congress...hahaha...effective...hahaha

    If there is one thing that DC Republicans are superbly gifted at doing, it is taking golden, gift wrapped, slow straight down the middle lobbed softball pitch, nut strewn ground political bombshells and TOTALLY failing to do anything with it. Even when these idiots are given decades of political spankings by Democrats in how to exploit even the merest, flimsiest misstep, Republicans are congenitally incapable of learning a blessed thing from their betters. At this point you have to conclude that they are simply going through the motions. Not sure about Rand Paul or Cruz but I will be absolutely dumbnified if any Republican in Congress does anything of any effect with this.


    1. @Krek

      "If there is one thing that DC Republicans are superbly gifted at doing, it is taking...political bombshells and TOTALLY failing to do anything with it."

      I am sympathetic, and frustrated too. But, I noticed that Sen John Kennedy (R-La) spoke up extensively and eloquently about Fauci's coverup on Hannity last night. In fact, many Republican politicians (yes, Rand Paul and Cruz, but also Johnson, Blackburn, and Hawley and Cotton, and others, and Jordan, Nunes, and Scalise and numerous others in the House) regularly stand up against the Democrats and their lies. But who's listening? Most Americans have jobs and families and lives and aren't glued to the political news every evening.

      When push came to shove in the two impeachments, the Republican Congressional party stood up nearly unanimously in support of President Trump.

      Because Kennedy's party today is a minority in both houses of Congress and because the MSM will not report the Fauci story, or nearly any other Democrat hoax or fantasy, and because the MSM, which holds the megaphone, relentlessly lies and lies and lies, I am somewhat at a loss to know what else you would have Republicans do. Its a dilemma.

      Doesn't the problem really boil down to November 2022?

    2. I get very tired of the "failing to do anything" narrative. There is truth in it when the senate fails to conduct hearings effectively. But the senate is largely a debating society--as intended by the founders. They mostly can't DO anything--as intended by the founders. They can't prosecute. It's next to impossible to pass laws without bipartisan support: 60+. It's purpose is, to a great extent, precisely to conduct political theater. Political theater is a very good thing if it serves the purpose of educating the public. Kennedy, Paul, Cruz, Hawley, and others with that talent have been doing it. It really is about 2022. We the People are the ones who CAN DO SOMETHING.

    3. Which coincidentally enough, is what President Trump is focused like a laser beam on. I think there is hope still in the fact that many many so-called smart people on both sides of the aisle and throughout the uniparty insist on CONTINUING still, despite all the evidence, to underestimate the political abilities of PDJT. Mark A

    4. "Doesn't the problem really boil down to November 2022?"

      Wait... we can vote? When did they fix voting? Beyond that, when did we regain faith in electing "better republicans"?

      What is a better republican?

      I appreciate what you guys are saying but I don't have that kind of optimism. We really didn't "elect" our way into the present situation and I don't believe (even over decades) we will every elect our way out.

      Beyond that.. the only "plan" for change I hear anyone speak about has fallen right back to "check the boxes with a R next to the name"... Ummm how's that idea worked out for the last 165+ years of the party?

      I would say "Uniparty" but that's a over simplification.

      I still say our states are our only hope and it's become overly obvious that they are just as infected with the same party ilk as everywhere else. The only place I am seeing any hope right now (don't faint) is Arizona... Open primaries, a strong independent base and two very weak repub-dem parties is producing some pretty interesting state level political results. It's killing McCain'isum, RINO'isum or whatever you wish to call it.

      If we're going to keep believing in "voting" I am still saying the number one thing "we" could be doing right now is ripping up our affiliated registrations. Most of the two party issue is falling for their propaganda of "must vote R". It's not about elections!!! These cushy voter rolls give way too much comfort to the party in the majority of states we need serious change from. If the parties in GA, PA, WI, MI, FL and TX can keep counting their votes in advance they have very little incentive to do anything.

      Additionally... and I apologize for sounding arrogant but my money is on the majority of these "MAGA" candidates being like the Tea Party darlings cheered into office. Rubio, Gowdy, Lee, Ryan, etc. The head fake and duplicity of "vote R" is giving me serious friggen heartburn and tweaks a nerve in my core that puts my hackles up.

      In my own defence, between Russia, Russia, Russia, Durham, Emailgate, Covid, Wolf, SCOTUS, Jan 6th etc, etc, etc. I'm probably one of the minority that has honestly brick walled into embracing extremism. 🙄

    5. Thank you, Mark! Too many do not understand the purpose and functions of the various parts of our federal government. An explanation like yours is long overdue.

      There is also a tendency to want someone else to DO SOMETHING when it is up to us. We the People.

    6. Don't you mean, When did WE fix voting?

      There are some reasons for optimism. One is from an article today at NRO--which I didn't read because I don't give traffic to them--but the gist of the heading was local school administrators are in for a very big shock, because the natives are up in arms over CRT etc. in the schools and they're running for the school boards.

    7. @devilman

      "Wait... we can vote? When did they fix voting? Beyond that, when did we regain faith in electing 'better republicans'?"

      Respectfully, I think we are talking past each other. I agree with you that a good case can be made that the uniparty is hopeless and conventional republicans are not going to fix some of the major problems that have been identified since, let's say, Trump descended the golden escalator.

      But, short of the radical change you seek, there is the incremental change which is, frankly, the only kind of change our system really permits.

      Take the radical agenda offered by the Biden Administration, which, if passed would fundamentally alter our country. Except it won't be passed. There are far too many checks and balances in our system. There are the three branches of federal government. And the three branches of the governments of the fifty states. There are two houses in Congress. One is subject to reelection every two years and the other still has a 60 vote filibuster. There is the tension between the elected Executive and the Administrative State. There are the Constitutional powers granted to the federal government and the powers reserved to the States, and the powers reserved to the People. There is the Bill of Rights and some semblance of these rights still exist. There is a powerful Establishment media, but there is a powerful voice of dissent as well. While it may feel sometimes like the balance of power has shifted to the Left, there are still powerful, in fact overwhelmingly powerful, checks and balances. Has Biden passed a single meaningful piece of legislation yet?

      If the game is to win incrementally, and notwithstanding the checks and balances, I'd still say a good bet is to win as many elections as possible in November 2022, both federal and state, and local, and to win big.

    8. @ Cassandar / Mark

      Hard call on "they" or "we" for me as a person on fixing elections. Mostly because I don't think "we" can or will do what's required to actual fix them.

      @ Cass, respect is always implied, no need to emphasize, this group is an amazing exception to the www. Your comments are always well thought out and challenging (damn you! lol) to reply to.

      From my perspective there is no right or left. I doubt I will bother voting again in the near or distant future, I just can't pretend it matters.

      You are correct in stating that incremental change is slow and our system makes it that way intentionally. My issue is not with the slowness but the direction of it. Governments and their actions are like diodes with power. It's one way and all consuming. The first things they took (which you will never get back) were the restraints.

      That is why we are where we are and I think we all agree to that much in the larger picture.

      I feel my time is better spent advocating for the radical and more direct. I suspect that this will take a much further fall from where we currently are but it's definitely accelerating and there is little they can do to save face anymore. A scandal a decade has become one if not three every quarter.

      That may seem apocalyptic or cynical to some I see it as more honest. I understand most individuals (beyond passing moments) will not yet throw in the towel. However they definitely finding that feeling in their gut harder to deny and more frequent in our current state of affairs. I think that is very human of us, to be overly optimistic but it's also why it takes an train wreck before most will admit out loud it was too much, to far.

      So, I say you can't out vote this... you may slow the already painstakingly slow process, but you will never reverse it peaceful. That is the history of every great empire and american exceptionalisum is not at all exceptional.

    9. @dm and cass and...

      we always, eventually hit upon the very rock over which patriots divide. (And let's be clear and charitable to each other on that poknt: i have no reason to think any of the regular commenters here are anything other than patriots with the same goal, a restoration of the republic). That rock is the feality of just how bad things are. I read and listen to a lot of content, from typical conservative to Q to rah rah Republican with the usual google news feed too. Even as patriots we live in different realities. By that i mean that we view events and people through a narrative lens (or as Scott Adams says, our movie/story) that makes sense of this chaotic world. At one end of the patriot spectrum are those who are convinced that the good guys have already won but have allowed Zhou and the gangsters to hold the illusion of office to show the American people at large just how evil these people are. Once accomplished the good guys will clean house in some way, likely by military action, and restore civilian authority by swearing in Trump as the lawfully elected president. At the other end of the spectrum are the patriots who believe all is lost and it's time to finish preparing for a SHTF/TEOTWAKI future soon to fall upon us. I sense most of us here are between those extremes, some combination of despair but grim determination to do what we can and a more hopeful belief that elections can still matter and the system can still work to bring us back from the brink.

      Personally I'm with devilman but I can see why others are not yet ready to embrace the suck. And i try to remember that anything could happen, probably what we least expect.