Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
The Tale of Anthony Fauci
Fauci was in his late seventies when COVID-19 emerged, still at his job as the head of NIAID (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease), a position he had held since 1984 — 39 years. He was the highest-paid employee on the federal payroll and finally retired at the end of 2022 at the age of 82. He is, no doubt, an ageless and vigorous octogenarian. He could have retired at 65, or even 62, but instead chose to work full-time. Fauci was driven, dedicated, and invested in this role. Fully invested.
His wife, some 11 years younger, remains a public health employee, highly paid, a nurse, and the “bioethicist” for the National Institute of Health. In this role, she oversees NIH policy, ensuring that NIH recommendations, decisions, and policies meet basic medical ethical standards; so that no harm is done and public interests are not compromised. Her husband’s official actions during the pandemic fell under her ethical oversight.
In the 1980s, Fauci championed the NIH’s attempts to find an AIDS vaccine. That stream didn’t pan out, which must have been very disappointing for Dr. Fauci. He’s always been a big vaccine promoter and seemed to favor the vaccine approach to viral infection over therapeutics. Anyone as strongly vax-favored had to believe in the effective resilience of natural immunity. Traditional vaccines (as opposed to mRNA gene therapy) mimic real viral infection using weak or compromised viruses, thus initiating a full and resilient natural immune response.
Early on, when the Covid-19 pandemic seemed inevitable, Fauci realized he might be compromised. There was credible evidence the virus had escaped from the CCP’s Wuhan virology lab. In the late summer or early fall of 2019, there were reports of unusual respiratory infections, even deaths of lab workers. The lab was moved from civilian to Chinese military control and its HVAC systems were completely revamped. Lab workers were rumored to have been “disappeared.” And this lab was home to the Bat-lady, a researcher renowned for the genetic manipulation of bat coronaviruses.
Fauci had given the go-ahead to provide Eco Health Alliance, a Washington-based health research outfit, with a substantial grant to help fund continued work in that Wuhan Lab. The research was related to chimera (manipulated) coronaviruses. Years before, this research had been funded by the USDOD. Their support was later withdrawn as the high-risk nature of this research became apparent. Dr. Fauci was one of the few high-level NIH officials with the authority to green-light the Wuhan initiative and continue funding the COV research despite the risks. He signed off. Had Covid-19 leaked from the Wuhan lab, he and his cohorts could be culpable or compromised.
There was some panic among those closest to the Wuhan funding. Fauci quickly convened a meeting of top, hand-selected virologists and commissioned a paper, denouncing the “lab leak” as a conspiracy and in support of a natural evolution of SARS-Cov-2 from bats to other mammals and eventually, to humans. He edited this paper himself and after its publication, trumpeted its “findings” publicly, never once acknowledging his participation. Those associated with the paper later had substantial NIH grant monies approved. The threat, it seems, was staunched.
Thus Operation Warp Speed was saved and the mRNA “vaccine” accelerated. There were obstacles to Fauci’s eventual plans for mass vaccination. The emergency approval of the mRNA therapies was not assured. By law, there could be no viable alternative therapies. This would explain later Fauci’s and the NIH’s stubborn and continued refusals to acknowledge the efficacy of Ivermectin, Hydroxychloroquine, and all other alternative antibiotic protocols that many doctors found remarkably effective and safe. Effective therapeutics threatened mRNA therapy’s emergency-use authorization. This denigration of alternative therapies was so pervasive that pharmacists refused to fill prescriptions and prescribing doctors were threatened in some states with loss of license.
mRNA therapies also had to be relabeled “vaccines” to allow Big Pharma to avoid the risks of legal repercussion should there be adverse reaction. The NIH dutifully expanded the official definition of a “vaccine” to allow mRNA therapy to fall under a blanket of exemption of vaccines from legal reprisal.
There are a few other things that Fauci had to know. He had to know that despite much effort, no one had ever been able to produce an effective traditional vaccine (some 20% of common colds are coronavirus infections) for any human coronavirus infection. He also had to know that an antibody response to a single protein initiated by mRNA introduction (the protein on a Covid-19 spike) was not likely to be as effective, and certainly could never be as resilient, as a full immune response caused by an actual Covid-19 infection.
Yet, despite this knowledge, Fauci pushed the “vaccines” and downplayed the obvious superiority of natural immunity. He even said that vaccine immunity was superior, an assertion he knew he could not support; all this in his attempt to promote mass inoculation.
There were also a few things that neither Fauci nor the mRNA producers could not know at the time the mRNA therapies received their provisional approvals. They could not know how long mRNA remained in the body, and if it persisted, where it might accumulate. They also did not know whether this possible persistence would result in the body’s continued production of the spike protein long after vaccination. They also did not know what the potential toxic effects, especially the cumulative potential toxic effects, would be with serial injections of mRNA, of spike proteins, of dense lipids, and of nanocarbon fibers, especially in tissues where these things might accumulate. We still don’t know these things, but what we do know is that the mRNA vaccines are not benign.
The national health experts were so arrogant, they did not even recommend needle aspiration when injecting the vaccine, a simple technique used to ensure that the injection would not be made directly into vascular tissue where it could travel directly to the heart, lungs, heart again, and brain.
There was some evidence in the initial trials indicating that the various mRNA vaccines might not be benign, but this evidence was either hidden, rationalized, or ignored. The drug manufacturers were more than happy to sell their newly minted “vaccines” because, of course, they were making bank and they were exempt from legal reprisal. Fauci, the vax-man, was completely vested in promoting, even mandating, universal vaccination; that is, playing the savior; something he’d always wanted to be. He loved the adoration and the spotlight. As his luster started to tarnish with criticism, he called himself “the science.”
The result of this arrogance? The credibility of public health officials is at or near zero. Billions and billions of taxpayer dollars were and continue to be spent promoting useless vaccines and masks. People likely died because they did not receive safe and effective therapeutics banned by public health authorities. Folks who defied silly mandates, especially those with natural immunity, lost their jobs. Businesses failed. Children were and continue to be injected with mRNA, nanocarbon fibers, and dense lipids despite infinitesimally small risk and insufficient testing and safety. Children missed months and months of school and peer interaction. Susceptible older Americans died, locked down and alone. More businesses failed. The economy tanked and continues to do so. Sitting politicians were blamed, causing a change in government, and then inflation, chaos, and further decline.
Not all this can be laid at the feet of Dr. Anthony Fauci. Much of it belongs to China and CCP, whose lab it was that created this bug and who sponsored its existence. Fauci’s part in the story, not yet completely told, is neo-Shakespearian. As the deleterious effects of the mRNA vaccines persist and become more obvious, there will be a reckoning. At the forefront of this reckoning will be the name Fauci, for forcing upon us a “cure” that was worse than the disease, and for playing a role in the rise of the disease itself. He will be seen as the man with his finger in the dike, who also helped design and build the faulty dike itself and failed to predict the flood behind it. History will not be good to him.Published in General
And that’s how he got to be the nation’s highest-paid bureaucrat.
Just found out today that the Merchant Marine Academy has dropped the vax requirement. The Class of 2027 won’t need it and those already enrolled will not be subject to boosters.
It is quite a shame that the “elected officials, the health bureaucracy, and the pharmaceutical companies” all went the route of releasing a vaccine for a corona virus despite two important considerations that people holding such a vast responsibility should never have deliberately ignored.
Consideration One) Over the decades, there has never been a successful vaccine for a corona virus. The vaccines for seasonal influenzas have not even managed to be more successful and effective as time has gone by. I’m forgetting if it was the winter of 2013/2014 or the following winter when the vaccine for the flu was at an all time low of around 18% efficacy. (A sugar placebo will give the populace some 23% efficacy.) Yet despite the supposed virility of COV, a virility that was part of the hoax, the PTB decided that a vaccine was the way to go. (And may Ferguson of the UK’s Imperial College receive a special hot spot in hell for his part in the hoax of COVID virility.)
Consideration Two) Just a short time prior to the discovery of COV, Congress had carefully seen to it that the rules and regulations pertaining to the release of a new vaccine for an infection contain the following provision, which Big Pharma and all involved carefully avoided following:
Not only that, but by pretending that no alternatives to vaccination existed, the American public was denied the then quite available HCQ + zinc, so cheap, effective and safe that in over 40 nations across the globe it is sold over the counter. We were also denied ivermectin.
This activity of denying real remedies is called negligent homicide!
That’s a nice, well constructed narrative. It even has elements of truth in it, but not so much as to make it unfit for its intended market.
A nice touch is the self-contradiction on “therapies.” I love it!
Yes, that pretty much covers his usual stance.
The only time he consistently stands by some COVID or COVID vaccine policies is when he can stand by some newly created definition that demonstrates – to his way of thinking – that Sen Rand Paul is behind the curve.
Most other people calling themselves scientists would be embarrassed to acknowledge that to achieve compliance with The WHO & DoD’s desire for a pandemic, the definition of “pandemic” had to be re-defined.
Ditto with the definition of the term “vaccine.”
Also ditto with the expression “gain of function.”
Since it was mentioned on this thread, I’m trying to figure out what Trump’s culpability as president was. Overall, I find him at fault for two big things: (1) allowing the budget to grow even further; and (2) for his handling of the covid crisis, that is promulgating the vaccine theory usage as the only way to control and cure the covid crisis, as well as allowing the states such draconian anti-covid measures.
Remember, the government broadly speaking was vehemently against him and impeachment was called for from just about the day he was sworn in, and after the Democrats took over the House, he had a hostile Congress.
But only keeping that in the back of your mind and focusing on covid (and thereby touching on fauci) what was Trump’s thinking, what were his reasonable and doable options as president, and who would have done anything differently? As it is, he tried to advance repurposing existing safe drugs, allowed states to call the shots — which was a Constitutionally valid approach, perhaps Constitutionally mandated – and worked to expedite a vaccine cure. He even called out two hospital ships and transformed an arena for care of overflow patients, which were never used. And he handed over a great degree of public health control to those within the government who specialized in public health and communicable diseases.
If Trump had not been president, Hillary would have been president. Would she have been more restrained or correct in her leadership? I don’t think so. Would Biden have been more correct in his leadership choices? I don’t think so.
Who in America would have lead the country better? Who would have disempowered fauci? Who would have held out for five to (more likely) ten years for the safety and efficacy of the vaccine to be proven to existing standards? And who would have both held the power and used the power to do anything differently than the way things eventually transpired? DeSantis? We don’t know. Paul Ryan? I don’t think so. Mitch McConnell? I don’t think so.
Ben Carson? Perhaps.
Ted Cruz? I don’t think so. Chris Christie or Marco Rubio? I very much doubt it.
Remember, a representative of, I believe, Moderna said in 2019 that pandemic was coming and that they would make billions on a vaccine. So the CDC and FDA were presumably already looking to advance an mRNA vaccine cure (I use the word “cure” here as a cure for the crisis, not a cure for the disease).
Would these politicians or any others even close to power have done anything differently in the face of (1) not being the chosen Hillary, and (2) confronting the apparently preordained launch of an mRNA vaccine against a virus, as fauci himself said was necessary, also in 2019?
No, I think the cure for the covid crisis was already baked into the bureaucratic cake before the first case was diagnosed.
I don’t see the propriety of the venomous criticism of Trump in his handling of the covid crisis. the crisis was bad, but it would have happened anyway.
And if Trump had fired Fauci early on as many people think he should have, that would have been the first impeachment. And it might have gotten him removed from office too. Which could easily have been what they hoped for.
Yes, I’m pretty sure. But who else would ever have fired or even sidelined fauci and Birx? And who else would not have funded speeded vaccine roll-out by-passing safety research — which is exactly what fauci said a viral pandemic emergency, say, out of China, would allow? DeSantis? Cruz? President Pelosi? Newsome? Who??
Who would have put the US population at risk by spurning Big Pharma’s new technology?
I think it would have been more important to fire Birx than Fauci. She was clearly in over her head on this pandemic. A lot of the bad response on the part of the governors seems to have been instigated by her. Maybe both Birx and Fauci were like generals who are still fighting the last war. Some of the methods they advocated might have been suitable for an AIDS epidemic (but were politically unacceptable for that purpose) and they kept pursuing those methods even though though a respiratory virus requires very different methods, as became clearer the longer the covid pandemic went on.
There are some other Fauci problems that I wish we would deal with, but they won’t be fixed just by putting a different person in his position.
Before COVID most Americans trusted our medical bureaucracies like the FDA and the NIH. We had no idea what self-promoting, pompous, lying tyrants were running these institutions. I don’t think Trump knew either. BY the time he found out, it was too late. He had done the natural thing and gone to them for advice. Once he became aware of the political motivation that seemed to guide Fauci’s actions, the press was ready to hammer him had he removed Fauci.
That’s simply not true. We knew very well how the administrative state works. We knew how the CDC was diverting health funds to gun control, for example. It’s been a problem for a long time, and the problem is not really in the self-promoting, pompous, lying tyrants because if you replace them all you’ll get is your own self-promoting, pompous, lying tyrants, because that’s what you get in a system in which legislative, executive, and judicial power is rolled all into one, with no cross-checks and balances, and underpinned by a civil service whose primary goal is self-perpetuation.
I don’t think Trump knew but it wouldn’t have mattered because the administrative state is a power unto itself. Replacing Fauci would have accomplished nothing, because Fauci is a creature of the agency he serves. Replacing Birx might have accomplished something, because her special commission didn’t necessarily have to be underpinned by the administrative state.
What bothers me is not so much that Trump didn’t know but that so many conservatives still don’t have as clue as to what they’re up against and aren’t interested in anything but superficialities such as the public faces that talk on TV.
You seem to be presenting this as one being correct and, therefore, the other being incorrect. I think both are correct.