Winston Churchill famously reminded us that “lies go halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to put its pants on.” This old adage rang true on a virtual daily basis during the Trump administration, as rabid leftwing journalists raced to print the most damaging headlines possible, truth be damned.
It should, then, come as no surprise that this sort of journalistic malpractice would be in full swing to protect the Left’s latest deity, Dr. Anthony Fauci, from any culpability he may have had in the recent pandemic known as Covid-19. To (far too) many Americans, Fauci represents a benevolent grandpa of sorts, full of wisdom to bestow upon a population that needs answers in uncertain times. This was a service Fauci was all too happy to provide, as his 15 minutes of fame have stretched well into over a year, with his aura of infallibility remaining intact despite numerous demonstrably incorrect decisions, many countering the previous advice of Fauci himself. Indeed, a Fauci vs. Fauci debate could very well be in order once all the smoke clears and normalcy—whatever that is—reigns once more.
It appears, however, that Dr. Fauci has much more to answer for than mere contradictory mask recommendations or nonsensical social distancing guidelines. There is a growing body of evidence that Fauci played a key role in a scheme that very well could have started all of this in the first place. The very notion that he could have played a foundational role in this pandemic is considered sacrilegious in most mainstream news circles, so it will be up to the alternative media to once again get to the bottom of these troubling developments. In this piece, we’ll lay out the evidence so that the reader may decide for themselves.
The Official Story
What’s not up for debate is that In 2014, the U.S. Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease [NAID], headed by Fauci, had awarded $3.4 million grant to EcoHealth Alliance. The EcoHealth group hired the virology lab in Wuhan to conduct analysis of bat coronavirus. They started studying the coronavirus collected from bats in Yunnan province in Wuhan, China. These facts are not in dispute.
EcoHealth paid this lab $598,500 over five years. The Wuhan lab got approval for research from both the US State Department and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). So we can also say with absolute certainty the fund was approved by no less than the NIH and State Department.
Gain-of-function research means enhancing or boosting the infectivity and lethality of pathogen. It is true that Fauci had advocated for gain-of-function research in the past because the study helps researchers to find potential threats to human health, thus helping researches find a solution to tackle the problem. Again, that is the official story. We’ll have to take his word for it.
But this kind of research also can also be extremely dangerous as it might lead to mutations that would increase the pathogenicity, transmissibility, and antigenicity of the viruses. However, EcoHealth Alliance claims that this type of research does not have anything to do with the research they funded in the Wuhan lab.
NIH has said on record that gain-of-function research was not involved. “The research supported under the grant to EcoHealth Alliance Inc. characterized the function of newly discovered bat spike proteins and naturally occurring pathogens and did not involve the enhancement of the pathogenicity or transmissibility of the viruses studied,” they recently told The Statesman.
Both the NIH and EcoHealth Alliance have stated that grants to Wuhan lab were not allocated to gain-of-function research. Even when grants to EcoHealth Alliance was terminated in 2014 citing safety and security risks, it was reviewed by NIH. The agency ruled that this research did not involve gain-of-function research. Thus the fund was reinstated. A similar trend followed last year and the grant was terminated again on April 24, 2020 only to be reinstated on July 8, 2020.
A study on coronavirus conducted by five researchers in March had stated that ability of the virus to affect human cells is likely the result of natural selection in an animal host or in humans as there the genetic makeup of viruses did not show any signs of altercation.
MIT biologist Kevin Esvelt, who fancies himself an “evolutionary sculptor,” reviewed a paper on coronavirus research and stated that the methods used by the EcoHealth Alliance funded research indeed met the definition of gain-of-function. But then something strange happened. Speaking to PolitiFact, he clarified that the genetic sequences used for study in the research paper were different from new coronavirus. Thus, “The work reported in this specific paper definitely did not lead to the creation of SARS-CoV-2,” Esvelt said.
That’s an awful lot of certainty all of a sudden from a man who values uncertainty as a scientific principle. But I digress.
To add to the “nothing to see here” chorus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the World Health Organization, and the NIH have stated that coronavirus was not derived from a lab. They are also keen to point out that even in terms of funding, the lab was not only funded by the U.S. government. The European Union also had provided grants to Wuhan lab since 2015.
Thus, the powers that be have rendered their verdict: Anthony Fauci did not bypass any rules in granting funds to EcoHealth Alliance. Moreover, there is no proof that the virus originated in the lab. Also, there is no proof for claims that EcoHealth grant was involved in gain-of-function research. There you have it, all neat and pretty and ready for public consumption.
But, as always, there are few—let’s call them difficulties—to sort out.
The Problem With the Official Narrative
The first problem—and it’s a glaring one—is that the ‘official’ findings of all the agencies above rely heavily on the transparency of the Chinese government regarding the Wuhan lab of virology — for which there is none. If you believe the Chinese to be honest brokers when it comes to bio-testing funds from foreign governments, be my guest, but I would not recommend it.
The CCP hid literally everything about this virus from the world once it emerged on the scene. Not only did they withhold very valuable data on things like the genome, doctors who attempted to alert the world were “disappeared” never to be heard from again. Accurate casualty numbers were never kept and makeshift hospitals were built as secretly as possible. Meanwhile, flights within China were banned, but flights out of China were allowed full-go. So not only did they hide the virus from the world, they sought to infect as much of the world as possible while protecting their own citizens. These are the people that the WHO and NIH are relying upon to debunk “cover conspiracy theories.” Over a year ago, I received intel from a former colleague that an assessment was pushed up the ladder that claimed the virus had escaped from the Wuhan lab. Two weeks later, President Trump confirmed the existence of the report when asked by Fox reporter John Roberts. Oddly enough, the assessment was never again mentioned publicly.
The fact is, the Wuhan Institue of Virology has been conducting research on bat coronaviruses. And not just as they relate to bats.
To their credit, New York magazine has taken the lab leak hypothesis seriously from the start and done quality research to get to the truth. Their research shows that EcoHealth Alliance ‘has channeled money from the National Institutes of Health to Shi Zhengli’s laboratory in Wuhan, allowing the lab to carry on recombinant research into diseases of bats and humans’.
Dr Shi Zhengli is a notable expert in bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute. She had been studying the effects of bat viruses on humans when ‘in 2012, six men set to work shoveling bat guano were sickened by a severe lung disease, three of them fatally. Shi’s team took the samples back to Wuhan and analyzed whatever fragments of bat virus she could find. In some cases, when she found a sequence that seemed particularly significant, she experimented with it in order to understand how it might potentially infect humans. Some of her work was funded by the National Institutes of Health and some of it by the US Defense Threat Reduction Agency of the Department of Defense via Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance.’
Peter Dasazk of EcoHealth Alliance gave an interview to the Bulletin in December 2019, shortly before the first reports of the COVID-19 outbreak where he ‘talked in glowing terms of how researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been reprogramming the spike protein and generating chimeric coronaviruses capable of infecting humanized mice’.
I’m no scientist, but I’m willing to bet that Dr. Esvelt over at MIT saw some pretty striking parallels between infecting ‘humanized mice’ with coronavirus and gain-of-function research.
We are being offered an official explanation by people whose main source of information have proven themselves entirely untrustworthy. On the other hand, we have evidence—albeit circumstantial—all pointing in the same direction.
I cannot tell you exactly how Covid-19 made its way into open air. What I can tell you is that those who were around when it was born have done everything possible to keep the facts from us, and those who are brave enough to ask the tough questions are being stopped at every turn.
The truth may not yet have its pants on, but the lies are becoming more naked by the day.
If you feel I’ve earned it, I appreciate any donations you would like to give. If having issues with PayPal, I recommend using the following link: paypal.me/DailyTrump. My Venmo is: @Trey-Vaught and my CashApp is: $DeweyVaught. If you would like to give more than $1.00 below, simply change the number in the donation box. Thank you for your generosity.