Supra genius Fauci warned Trump administration of the issue of pandemic preparedness/ surprise outbreak

[JimmyB]

Warrior of truth, what is this very critical post about?  Who are the "hypocrites" and "traitors"?

[one.opinion]

2 hours ago, Heaven_Bound said:

The real issue was that the drug companies connected to Fauci were using a synthetic marijuana that never had the ability to cure HIV/AIDS.   But Fauci preached it like it was gospel.  And look at today, the drugs used now have "Nothing" to do with either CD4/CD8 Cells and are effective.   So the issue was never about CD4/CD8, it was about using synthetic hemp that cured nothing but kept the patient stoned till they died.

Your complaint is changing now. It was focused on CD4 vs CD8, but you didn't articulate what these were or why they were important, let alone establish that there was a legitimate complaint against Fauci for emphasis on monitoring CD4.

Now you've moved your argument to focus on marijuana, but you still haven't established any sort of connection to any of Fauci's statements or activities. You have just a solo claim that "so Fauci lied!" without providing any sort of evidence that he lied.

The letter you provided simply doesn't include any sort of evidence that Fauci lied or is responsible for thousands of deaths and the humiliation of many.

2 hours ago, Heaven_Bound said:

Who cares about ICU, anyone Vaccinated should not even be able to contract Covid to need hospitalization.

As I mentioned in my previous post, there are a very large percentage of people that were hospitalized for another issue, but testing shows them to have viral RNA or antigens. This is important because patient infections in the hospital need to be handled much differently. One hospital in New York actually had 65% of their COVID patients check into the hospital for other reasons (check this report). This is an exceptionally percentage, but illustrates the problem rather well. If you want to try to get a better handle on who is going to the hospital for COVID treatment, other metrics are needed. Some hospital systems are distinguishing between "hospitalization with COVID" and "hospitalization for COVID". Another useful metric is describe in the article you cited - ICU visits. When looking at the rates of ICU visits and deaths, particularly since the onset of the omicron wave, the data clearly show the effectiveness of the vaccines.

2 hours ago, Heaven_Bound said:

Fauci issued the monies.  Therefore, he issued towards his own interests.

Fauci does not personally approved each and every grant and each and every sub-grant. He is ultimately responsible, and he really should have done some significant homework before issuing statements about gain-of-function research, but it seems you have the impression he personally funded the WIV research group studying coronaviruses. He didn't.

[Sparks]

54 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

Fauci does not personally approved each and every grant and each and every sub-grant. He is ultimately responsible, and he really should have done some significant homework before issuing statements about gain-of-function research, but it seems you have the impression he personally funded the WIV research group studying coronaviruses. He didn't.

Yeah he did.  It seems Dr. Fauci broke the Clayton Act, the Sherman Act (both US antitrust issues), funded gain-of-function in Wuhan, and then was charged for lying to Congress surrounding these issues.   Wuhan funding is what the lying was about.

[one.opinion]

32 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Yeah he did.  It seems Dr. Fauci broke the Clayton Act, the Sherman Act (both US antitrust issues), funded gain-of-function in Wuhan, and then was charged for lying to Congress surrounding these issues.   Wuhan funding is what the lying was about.

I don't know anything about the Clayton Act or the Sherman Act. Could you explain these and what Fauci did that broke them?

The gain-of-function research claim is still contested. Could you explain what you know about the research that was done in the WIV and why it qualified as gain-of-function research? Apparently, there is some dissention among experts on whether or not it was truly gain-of-function.

Fauci should have been better informed regarding the WIV research and the involvement of the EcoHealth Alliance prior to Congressional hearing. But the NIAID overview from 2018 (I didn't find one for 2019) showed that there were 1,435 international projects (check here), so it is silly to assume that Fauci made all the funding decisions for these 1,435 projects, let alone knew all the details about subcontracting research as the EcoHealth Alliance did with WIV.

He has not been charged with lying. There is a difference between "accused" and "charged". "Charge" implies a formal accusation with legal ramifications. This has not yet been done and it remains to be seen if it will.

Edited February 8, 2022 by one.opinion
edited for clarity

[WilliamL]

25 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

He has not been charged with lying. There is a difference between "accused" and "charged". "Charge" implies a formal accusation with legal ramifications. This has not yet been done and it remains to be seen if it will.

No way the current administration and Justice Department would ever charge Fauci with anything. He is one of their own.

[one.opinion]

31 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

No way the current administration and Justice Department would ever charge Fauci with anything. He is one of their own.

I’m not a political analyst, but it looks like there is a pretty good chance that Congress will be back in Republican control in about one year. It will be interesting to see if anything happens then.

[Sparks]

2 hours ago, one.opinion said:

I don't know anything about the Clayton Act or the Sherman Act. Could you explain these and what Fauci did that broke them?

It has to do with antitrust laws.  A person cannot be the CEO of two companies, and control funds, without breaking antitrust laws.  You also cannot be an acting member of multiple boards, and control its funds. 

2 hours ago, one.opinion said:

The gain-of-function research claim is still contested.

Only by Dr. Fauci and maybe yourself.

2 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Could you explain what you know about the research that was done in the WIV and why it qualified as gain-of-function research? Apparently, there is some dissention among experts on whether or not it was truly gain-of-function.

Do you mean before or after they re-defined the meaning of gain-of-function?  By the original definition, the USA, specifically the NIH, paid for gain-of-function.

2 hours ago, one.opinion said:

Fauci should have been better informed regarding the WIV research and the involvement of the EcoHealth Alliance prior to Congressional hearing. But the NIAID overview from 2018 (I didn't find one for 2019) showed that there were 1,435 international projects (check here), so it is silly to assume that Fauci made all the funding decisions for these 1,435 projects, let alone knew all the details about subcontracting research as the EcoHealth Alliance did with WIV.

Dr. Fauci is in charge of all grants and funds, and the buck stops with him. 

2 hours ago, one.opinion said:

He has not been charged with lying. There is a difference between "accused" and "charged". "Charge" implies a formal accusation with legal ramifications. This has not yet been done and it remains to be seen if it will.

Lying to Congress is quite formal.  If you want to make the argument that nothing will happen to Dr. Fauci due to the charges of lying to Congress, now that is possible.  That's a benefit of being in his political party.

So, what do you think the 191 billion spent on gain-of-function was used for?  We have the audit of every grant recipient, their address, their laboratory and what they were working on.  The gain-of-function scared the US government because it was getting too close to being the bioweaponization of viruses against humanity, so they stopped research in the USA and moved it off shore.  Then continued it.

[one.opinion]

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

It has to do with antitrust laws.  A person cannot be the CEO of two companies, and control funds, without breaking antitrust laws.

What companies was he CEO of? Was this simultaneous?

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

You also cannot be an acting member of multiple boards, and control its funds. 

Again, some details are missing. Which boards are you talking about?

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

Only by Dr. Fauci and maybe yourself.

No, not really. Check it this article - https://www.asbmb.org/asbmb-today/policy/112121/gain-of-function-research-all-in-the-eye-of-the-be

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

Do you mean before or after they re-defined the meaning of gain-of-function?  By the original definition, the USA, specifically the NIH, paid for gain-of-function.

Feel free to explain it with any definition you choose.

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

Dr. Fauci is in charge of all grants and funds, and the buck stops with him.

Agreed. Like I said previously, he is ultimately responsible.

[Sparks]

52 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

What companies was he CEO of?

Obviously none.  Now, what's left?

52 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

Again, some details are missing. Which boards are you talking about?

Look them up.  You might find the work of Dr. David E. Martin PhD of assistance there.  I would steer clear of the 'fact checkers' there, as their job is to spin things.

52 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

No, not really.

I like the original definition, not the spin. 

52 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

 

Feel free to explain it with any definition you choose.

Dr. Rand Paul did when he was asking Dr. Fauci if he wanted to reverse his statement before Congress.  You can find his channel on Rumble.  Dr. Paul has a few short videos in which goes through the definition.  

[one.opinion]

59 minutes ago, Sparks said:

Look them up.

Since you made the claim, I assumed you would be able to answer the question.

59 minutes ago, Sparks said:

I like the original definition, not the spin. 

My comment was related to the still-existing controversy of whether or not the research being done at the WIV was gain-of-function. Read the article and you will say that what I said is true - and not just Fauci and (possibly) me.

1 hour ago, Sparks said:

Dr. Rand Paul did when he was asking Dr. Fauci if he wanted to reverse his statement before Congress.  You can find his channel on Rumble.  Dr. Paul has a few short videos in which goes through the definition.

Since you are making claims about it, I'd like to see your explanation of the WIV research and why it violated the policy of gain-of-function moratorium.