Monday, May 4, 2026

Conspiracy Resource

Conspiracy news & views from all angles, up-to-the-minute and uncensored

china

‘Because I said so’: 5 takeaways from the Fauci hearing
COVID-19
, , ,

‘Because I said so’: 5 takeaways from the Fauci hearing

Former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci was
grilled by the Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic for 14 hours in January. In the lengthy interview, Fauci admitted that he was unaware of any scientific studies demonstrating that masking for children worked or that the 6-foot social distancing guidelines — which effectively shut down schools, churches, and businesses — were an effective way of curbing the spread of the coronavirus. Fauci also acknowledged that the lab leak theory was not a conspiracy theory as he previously suggested.

Fauci, who plays a starring role in BlazeTV’s “The Coverup,” appeared before the committee Monday to speak to these admissions as well as to his role in overseeing the funding of deadly gain-of-function experiments.

”Because I said so.’ That’s never been good enough for Americans and it never will be.’

Committee Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio)
told Fauci at the outset, “Whether intentional or not, you became so powerful that any disagreements the public had with you were forbidden and censored on social and most legacy media time and time again. That is why so many Americans became so angry — because this was fundamentally un-American.”

“‘Because I said so.’ That’s never been good enough for Americans and it never will be,” added Wenstrup. “Americans do not want to be indoctrinated. They want to be educated.”

The hearing had the potential to be educational; however, Democratic committee members opted for the latter, celebrating Fauci, defending his preferred narratives, and lobbing attacks on their political opponents.

Republican lawmakers, alternatively, attempted to hold Fauci’s feet to a low-heat fire, largely failing to get results.

What follows are five key takeaways from the Fauci hearing.

1. Not so effective after all

When asked straight out by Wenstrup whether the vaccine “stopped transmission of the virus,” Fauci answered, “That is a complicated issue because in the beginning, the first iteration of the vaccines did have an effect — not 100%, not a high effect — they did prevent infection and subsequently, obviously transmission.”

‘I feel extreme confidence in the safety and the efficacy of this vaccine.’

“However, it’s important to point out something that we did not know early on that became evident as the months went by is that the durability of protection against infection and hence transmission was relatively limited whereas the duration of protection against severe disease, hospitalization, and death was more prolonged,” said Fauci. “In the beginning it was felt that in fact it did prevent infection and thus transmission.”

After discovering Fauci
would not disavow any of the draconian COVID measures he championed during the pandemic, Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) also asked Fauci about his support for vaccine mandates and the efficacy of vaccines.

Fauci reiterated, “It clearly prevented infection in a certain percentage of people, but the durability of its ability to prevent infection was not long.”

Fauci was one of the most visible and consistent exponents of the “safe and effective” mantra, having
claimed in December 2020, “I feel extreme confidence in the safety and the efficacy of this vaccine and I want to encourage everyone who has the opportunity to get vaccinated so that we can have a veil of protection over this country, that would end this pandemic.”

2. Fauci: The blameless victim

Whereas Republican members blasted the former NIAID director for funding dangerous experiments of the kind that may have kicked off the pandemic as well as his years-long promotion of falsehoods, Democrats painted Fauci as a blameless victim and seized on the opportunity, as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) did, to attack former President Donald Trump and other Republicans.

Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) told Fauci, “You’re human, just like the rest of us,” and stressed that he “deserve[s] better.”

“I’ve seen your commitment not just to science, but to, again, to the greater good,” said Dingell.

‘You have been a hero to many for 54 years.’

After singing Fauci’s praises, Dingell gave Fauci an opportunity to complain about facing criticism and perceived threats.

Democratic Reps. Dingell, Robert Garcia (Calif.), Jill Tokuda (Hawaii), Katherine Castor (Fla.), Raul Ruiz (Calif.), and Kweisi Mfume (Md.) similarly engaged in hagiography.

“We owe you an apology for the way we have dragged you through the mud,” said Mfume.

“You have been a hero to many for 54 years,” continued Mfume. “You are a world-renowned scientist and an American patriot.”

Mfume made no mention of Americans who have suffered vaccine injuries but instead spoke in the abstract of “thousands of American lives [that] could have been spared” if they had not followed so-called conspiracy theories during the pandemic.

After paying his respects to Fauci, Rep. Garcia asked whether the “American public should listen to America’s brightest and best doctors and scientists, or instead listen to podcasters, conspiracy theorists, and unhinged Facebook memes.”

“Listening to the people just described is going to do nothing but harm people because they will deprive themselves of life-saving interventions,” said Fauci, who was among the so-called experts who
cautioned against using ivermectin to fight COVID-19.

Fauci proceeded to accuse the unvaccinated of getting an estimated 200,000-300,000 killed in the U.S. alone.

3. Fauci hangs ‘inner circle’ out to dry

Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) noted that there is “a troubling pattern of behavior” in Fauci’s “inner circle,” naming Fauci’s
David M. Morens, senior scientific adviser to the head of the NIAID, and Fauci’s former chief of staff as two offenders.

Comer pressed Fauci on whether Morens violated NIH policy by using a personal email for official purposes. Fauci appeared more than willing to throw his former adviser and frequent correspondent under the bus, indicating Morens’ personal email use to avoid transparency was indeed in violation of agency policy.

“Does it violate NIAID policy to delete records to intentionally avoid FOIA?”

“Yes,” said Fauci.

‘That was wrong and inappropriate and violated policy.’

“On April 28, 2020, Dr. Morens edited an EcoHealth press release regarding the grant termination. Does that violate policy?” asked Comer.

“That was inappropriate for him to be doing that for a grantee as a conflict of interest, among other things,” said Fauci.

“On March 29, 2021, Dr. Morens edited a letter that Dr. Daszak was sending to NIH. Does that violate policy?” asked Comer.

“Yes, it does,” answered Fauci.

“On Oct. 25, 2021, Dr. Brady provided Dr. Daszak with advice regarding how to mislead NIH on EcoHealth’s late progress report. Does that violate policy?” asked Comer.

“That was wrong and inappropriate and violated policy,” said Fauci.

“On Dec. 7, 2021, Dr. Morens wrote to the chair of EcoHealth board of directors to quote, ‘Put in a word,’ for Dr. Daszak. Does that violate policy?” asked Comer.

“Should not have been done, and that was wrong,” said Fauci. “Well, I’m not sure of a specific policy, but I imagine that does violate policy. Should not have been doing 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 would not characterize it as dangerous gain-of-function research.’

“I would not characterize it the way you did,” said Fauci, contradicting the NIH’s account. “The National Institutes of Health, through a sub-award to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, funded research on the surveillance of and the possibility of emerging infections. I would not characterize it as dangerous gain-of-function research.”

Elsewhere in his testimony Monday, Fauci
said that “according to the regulatory and operative definition of [Proposed Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens], the NIH did not fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”

Lesko quoted NIH Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak as acknowledging the “failure of the Wuhan Institute of Virology to provide us with the data that we requested and the lab notebooks that we requested, [which] certainly impeded our ability to understand what was really going on with the experiments that we have been discussing.”

Granted the lack of transparency at the infamous lab, Lesko asked Fauci how he can be certain that the National Institutes of Health did not fund gain-of-function research on coronaviruses in China granted its subcontractor EcoHealth Alliance’s reporting failures.

Fauci once again stressed that the NIH did not fund the deadly research in question, which EcoHealth Alliance’s subcontractor specialized in.

5. Downplayed likelihood of lab leak

Fauci claimed Monday that the idea he covered up a lab leak was “preposterous.”

Fauci indicated in his opening statement that he was informed on Jan. 31, 2020, “through phone calls with Jeremy Farrar, then director of the Wellcome Trust in the U.K., and then with Christian Anderson, a highly regarded scientist at Scripps Research Institute, that they and Eddie Holmes, a world class evolutionary biologist from Australia, were concerned that the genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 suggested that the virus could have been manipulated in a lab.”

Fauci then noted he partook in a conference call the next day “with about a dozen international virologists to discuss this possibility versus a spillover from an animal reservoir.”

Despite indications to the contrary, Fauci claimed, “The accusation being circulated that I influenced these scientists to change their minds by bribing them with millions of dollars in grant money is absolutely false and simply preposterous. I had no input into the content of the published paper,” referencing the March 2020 study published in the journal Nature, “The Proximal Origins of SARS-CoV-2.”

“The second issue is a false accusation that I tried to cover up the possibility that the virus originated from a lab. In fact, the truth is exactly the opposite,” continued Fauci. “I have repeatedly stated that I have a completely open mind to either possibility and that if definitive evidence becomes available to validate or refute either theory, I will readily accept it.”

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) later asked Fauci whether he downplayed the lab leak theory on account of having funded experimental viruses at the Wuhan lab — funding Fauci copped to but Ranking Member Raul Ruiz nevertheless cast doubt on in his closing remarks.

Fauci, prickled by the suggestion that he tried to downplay the possibility he had fingerprints on research that got millions of Americans killed, answered in the negative.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More
Globalists suffer big upset in Geneva; WHO chief urges aggressive crackdown on ‘global pandemic agreement’ skeptics
Great Reset
, ,

Globalists suffer big upset in Geneva; WHO chief urges aggressive crackdown on ‘global pandemic agreement’ skeptics

WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus and other globalists were met with failure at the May 27-June 1 World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland. Rather than win over critics with reassurances ahead of the next stage of his campaign to promote the failed scheme, Ghebreyesus instead doubled down, urging a crackdown on skeptics.

Road to failure

Ghebreyesus has spent several months promoting his “global pandemic agreement.”

In his Feb. 12 Dubai address, entitled, “A Pact with the Future: Why the Pandemic Agreement Is Mission-Critical for Humanity,” Ghebreyesus said, “We cannot allow this historic agreement, this milestone in global health, to be sabotaged by those who spread lies, either deliberately or unknowingly.”

The critics whom Ghebreyesus branded liars and conspiracy theorists include those who reckon the pact would
undermine national sovereignty as well as those skeptical of the WHO’s competence. In the latter case, the WHO did itself no favors in recent years, particularly during the pandemic.

After all, the organization
reportedly aided the Chinese communist regime in its cover up of COVID-19’s origins; told the nations of the world not to restrict travelers from China or close their borders even though China had domestically; granted Beijing a veto over the WHO’s COVID-19 origins report; and it endorsed vaccines that were not nearly as safe or as effective as advertised, including the blood clot-inducing Oxford-AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine whose developer now faces a class-action lawsuit over injuries in the United Kingdom as well as a recent lawsuit in Utah. Prior to the pandemic, it also courted controversy with its sexual abuse scandal, wasteful spending, and corruption.

Evidently, it was not enough for the WHO director to demean opponents of his grand scheme to see it through.

‘I know that there remains among you a common will to get this done.’

“Of course, we all wish that we had been able to reach a consensus on the agreement in time for this health assembly, and cross the finish line,” Ghebreyesus said in his
opening remarks at the 77th World Health Assembly. “I remain confident that you still will, because where there is a will, there is a way. I know that there remains among you a common will to get this done.”

In the days that followed, the assembly failed to cross the finish line or even come close. As the result, Ghebreyesus has sought to transform the race into a marathon.

New deadline for a desired result

Desperate to keep the dream alive after two years of futile negotiations, the WHO had countries agree to continue negotiating the proposed globalist pact. A package of half-measures have apparently been accepted to tide over pandemic treaty supporters in the meantime.

The WHO
said in a statement Saturday that the World Health Assembly and its 194 member countries “agreed [on] a package of critical amendments to the International Health Regulations (2005) (IHR), and made concrete commitments to completing negotiations on a global pandemic agreement within a year, at the latest.”

The half-measures compromise amendments to the IHR that will supposedly “strengthen global preparedness, surveillance and responses to public health emergencies, including pandemics.”

These include a new definition for “pandemic emergency”; another “equity”-driven international wealth re-distribution mechanism; the creation of a new bureaucracy to oversee the implementation of the other half-measures; and the creation of IHR authorities for member countries to “improve coordination of implementation of the Regulations within and among countries.”

“The amendments to the International Health Regulations will bolster countries’ ability to detect and respond to future outbreaks and pandemics by strengthening their own national capacities, and coordination between fellow States, on disease surveillance, information sharing and response,” said Ghebreyesus. “This is built on commitment to equity, an understanding that health threats do not recognize national borders, and that preparedness is a collective endeavor.”

Clampdown on vaccine critics

After negotiators failed to produce a draft deal for approval by the WHO annual assembly, Ghebreyesus
gave a speech promoting health initiatives and vaccines.

‘I think they use COVID as an opportunity and, you know, all the havoc they’re creating.’

Toward the end of his remarks, he noted, “You know, the serious challenge that’s posed by anti-vaxxers and I think we need to strategize to really push back because vaccines work, vaccines affect adults, and we have science, evidence on our side.”

“I think it’s time to be more aggressive in pushing back on anti-vaxxers,” continued the WHO director. “I think they use COVID as an opportunity and, you know, all the havoc they’re creating. Maybe that’s one of the messages I’d also like to include to whatever I have [to] say.”





Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More
BlazeTV debuts damning docuseries exposing COVID origins ‘coverup’ ahead of Fauci hearing
COVID-19
,

BlazeTV debuts damning docuseries exposing COVID origins ‘coverup’ ahead of Fauci hearing

There was a concerted public-private campaign during the pandemic to downplay the strong likelihood that COVID-19 — a virus that would go on to kill millions worldwide — did not originate in the controversial Chinese communist lab that long engaged in dangerous experiments on coronaviruses with the help of U.S. taxpayer dollars.

While the Chinese communist regime
did its part to bury evidence of a potential lab leak as the virus was first spreading, then-director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci ultimately did the heavy lifting in terms of narrative curation.

Anthony Fauci and the virologists in his orbit
worked feverishly to suggest that the virus had a zoonotic origin, concealing their own doubts about that possibility while denigrating those who would suggest otherwise.

There was cause, after all, for them to engage in revisionism and propaganda. Elements of the Western medical establishment admittedly didn’t want to
alienate China by assigning it any blame over the deaths of multitudes of Americans, and Fauci had his fingerprints on the American grant money poured into dangerous work at the Wuhan Institute of Virology via disgraced zoologist Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance — whose gain-of-function subcontractor was ostensibly among the patients zero who took ill in late 2019.

The lab-leak theory was
censored on social media, especially on Facebook, which directly coordinated with Fauci. Talk show hosts, talking heads, and once respected newspapers dutifully parroted the approved talking points.

Yet, not all were convinced in Washington, D.C., the media, and the medical establishment — certainly not Stanford University’s Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, epidemiologist and co-author of the “Great Barrington Declaration,” and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

Both Bhattacharya and Paul are among those featured in ”
The Coverup,” a new documentary series presented by Blaze Media and Free the People, which debuts today on BlazeTV.

”
The Coverup” explores the evolution of the Fauci-anointed COVID-19 origins narrative, the corresponding censorship campaign, various underlying motives and vested interests, and the ultimate breakdown of truth, breaking new ground and making Fauci’s job of spinning yarns before Congress next week all the more difficult.

‘You would go down in history as one of the world’s greatest monsters.’

In BlazeTV host Matthew B. Kibbe’s deep-dive in the
first episode of the series, entitled “Dissident,” he speaks to Bhattacharya about the research agenda that set the stage for the deadly outbreak and assesses what was at stake for the powers that be — and for Fauci in particular — where narrative control was concerned.

“He’s in a tough position,” said Bhattacharya. “If people understand that what has happened the last three-and-a-half years in the COVID pandemic is potentially, maybe even actually, a result of this kind of research agenda and Fauci was one of its champions, he is in a very tough spot.”

“Millions and millions of people have died. Economies have been devastated,” continued Bhattacharya. “The poor of the world, children, vulnerable people have been hurt by this mad science experiment. … You would go down in history as one of the world’s greatest monsters.”

Later in the episode, Bhattacharya discusses the nature of the infrastructure shoring up the deadly research agenda as well as the possible link between officials’ cognizance of a possible lab leak and the draconian COVID protocols they ultimately promoted.

Extra to speaking to Dr. Bhattacharya and Sen. Paul in the series, in subsequent episodes, Kibbe gleans troubling insights from White House Coronavirus Task Force insiders about the early commitment to the zoonotics origin narrative, from journalists censored for asking questions, and from those working to hold the apparent architects of the pandemic responsible in its aftermath.

‘They want us to just move on.’

Kibbe told Blaze Media, “Free the People produced ‘The Coverup’ to shine light on the shadowy government figures who caused so much pain and suffering with their tyrannical overreach during the pandemic. They would rather we not uncover what really happened. They want us to just move on.”

“Unfortunately for them, I’m not going to let that happen,” continued Kibbe. “As someone who has been fighting big government for most of my career, this fight is the most crucial one. I want to expose their unethical motives and wildly dangerous actions and figure out who really pulls the strings behind the curtain of the pandemic industrial complex. Because they’re not going to stop. The power is too intoxicating.”

“This investigative series from Blaze Media and Free the People will arm alarmed citizens with the truth, and that’s the one thing shadowy bureaucratic schemers like Anthony Fauci cannot withstand — exposure to sunlight,” added series’ host.

Editor’s note: The article has been updated to incorporate Matthew Kibbe’s statement to Blaze Media.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Read More