A coordinated corruption and coverup by numerous top U.S. scientists is now clear, based on reporting you will find today in Public and Racquet. The article is titled: “Top Scientists Misled Congress About Covid Origins, Newly Released Emails And Messages ShowTop advisor to Anthony Fauci still thought a lab leak was possible in April 2020, one month after claiming publicly that it wasn’t.”
Simultaneously, you will not find any information about these numerous newly-leaked documents at NYT, WaPo, NPR, MSNBC or CNN. Why are these “news” outlets not interested in this dramatic and disturbing new evidence that top U.S. scientists have been lying to the American Public about the cause of the pandemic?
Here is an excerpt from today’s article in Public (from a much longer article that contains numerous excerpts from the Slack and email messages of the scientists):
For months, Fauci, Andersen, and their allies have been pushing the message that ”we may never know” what caused the Covid-19 pandemic. In truth, we are getting closer to understanding what happened with every new batch of emails and Slack messages.
Previously released messages show that a top Fauci advisor who boasted of evading FOIA with his Gmail, and hiding Fauci’s role.
“Tony [Fauci] doesn’t want his fingerprints on origin stories,” wrote Fauci advisor David M. Morens. “As you know, I try to always communicate on gmail because my NIH email is FOIA’d constantly… Don’t worry…I will delete anything I don’t want to see in the New York Times.”
The evidence now shows a clear pattern of Fauci’s top advisors behaving the way that people might if they were engaged in a cover-up. Fauci and Collins pressured Andersen and his colleagues to publish an article dismissing the lab leak even though they believed in it. Morens and Andersen both attempted to evade future FOIA and Subpoena requests using Gmail and Slack.
If it was really the case, as Garry and Andersen said, that Covid-19 did not leak from a lab and that the behaviors revealed by the emails and Slack messages are not a conspiracy theory, then what do they have to hide? Where is the Zoom recording of the February 3 meeting? What was said?
As a nation, we need to go from “we may never know” to “we must find out.” If the behavior by Fauci, Collins, Andersen, Garry, and the others was entirely above board, then they should have no objection to helping members of Congress, journalists, and the public understand what exactly happened between February 3 and February 6 for them to abandon “project-wuhan_engineering” for “project-wuhan_pangolin.”
Here is an excerpt from the Racquet (Matt Taibbi) titled: “”So Friggin’ Likely”: New Covid Documents Reveal Unparalleled Media Deception: Newly released chats and emails between the authors of a crucial scientific paper leave no doubt: an unprecedented official disinformation campaign accompanied the arrival of Covid-19.”
The core four also repeatedly pored over the problem posed by the “furin cleavage site,” a distinctive feature of the Covid-19 genetic sequence. As is now known to the general public thanks again to the digging of the DRASTIC group, which leaked the material in the fall of 2021, researchers at the University of North Carolina led by Dr. Ralph Baric had sent a proposal to the Pentagon seeking to introduce “human-specific cleavage sites” into bat coronaviruses, for a program called DEFUSE. Baric and Shi had worked together on more than one occasion, and even co-authored a paper in 2015 demonstrating that a coronavirus spike protein can infect human cells.
In any case, with these and other issues in mind, all five scientists express belief that escape from the Wuhan lab was at least possible, if not probable:
Andersen: “The lab escape version of this is so friggin’ likely because they were already doing this work…
Garry: “The major hangup I have is the polybasic cleavahe [sic] site… it’s not really a natural process.” Also: “It’s not crackpot to suggest this could have happened given the GoF research we know is happening.”
Lipkin: “[A draft of the paper] does not eliminate the possibility of inadvertent release following adaptation through selection in culture at the institute in Wuhan. Given the scale of the bat CoV research pursued there… we have a nightmare of circumstantial evidence to assess.”
Holmes (replying to Lipkin): “I agree… Seems to have been pre-adapted for human spread since the get go. It’s the epidemiology that I find most worrying.”
Rambaut: “I am quite convinced it has been put there by evolution (whether natural selection or artificial).” …As detailed in Public, the Proximal Origin authors who initially discussed lab escape in such a casual manner appeared to have a change of heart after a February 3rd conference call that included the likes of Dr. Anthony Fauci, then-NIH Head Francis Collins, and Dr. Jeremy Farrar of the Wellcome Trust (and now the WHO).
[Added July 20 2023]
Matt Taibbi steps back and puts these new revelation into a grim perspective. His article is titled: “Covid’s Origins and the Death of Trust: “Public releases the Proximal Origin documents. What they show, and why they’re historic.”
The problem that’s been threatening Western democracies for years, and which is captured in books like Martin Gurri’s The Revolt of the Public, is the widespread loss of faith in institutional authority. At first this was a technical problem, caused by a monstrous new surfeit of information on the Internet, allowing the public for the first time to see warts that were always there. What’s happening now is different. Even those of us who never trusted leaders before at least trusted such people to act in their self-interest. We thought that in emergencies, even the worst officials would suspend their stealing and conniving long enough to do the bare minimum.
As these documents show, however, we can’t even have that expectation. Once people see an institutional malfunction on this scale, it’s like walking in on a cheating spouse, they can’t unsee it. That’s what these scientists were risking when they played around with a lie this big: everything. They may not have been evil exactly — “more Three Stooges than Ocean’s Eleven” is how one scientist put it to me — but their bumbling inability to find their consciences under pressure in the first months of 2020 might end up having lasting consequences, for society and science. In any case, conceding that in media we get lost in the moment a lot and often think what’s happening today is far more important than what happened yesterday, what they have over at Public is historic stuff. I hope you find time to discover it for yourselves.
Taibbi’s article links to Public’s new article: “Covid Origins Scientist Denounces Reporting On His Messages As A “Conspiracy Theory”: We release full cache of messages :: Plus, why Public and Racket keep scooping the mainstream media.” What are the take-aways from the newest documents? They are earthquakes (or, the corporate media should consider them to be earthquakes):
- The scientists never really blamed the pangolins
- Scientists thought lab leak was “Friggin’ likely
- Scientists thought lab leak was possible months after saying otherwise
- “I’m dismissing him” said top scientist about Times reporter
- Scientists suspected the Bat Lady of the lab leak
- The scientists’ conspiracy was driven by obedience to “higher-ups” in US and UK governments
In the context of a worldwide pandemic we suffered through, these are some of the biggest story-lines of the century, but not for many “news” outlets. Public explains:
The New York Times and Washington Post have yet to cover the conspiracy by Andersen and his colleagues to misinform the public. But whatever they decide to do, the question is why Public, Racket, and intrepid reporters like Lee Fang keep getting the big scoops and they don’t.
After all, we have broken some of the biggest stories in the world over the last several months, from the Twitter Files and the global crackdown on free speech to Covid’s origins to FBI and UAP whistleblowers. Often, our stories are confirmed days or weeks later by much larger news media companies and even U.S. Senators. Taibbi has done more than anyone to uncover the disinformation of the Censorship Industrial Complex, while Fang exposed how the FBI helps the Ukrainian government censor ordinary American citizens on Facebook.
Public, Racket, Fang, and other small fry like us shouldn’t be scooping news behemoths. The New York Times had over $2.2 billion in revenue last year, which is over 2,200 times more revenue than Public will have in 2023. All combined, Public, Racket, and Fang have fewer than 12 employees. Why, then, do we keep scooping the Times, the Post, and other major media outlets?
To answer that question, it’s important to understand why the New York Times pushed out Don McNeil, the reporter who Andersen et al. conspired to deceive.
I urge everyone to read the entire article at Public. These are stunning revelations for all of us who want to know what is going on around us. I would not put left-leaning corporate “news” outlets into that category. Their public function is “Protect Joe Biden” and their entire rational appears to be “Because Trump.” News is not their priority on any story that might affect a national election.
I’m writing this on July 20, 2023 5pm Central Time. I checked to see which of the “Big Five” on the political left has any interest in these revelations: Not any of the following: New York Times, Washington Post, NPR.
All of us remember how Trump Gish-galloped from lie to lie while he was in office. It was quite the spectacle. Now we are watching supposed journalists pretend to not see important revelation after important revelation. I’ve been watching and noting these episodes of “See No Evil” for years, so I’m long past the point where I am surprised at the silence and the manipulation by “news” outlets. I’m not beyond despairing for our country. I have been feeling it intensely lately. Without reliable information, we don’t have much of a country.
I will end with this quote from the National Constitution Center:
If there is a lesson in all of this it is that our Constitution is neither a self-actuating nor a self-correcting document. It requires the constant attention and devotion of all citizens. There is a story, often told, that upon exiting the Constitutional Convention Benjamin Franklin was approached by a group of citizens asking what sort of government the delegates had created. His answer was: “A republic, if you can keep it.” The brevity of that response should not cause us to under-value its essential meaning: democratic republics are not merely founded upon the consent of the people, they are also absolutely dependent upon the active and informed involvement of the people for their continued good health.
