Fauci-gate

[KB5252]

Fauci was an honest broker of information in a time where not a lot was certain. Anyone who does not think that the scientists in this area were doing the best they could is just not rational. And all the while Fauci had to fend off pressure form Trump to pretend it wasn't a problem.

You want to complain he was too dismissive of the possibility it was man made? Ok, I get it. You want to be able to say Trump was right about that. Maybe in the end you will get to say that, I don't know. But I don't think you can say that Fauci was intentionally misleading people about this when the facts are so murky.

And I say that particularly to the likes of Rand Paul, as anti-China as they come, because he wants to paint Biden and the Dems as soft on China. the irony is that its such a weaksauce gimmick to try to overcome the REALITY that Trump was constantly taking it up the keister from Russia.

Not going to work.

If Trump was taking it up the keister as you say, what terms would we use for what is happening to Biden? Hell Obama took just s many L's to Putin as Trump did. Biden has taken more in his short tenure than either, possibly even more than the two combined.

 

[KB5252]

I could agree with this except the emails and reports state that he told the American people and congress one thing while he was saying something something else to his colleagues and scientists.,...that makes it a lie.

And the people that support him hypocrites, since they blasted Trump for doing the same thing.

 

[DC_Vol]

If Trump was taking it up the keister as you say, what terms would we use for what is happening to Biden? Hell Obama took just s many L's to Putin as Trump did. Biden has taken more in his short tenure than either, possibly even more than the two combined.

You will never hear it stated, but you can intuit with certainty from their actions and statements: The Democrats are not really concerned with Putin or his influence, nor do they view Russia as a major global threat.

We don’t even have to go back to the Cold War to see evidence of this. Let’s just got back to the Obama administration. Just a few examples:

1- The “reset” debacle with Russia, which was spearheaded by Biden himself. Who can forget where Obama uttered his infamous flexibility comment on a hot mic?

2- Refused support of Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression. Wouldn’t even sell them US weapons to defend themselves

3- Removed the missile defenses in Europe

4- They all scoffed at Romney for suggesting Putin and Russia were the largest threat to the west. “The 80’s called and they want their foreign policy back”.

Then when it looked like there was some political power to be recaptured, they all became anti-Russia patriots. It was a miracle! And everyone who disagreed with them became a Russian stooge, a narrative dutifully propagated by the media.

Now here we are with Biden, and it seems like it’s old times again.

You really have to be a dope not to see how hollow the Democrats’ position is on Russia. It’s all a show.

 

[McDad]

The whole thing is very strange to me. Sadly, the unsurprising part is that Fauci, along with other people in the bureaucracy, were following the rules of politics more than the rules of science. This was evident early on.

Just a few of many things I find really odd:

- why did the media change course on this at the same time? We went from conspiracy theory to consensus overnight? This quick shift clearly exposes the media as propagandists versus journalists, so why the sudden change?

- why did Fauci’s book get pulled so fast? These types of decisions usually take longer to make. I was very surprised how quickly this happened...would love to know why.

Who in their right mind still trusts any government institution? Or the media?

In reverse order.
Could be Fauci's book was not selling and it was in the cards to pull it. Might have been the opportune moment. Might be coincidence.

The media doing a 180 so quickly is a bit different. There was a scandal in 2010 about journalists who were on a moderated forum by invitation only. They all happened to be left leaning. The forum was shut down once it came to light. McDad conspiracy theory...the forum was shut down and the arrangement moved "underground" and is still active today.

Rush, years ago, used to play montages of media using the exact same words (like "gravitas" when Bush 2 was running) and I wondered how did all these separate people in different media organizations all coincidentally land on the same obscure term.

Here's a link about Journolist. JournoList - Wikipedia

 

[volinbham]

In reverse order.
Could be Fauci's book was not selling and it was in the cards to pull it. Might have been the opportune moment. Might be coincidence.

The media doing a 180 so quickly is a bit different. There was a scandal in 2010 about journalists who were on a moderated forum by invitation only. They all happened to be left leaning. The forum was shut down once it came to light. McDad conspiracy theory...the forum was shut down and the arrangement moved "underground" and is still active today.

Rush, years ago, used to play montages of media using the exact same words (like "gravitas" when Bush 2 was running) and I wondered how did all these separate people in different media organizations all coincidentally land on the same obscure term.

Here's a link about Journolist. JournoList - Wikipedia

It's less underground than you think - there was an article bragging about how the news media coordinated ahead of the election to quash any discussion of election fraud issues. It was pretty revealing how the narrative was created and implemented then they patted themselves on the back for it

 

[McDad]

It's less underground than you think - there was an article bragging about how the news media coordinated ahead of the election to quash any discussion of election fraud issues. It was pretty revealing how the narrative was created and implemented then they patted themselves on the back for it

Doesn't surprise me to hear it is not very underground. I am not as "tuned in" as I used to be.

 

[NCFisher]

In reverse order.
Could be Fauci's book was not selling and it was in the cards to pull it. Might have been the opportune moment. Might be coincidence.

The media doing a 180 so quickly is a bit different. There was a scandal in 2010 about journalists who were on a moderated forum by invitation only. They all happened to be left leaning. The forum was shut down once it came to light. McDad conspiracy theory...the forum was shut down and the arrangement moved "underground" and is still active today.

Rush, years ago, used to play montages of media using the exact same words (like "gravitas" when Bush 2 was running) and I wondered how did all these separate people in different media organizations all coincidentally land on the same obscure term.

Here's a link about Journolist. JournoList - Wikipedia

The book was set for a November release and in Pre-Sale status, launched June 1.

Looks like some social distancing from Fauci in a confluence of reveals that his shape-shifting, double-talk may have been motivated by self preservation, not what's in the best interest of the country. And may have perjured himself in the process.

I admit to liking that the infectious gnome is meeting his karma.

Hey, if they find themselves with a lot of leisure time, maybe he and A. Cuomo can do that Pacino/DeNiro movie thing - I'm laughing already!

 

[BreatheUT]

It's less underground than you think - there was an article bragging about how the news media coordinated ahead of the election to quash any discussion of election fraud issues. It was pretty revealing how the narrative was created and implemented then they patted themselves on the back for it

Apparently there is a long article in the NYT from several months ago about bureaucrats working behind the scenes to make sure Trump wasn't re-elected. I can't remember the exact name of it but it was troubling.

 

[NCFisher]

Apparently there is a long article in the NYT from several months ago about bureaucrats working behind the scenes to make sure Trump wasn't re-elected. I can't remember the exact name of it but it was troubling.

Probably this: The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election

 

[Grand Vol]

One of my friends, a doctor in the Air Force Reserves and optometrist in her daily life, double masked since Day 1 based on information she received from her AF colleagues.

I'm frustrated that it appears there were multiple streams of info.

The .mil went full potato over CV19. I'm not sure if I'd trust anything that came out of any military service.

 

[Wireless1]

Then, maybe you can explain why the .gov didn't mail three to each American so they could rotate them daily.

With every mail in ballot

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

Zuckerberg and his “fact checking” is a joke

 

[n_huffhines]

“After the email release, Andersen tweeted June 1 that "we seriously considered a lab leak a possibility," and "what the email shows, is a clear example of the scientific process."

The WTF Facebook post includes another email to Fauci from a professor of dermatology who voiced his suspicion that the virus could have been released from a lab in Wuhan. The email gives no data to support that suspicion.

Plucking emails from the BuzzFeed and Washington Post trove inspired other social media posts suspicious of Fauci.

Instagram posts drew attention to an email to Fauci from independent researcher Adam Gaertner. In one June 2 post, the email’s subject line, "Coronavirus bioweapon production method," and the phrase "This is how the virus was created" are underlined in red.

But despite Gaertner’s use of technical terms, including "adjusted virions" and "conformational rearrangements," the email contains no evidence to prove the point. Gaertner has appeared on web programs that link vaccines to the creation of superspreaders, and he promotes the use of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin to treat COVID-19. Some studies find ivermectin effective in treating COVID-19; others have found no impact.

One Instagram user who shared the image posted an update saying, "Just to be clear this email appears to have been sent to Fauci through public inquiry, so it doesn't necessarily link Fauci to anything."

Our ruling
A Facebook post says, "Fauci's fellow scientist could tell early on that the (coronavirus) looked manufactured."

The only email that came close to matching that claim noted that while some evidence suggested the virus might be man-made, more work was needed and that opinion could change. The email presented a possibility — a starting point for more research — not a conclusion. The man who wrote that email concluded that the virus developed naturally in a scientific journal article in March 2020.

We rate this claim False.”

PolitiFact - No, emails to Fauci don’t show early agreement that virus was man-made

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

“After the email release, Andersen tweeted June 1 that "we seriously considered a lab leak a possibility," and "what the email shows, is a clear example of the scientific process."

The WTF Facebook post includes another email to Fauci from a professor of dermatology who voiced his suspicion that the virus could have been released from a lab in Wuhan. The email gives no data to support that suspicion.

Plucking emails from the BuzzFeed and Washington Post trove inspired other social media posts suspicious of Fauci.

Instagram posts drew attention to an email to Fauci from independent researcher Adam Gaertner. In one June 2 post, the email’s subject line, "Coronavirus bioweapon production method," and the phrase "This is how the virus was created" are underlined in red.

But despite Gaertner’s use of technical terms, including "adjusted virions" and "conformational rearrangements," the email contains no evidence to prove the point. Gaertner has appeared on web programs that link vaccines to the creation of superspreaders, and he promotes the use of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin to treat COVID-19. Some studies find ivermectin effective in treating COVID-19; others have found no impact.

One Instagram user who shared the image posted an update saying, "Just to be clear this email appears to have been sent to Fauci through public inquiry, so it doesn't necessarily link Fauci to anything."

Our ruling
A Facebook post says, "Fauci's fellow scientist could tell early on that the (coronavirus) looked manufactured."

The only email that came close to matching that claim noted that while some evidence suggested the virus might be man-made, more work was needed and that opinion could change. The email presented a possibility — a starting point for more research — not a conclusion. The man who wrote that email concluded that the virus developed naturally in a scientific journal article in March 2020.

We rate this claim False.”

PolitiFact - No, emails to Fauci don’t show early agreement that virus was man-made

Oh wow more “fact checkers” nonsense

 

[n_huffhines]

It's less underground than you think - there was an article bragging about how the news media coordinated ahead of the election to quash any discussion of election fraud issues. It was pretty revealing how the narrative was created and implemented then they patted themselves on the back for it

Can you really fault them when Trump was preparing everybody with claims of fraud if he lost? They're basically playing the same game

 

[n_huffhines]

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Fauci was an honest broker of information in a time where not a lot was certain. Anyone who does not think that the scientists in this area were doing the best they could is just not rational. And all the while Fauci had to fend off pressure form Trump to pretend it wasn't a problem.

You want to complain he was too dismissive of the possibility it was man made? Ok, I get it. You want to be able to say Trump was right about that. Maybe in the end you will get to say that, I don't know. But I don't think you can say that Fauci was intentionally misleading people about this when the facts are so murky.

Its amazing to me that you would give Fauci as much margin for error and benefit of doubt with regards to decisions being made within his field of expertise (medicine/virology), yet you couldn't find half of that amount of flexibility and understanding for Trump who was not a subject matter expert in that field. And furthermore, calling Fauci "an honest broker of information" is disingenuous because he had clear conflicts of interest (as these emails reveal) in that not only did he have an incentive to hide his possible role in the creation or proliferation of these Franken-viruses, but he also had an incentive to create a narrative and play up to the media in order to help with the sales of future movie and book deals (which were revealed in the emails).

And I say that particularly to the likes of Rand Paul, as anti-China as they come, because he wants to paint Biden and the Dems as soft on China. the irony is that its such a weaksauce gimmick to try to overcome the REALITY that Trump was constantly taking it up the keister from Russia.

Not going to work.

Your media and your White House have claimed that Russia (or Russian assets) have been engaged in multiple cyberattacks within the first 6 months of the Biden presidency to critical infrastructure when nothing of the sort happened under Trump's watch... but you're here screaming "Russia Russia Russia" was owning Trump at every turn.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

View attachment 372064

So what does this say about most Americans?

2 weeks before the election: A quarter of the population believed the virus came from the Wuhan lab;
23% of Americans think the coronavirus was created in a Chinese lab, a survey suggests. Here's why that conspiracy theory is bogus.

2 days ago: After the Fauci emails were revealed;
Most Americans now think COVID came from Wuhan lab, new survey shows

The survey from The Economist/YouGov found 58 percent of Americans said COVID-19 came from a Wuhan lab, up from 49 percent who said the same when the pollsters first asked the question in May of 2020.

 

[Sea Ray]

“After the email release, Andersen tweeted June 1 that "we seriously considered a lab leak a possibility," and "what the email shows, is a clear example of the scientific process."

The WTF Facebook post includes another email to Fauci from a professor of dermatology who voiced his suspicion that the virus could have been released from a lab in Wuhan. The email gives no data to support that suspicion.

Plucking emails from the BuzzFeed and Washington Post trove inspired other social media posts suspicious of Fauci.

Instagram posts drew attention to an email to Fauci from independent researcher Adam Gaertner. In one June 2 post, the email’s subject line, "Coronavirus bioweapon production method," and the phrase "This is how the virus was created" are underlined in red.

But despite Gaertner’s use of technical terms, including "adjusted virions" and "conformational rearrangements," the email contains no evidence to prove the point. Gaertner has appeared on web programs that link vaccines to the creation of superspreaders, and he promotes the use of the antiparasitic drug ivermectin to treat COVID-19. Some studies find ivermectin effective in treating COVID-19; others have found no impact.

One Instagram user who shared the image posted an update saying, "Just to be clear this email appears to have been sent to Fauci through public inquiry, so it doesn't necessarily link Fauci to anything."

Our ruling
A Facebook post says, "Fauci's fellow scientist could tell early on that the (coronavirus) looked manufactured."

The only email that came close to matching that claim noted that while some evidence suggested the virus might be man-made, more work was needed and that opinion could change. The email presented a possibility — a starting point for more research — not a conclusion. The man who wrote that email concluded that the virus developed naturally in a scientific journal article in March 2020.

We rate this claim False.”

PolitiFact - No, emails to Fauci don’t show early agreement that virus was man-made

That whole thing is fact checking the wrong point. The point here is that we didn't know whether it was manufactured. There was no evidence in either direction yet Fauci didn't have that attitude. His attitude was it definitely was not manufactured. Where are the facts to support that? All I want out of Fauci is to say "we don't know and we should continue to look at it". He gave no such ambivalence

 

[n_huffhines]

So what does this say about most Americans?

2 weeks before the election: A quarter of the population believed the virus came from the Wuhan lab;
23% of Americans think the coronavirus was created in a Chinese lab, a survey suggests. Here's why that conspiracy theory is bogus.

2 days ago: After the Fauci emails were revealed;
Most Americans now think COVID came from Wuhan lab, new survey shows

Well, i would say you need to compare poll 2 from 2 days ago to poll 2 May 2020, instead of a different poll. It rose from 49% to 58% with presumably the same methodology (polling just Americans). The methodology in study 1 that got 23% 6 months ago is different (polling people in 5 different countries).

For a day or two, without pouring through the emails myself, I believed people that interpreted the emails to say the virus came from the lab...now I have been convinced otherwise.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Can you really fault them when Trump was preparing everybody with claims of fraud if he lost? They're basically playing the same game

Not. even. close. Trump's fantasy didn't ruin millions of lives.

 

[headhunter15]

 

[volinbham]

Can you really fault them when Trump was preparing everybody with claims of fraud if he lost? They're basically playing the same game

I can fault them for coordinating to send a unified message.

I can fault them for predetermining reality and starting from a perspective rather than see what the facts were and report them.

One is a politician who is expected to deal in propaganda; one is supposed to be the neutral observer who cuts through the propaganda rather than being a coordinated propaganda machine.

TL;DR - the press shouldn't be "playing the same game" as politicians.

 

[volinbham]

About the fact-checking

Anthony Fauci May Not Have 'Lied' About Face Masks, but He Was Not Exactly Honest Either

 

[BreatheUT]

Its amazing to me that you would give Fauci as much margin for error and benefit of doubt with regards to decisions being made within his field of expertise (medicine/virology), yet you couldn't find half of that amount of flexibility and understanding for Trump who was not a subject matter expert in that field. And furthermore, calling Fauci "an honest broker of information" is disingenuous because he had clear conflicts of interest (as these emails reveal) in that not only did he have an incentive to hide his possible role in the creation or proliferation of these Franken-viruses, but he also had an incentive to create a narrative and play up to the media in order to help with the sales of future movie and book deals (which were revealed in the emails).


Your media and your White House have claimed that Russia (or Russian assets) have been engaged in multiple cyberattacks within the first 6 months of the Biden presidency to critical infrastructure when nothing of the sort happened under Trump's watch... but you're here screaming "Russia Russia Russia" was owning Trump at every turn.

This! I broached this question in another thread about whether or not we saw this type of cyber hacking behavior under the Trump administration but there was no response.

I didn't recall a single major cyber attack, but maybe I missed one. Yet here we are, 4 months in and you would think Somali privates were stealing ships again like during the Obama administration with the number of ransomware attacks.