Fauci ‘paid scientist $18 Million’ to change his opinion on Covid…

[TigerGrowls]

Put him in front of the firing squad.

Fauci ‘paid scientist $18 Million’ to change his opinion on Covid…

Fauci gave Anderson a $1.88M grant, and $16.5M funding. The Federalist has all the details… Recently released e-mails show that Dr. Ant…

citizenfreepress.com

Posted by Kane on March 2, 2023 12:34 am








Fauci gave Anderson a $1.88M grant, and $16.5M funding.

The Federalist has all the details…

---

Recently released e-mails show that Dr. Anthony Fauci knew key facts about the origins of COVID-19 in January 2020. But at that critical time, when the country was first learning about the virus, Dr. Fauci chose not to share the facts with Americans. Instead, he acted to conceal them.

On January 31, 2020, at 10:32 p.m., Dr. Fauci received an email from British researcher, Dr. Kristian Andersen. Dr. Andersen has received millions of dollars in grants from the NIH. In the email, he warned Dr. Fauci:

One has to look really closely at all the sequences to see that some of the features look engineered . . . Eddie [Holmes], Bob [Garry], Mike [Ferguson] and myself all find the genome inconsistent with evolutionary theory.

Two hours later, at 12:29 a.m. on February 1, Dr. Fauci emailed his long-time deputy, Dr. Hugh Auchincloss. In the email, Dr. Fauci attached a paper written by Dr. Ralph Baric and Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi – the so-called “bat woman” from Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). The paper highlighted taxpayer-funded gain-of-function research on coronaviruses conducted by the WIV. Dr. Fauci told Dr. Auchincloss:

It is essential that we speak this [morning]. Keep your cell phone on . . . read this paper . . . you will have tasks today that must be done. Urgency. Intensity.

Two hours later, at 2:48 a.m., Dr. Fauci sent another email, to Dr. Robert Kadlec. Dr. Kadlec was the Trump-appointed Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response at the Department of Health and Human Services. Attached to this email was an article that downplayed the lab leak and advocated for an evolutionary origin to COVID-19. Dr. Fauci simply wrote:

Bob: This came out today. Gives a balanced view.

No urgency. No intensity.

Why was Dr. Fauci so concerned when emailing his deputy but so calm when emailing his boss? Why didn’t he send Dr. Kadlec the Baric-Shi paper? The paper that supported the original message from Dr. Andersen that COVID-19 looked engineered, was inconsistent with evolutionary theory, and linked American tax dollars to gain of function research at the WIV.

Later that morning, at 11:47 a.m., Dr. Auchincloss replied to Dr. Fauci:

The paper you sent me says the experiments were performed before the gain-of-function pause but have since been reviewed and approved by NIH. Not sure what this means since [we are] sure that no coronavirus work has gone through the P3 framework. [We] will try to determine if we have any distant ties to this work abroad.

Dr. Auchincloss’ email confirms Dr. Fauci’s worst fear. American tax dollars funded gain of function research at the WIV and that research didn’t go through proper oversight (the P3 framework).

Dr. Fauci already knew there was a lethal virus on the loose in Wuhan, China. In just 13 hours, between 10:32 p.m. January 31, 2020, and 11:47 a.m. February 1, 2020, Dr. Fauci learned three additional facts.

What did he do next?

He organized a conference call for the evening of February 1, 2020. On the call were 11 virologists from around the world, including Dr. Andersen who sent Dr. Fauci the email less than 24 hours earlier. Almost all the participants on the call had previously been awarded American taxpayer-funded grants by Dr. Fauci.

Who was not on the call?

Dr. Kadlec, Dr. Fauci’s superior at HHS.

Dr. Robert Redfield, Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Dr. Brett Giroir, Assistant Secretary for Health.

Or Dr. Birx, the soon-to-be COVID-19 Response Coordinator.

In fact, there was not a single U.S. government official on the call, except for Dr. Fauci.

What happened on the call? We don’t know. All of the emails discussing the call are redacted.

However, we do know what happened four days later. Dr. Andersen, the virologist who sent the original 10:32 p.m. email on January 31, went public with this statement: “The main crackpot theories going around at the moment relate to this virus being somehow engineered . . . and that is demonstrably false.”

In four days, Dr. Andersen flipped 180 degrees.

The only intervening event appears to be the conference call with Dr. Fauci.

In addition, over the next few weeks, Dr. Andersen and three others on the conference call penned an article in Nature Medicine. The article included the definitive statement, that “Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct . . . “

 

[TigerGrowls]

 

[TigerGrowls]

The New York Times, Fauci, and the 2021 coverup of a virologist who accidentally blew the lid off COVID... - Revolver News

In this case, the coverup and the crime are equally bad.

www.revolver.news

 

[dpic73]

Sounds like a pack of lies to me. The researcher had done some very preliminary research but had not come to a conclusion about anything. This was in Jan 2020 when no one knew much at all. Science evolves dude

His own words:

"The features in SARS-CoV-2 that initially suggested possible engineering were identified in related coronaviruses, meaning that features that initially looked unusual to us weren’t.

Many of these analyses were completed in a matter of days, while we worked around the clock, which allowed us to reject our preliminary hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 might have been engineered, while other “lab”-based scenarios were still on the table.

Yet more extensive analyses, significant additional data and thorough investigations to compare genomic diversity more broadly across coronaviruses led to the peer-reviewed study published in Nature Medicine. For example, we looked at data from coronaviruses found in other species, such as bats and pangolins, which demonstrated that the features that first appeared unique to SARS-CoV-2 were in fact found in other, related viruses.

Overall, this is a textbook example of the scientific method where a preliminary hypothesis is rejected in favor of a competing hypothesis after more data become available and analyses are completed."

Scientist Opens Up About His Early Email to Fauci on Virus Origins (Published 2021)

In early 2020, Kristian Andersen wrote to Anthony Fauci about the possibility of an engineered coronavirus. His research has since dispelled those suspicions.

www.nytimes.com

 

[TigerGrowls]

Sounds like a pack of lies to me. The researcher had done some very preliminary research but had not come to a conclusion about anything. This was in Jan 2020 when no one knew much at all. Science evolves dude

His own words:

"The features in SARS-CoV-2 that initially suggested possible engineering were identified in related coronaviruses, meaning that features that initially looked unusual to us weren’t.

Many of these analyses were completed in a matter of days, while we worked around the clock, which allowed us to reject our preliminary hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 might have been engineered, while other “lab”-based scenarios were still on the table.

Yet more extensive analyses, significant additional data and thorough investigations to compare genomic diversity more broadly across coronaviruses led to the peer-reviewed study published in Nature Medicine. For example, we looked at data from coronaviruses found in other species, such as bats and pangolins, which demonstrated that the features that first appeared unique to SARS-CoV-2 were in fact found in other, related viruses.

Overall, this is a textbook example of the scientific method where a preliminary hypothesis is rejected in favor of a competing hypothesis after more data become available and analyses are completed."

Scientist Opens Up About His Early Email to Fauci on Virus Origins (Published 2021)

In early 2020, Kristian Andersen wrote to Anthony Fauci about the possibility of an engineered coronavirus. His research has since dispelled those suspicions.

www.nytimes.com

Its the truth and a bitter pill for the mrna militia members like you.

 

[TigerGrowls]

The New York Times, Fauci, and the 2021 coverup of a virologist who accidentally blew the lid off COVID... - Revolver News

In this case, the coverup and the crime are equally bad.

www.revolver.news

 

[TigerGrowls]

Fauci spending taxpayer money to screw us over. Wow!!

New emails show Dr. Anthony Fauci commissioned scientific paper in Feb. 2020 to disprove Wuhan lab leak theory

New emails uncovered by House Republicans probing the COVID-19 pandemic reveal the deceptive nature of Dr. Anthony Fauci.

nypost.com

New emails show Dr. Anthony Fauci commissioned scientific paper in Feb. 2020 to disprove Wuhan lab leak theory​

By Miranda Devine

March 5, 2023 | 7:07pm

New emails uncovered by House Republicans revealed Dr. Anthony Fauci's nature during the COVID-19 pandemic.Greg Nash - Pool via CNP
New emails uncovered by House Republicans probing the COVID-19 pandemic reveal the deceptive nature of Dr. Anthony Fauci.

MORE FROM:MIRANDA DEVINE​

• Why Democrats are dreading a full Jan. 6 reveal​

• GOPers stand up for life and against AG Merrick Garland​

• Thank God for the whistleblowers exposing the FBI's blatant political bias​

• Conservative judges punished for 'bias' while liberal jurists skate​

• Bitter Don Lemon isn't sorry for sexist remarks and clearly doesn't like women​

They show he “prompted” or commissioned — and had final approval on — a scientific paper written specifically in February 2020 to disprove the theory that the virus leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China.

Eight weeks later, Fauci stood at a White House press conference alongside President Trump and cited that paper as evidence that the lab leak theory was implausible while pretending it had nothing to do with him and he did not know the authors.

“There was a study recently,” he told reporters on April 17, 2020, when asked if the virus could have come from a Chinese lab, “where a group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists looked at the sequences… in bats as they evolve and the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.

“So, the paper will be available. I don’t have the authors right now, but we can make it available to you.”

In a press conference with then-President Donald Trump and Dr. Fauci, both men cited that the paper’s theory of the lab leak was implausible.Getty Images
View this document on Scribd
That paper, entitled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2” was sent to Fauci for editing in draft form and again for final approval before it was published in Nature Medicine on Feb. 17, 2020.

It was written four days after Fauci, and his NIH boss Francis Collins, held a call with the four authors to discuss reports that COVID-19 may have leaked from the Wuhan lab and “may have been intentionally genetically manipulated”.

The House Oversight subcommittee published emails Sunday in which the paper’s co-author Dr. Kristian Andersen admits Fauci “prompted” him to write the paper with the goal of “disprove” the lab leak theory.

The paper, entitled “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2” was allegedly sent to Fauci twice before it was published in Nature Medicine on Feb. 17, 2020.Getty Images
On February 12, 2020, Andersen submitted the paper to Nature Medicine with a cover email: “There has been a lot of speculation, fear-mongering, and conspiracies put forward in this space. [This paper was] Prompted by Jeremy Farrah [sic], Tony Fauci, and Francis Collins”.

Farrar, then head of British nonprofit, the Wellcome Trust, which has historic ties to the pharmaceutical industry and the Gates Foundation, was rewarded with the plum role of Chief Scientist at the World Health Organization last December.

On the day the “Proximal Origin” paper was published, emails show Farrar pushing through a crucial change: “Sorry to micromanage/micro edit! But would you be willing to change one sentence?”

Farrar’s change was to replace the word “unlikely” with “improbable” in a statement about the lab leak origin, so it would read: “It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of an existing SARS-related coronavirus.”

Improbable means having a probability too low to inspire belief; unbelievable, even ridiculous.

That’s what Fauci and friends wanted us to think of the lab leak theory that looked probable from the “get-go”, as one dissenting scientist said at the time, and looks more probable by the day.

The question of why Fauci went to such an effort to obscure the origins of COVID-19 is a major focus of the GOP-led committee.

China has long denied the virus was a result of a leak from one of its laboratories.AFP via Getty Images
While they’re at it, they should quiz the Biden administration’s new “US Negotiator for the Pandemic Accord” at the WHO, Ambassador Pamela Hamamoto, a former campaign bundler and Hawaii schoolmate of Barack Obama.

Last month she sided with China to keep deliberations around this new international pandemic treaty secret.

What are they trying to hide?