The fallout from the release of emails from Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and presidential medical advisor, continues to rain down on both the bureaucrat and the American media.
Rather than opting for honesty and full disclosure, both participants in a public deception of historic duplicity have decided to rehabilitate the doctor. This is the only explanation for MSNBC anchor Nicolle Wallace’s interview with Dr. Anthony Fauci, the first since his emails were made public.
Of course, she didn’t ask about email exchanges he had in the early months of the coronavirus pandemic, which have been trending as #FauciGate on social media. Wallace instead asked softball questions smearing the Trump administration and those of us who spread “disinformation” (that turned out to be the truth).
He responded that…”science is dynamic.”
I wonder if you feel like you’re still making up some of that lost ground from many months under the last administration of not just no information but disinformation being out there,” Wallace said. “Do you still see some hardness among his supporters around the vaccine or around some of these messages that you’re sharing today?”Fauci acknowledged that some people “resent” him for his conduct in the last administration but insisted he was never “anti-Trump.””What they didn’t seem to understand… is that science is a dynamic process,” Fauci told Wallace. “So something that you know in January, you make a recommendation or comment about it, but as you get more and more information, the information leads you to change because that’s what science is, it’s a self-correcting process.So when you hear someone say something at one point and then two or three months later, if you stick with what you said at the original time when you had one-fifth of the data that you have now, I think that would be inappropriate.”
So Fauci asserts he couldn’t possibly have known the coronavirus was a gain-of-function, bioengineered virus. You know, despite the fact a Feb. 1, 2020 email that he sent to NIH Principal Deputy Director Hugh Auchincloss had an attachment labeled “Baric, Shi et al – Nature medicine – SARS Gain of function.pdf” and the subject line, “IMPORTANT.”
Fauci’s message had a tone of urgency, saying, “Hugh: It is essential that we speak this AM. Keep your cell phone on. I have a conference call at 7:45 AM with [Health and Human Services Secretary Alex] Azar. It likely will be over at 8:45 AM. Read this paper as well as the e-mail that I will forward to you now. You will have tasks today that must be done. Thanks, Tony.” Fauci sent the same attachment to Lawrence Tabak, the principal deputy director and deputy ethics counselor at NIH, with the subject line “FW: IMPORTANT” and the message, “Here it is.”Auchincloss replied to Fauci later that day, saying, “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 that means since Emily is sure that no Coronavirus work [has] gone through the P3 framework.” Although “Emily” is not identified, Emily Erbelding, director of the NIH’s division of microbiology and infectious diseases, is mentioned in over five dozen Fauci emails. Auchincloss continued: “She will try to determine if we have any distant ties to this work abroad.” Fauci replied, “OK. Stay tuned.”
If this softball interview weren’t horrendous enough, in Wednesday’s White House Press Briefing, not one reporter from the White House Press Corps felt compelled to ask about Fauci’s emails that trended number one on social media.
The White House press corps did not ask President Joe Biden’s Press Secretary Jen Psaki one question about the recently published emails between Dr. Anthony Fauci, health officials, and other scientists discussing COVID-19’s origins and mitigation techniques.During the nearly 45-minute press briefing, Psaki fielded questions about the Russians, hacks, the president’s vaccination incentives, and bipartisanship but did not hear one mention of Fauci or the role he played in flip-flopping about masks, downplaying the NIH’s funding of gain of function research in Wuhan, and his relationship with Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg who censored COVID-19 posts until recently.
Years from now, when reasonable and rational people review the actions taken by Fauci, the high-level public health bureaucrats and scientists that he led, and the American press, they are likely to conclude their actions killed more people than the coronavirus.
Meanwhile, the tide of public opinion is now turning against Fauci.
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY