Election Officials In Democrat-Run State Rarely Investigate Campaign Finance Violations: REPORT
The Delaware Department of Elections said it had 'no records' of investigative probes
EcoHealth Alliance is in trouble with the National Institutes of Health again, but the agency appears to be showing lenience toward the nonprofit group, which used taxpayer dollars to conduct risky bat virus experiments with Chinese researchers.
In October, then-NIH Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak wrote in a letter to lawmakers that EcoHealth had violated the terms of a research grant to study bat coronavirus by failing to report the results of a lab experiment that caused a bat coronavirus to become more contagious. Now, current NIH Deputy Director Michael Lauer wrote another scathing letter to the nonprofit criticizing EcoHealth's pattern of noncompliance with the agency's grant requirements.
"EcoHealth has demonstrated a history of failure to comply with several elements of the terms and conditions of grant awards, but also for the suspended award," Lauer wrote to EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak and chief of staff Dr. Aleksei Chmura.
The "suspended award" was a 2020 grant for research that was sub-awarded to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, according to the Washington Examiner, which first reported the letter.
EcoHealth has received millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded research awards over the course of many years for coronavirus research in China as well as many other projects. But Lauer accused the group of a slew of violations related to neglecting to turn in financial and research progress reports on time and failing to meet other oversight requirements. The NIH identified eight different written agreement requirements that EcoHealth had failed to comply with, including reporting requirements for a $3 million study of "spillover risk of high zoonotic potential viruses from wildlife," the Examiner reported.
The NIH also accused EcoHealth of overcharging the agency on its "facilities and administrative" costs for the grant involving work with the Wuhan lab. "NIH identified that an inappropriate F&A was charged at a rate of 11 percent for years 2-5 of the subaward agreement," the letter states. The nonprofit should have charged a rate of 8%, according to NIH.
House Republicans on the Oversight Committee led by ranking member Rep. James Comer (R-Ky.) said the NIH letter "confirms EcoHealth hid the truth about their risky coronavirus experiments in Wuhan."
Oversight Republicans are getting results. \n \n@RepJamesComer recently requested NIH provide its communications with EcoHealth & Peter Daszak.\n \nA letter dated January 6, 2022 now confirms EcoHealth hid the truth about their risky coronavirus experiments in Wuhan.pic.twitter.com/XeOtyS6kK5— Oversight Committee Republicans (@Oversight Committee Republicans) 1641935005
Because of these multiple violations, the NIH informed EcoHealth that its current grants will no longer be automatically extended at no cost. The nonprofit must "request and receive written prior approval from the appropriate NIH awarding Institute or Center (IC) before any extensions of the final budget period." Additionally, EcoHealth will be required to "develop and successfully implement a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for these awards with milestones to address and correct the deficiencies noted in this letter."
Commenting on Lauer's letter, Dr. Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University and a critic of gain-of-function experiments, criticized the NIH for going easy on EcoHealth by declining to take further enforcement action, even though the agency is entitled to under federal law.
"Inexplicably, [the] letter imposes no sanctions on EcoHealth — which continues to receive $2.1 million annually in NIH funding — other than to set a new deadline of 1/14/2022," Ebright tweeted. He is one of many public health experts who believes that EcoHealth improperly funded risky gain-of-function experiments in Wuhan, China, that could make viruses deadlier.
NIH officials including Dr. Anthony Fauci have repeatedly publicly denied that grants awarded to EcoHealth or any other researchers were used to fund gain-of-function research that made deadly pathogens more transmissible among humans. EcoHealth also denies that a $600,000 grant received from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and sub-awarded to the Wuhan lab funded gain-of-function research there, but this claim is contested. Lawmakers like Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) have asserted that experiments known to have been done with EcoHealth's collaboration qualify as gain-of-function, and squabbling over the technical definition this area of research has led to tense public exchanges between Paul and Fauci. Last summer, Paul referred Fauci to the Department of Justice to be criminally investigated for allegedly lying to Congress.
Leaked documents published by whistleblowers in September revealed that in 2018, EcoHealth Alliance asked the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency for a $14 million grant to study infectious diseases as part of a program to prevent pandemics. The agency ultimately rejected EcoHealth's request after reviewers determined the group proposed to conduct research that violated agency guidelines on gain-of-function research.
The main problem with EcoHealth Alliance dodging oversight and reporting requirements for its research grants is that if the group did fund gain-of-function research, Fauci and the NIH may not even be aware of that fact because the results of the experiments were not reported on time.
A Democratic lawmaker suggested the FBI conducted a "fake" background check on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and demanded that President Joe Biden's newly appointed attorney general conduct a review of the bureau's work.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to newly confirmed Attorney General Merrick Garland demanding "proper oversight" over several matters related to the Department ofJustice, including the FBI's 2018 investigation into the unsubstantiated and uncorroborated allegations of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh, who was then President Donald Trump's nominee to fill a seat on the Supreme Court vacated by Justice Anthony Kennedy's retirement.
Whitehouse asked Garland to review "what appears to have been a politically-constrained and perhaps fake FBI investigation into alleged misconduct by now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh."
During Kavanaugh's confirmation process, Christine Blasey Ford came forward to accuse him of a sexual assault that she alleged occurred in the mid-1980s. She testified about her allegations to the U.S. Senate but was unable to provide a consistent account of what allegedly happened, had no memory of key details that could corroborate her account, and made several other inconsistent statements, failing to substantiate her claims.
Another woman, Judy Munri-Leighton, made a false allegation that Kavanaugh raped her and latter admitted she had never met him. A third woman, Julie Swetnick, made the outrageous claim that Kavanaugh participated in a "train" of boys lined up to rape women at house parties, later contradicted her sworn testimony, and was referred to the Department of Justice by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) for possible criminal investigation for false statements to Congress.
Kavanaugh vehemently denied all of the allegations.
At the insistence of Senate Democrats, the FBI conducted a background investigation into Kavanaugh and reviewed the allegations of sexual misconduct leveled against him. They found "no corroboration of the allegations."
But Whitehouse and other Democrats accused President Donald Trump of limiting the FBI's investigation, though FBI Director Christopher Wray would later testify to Congress that the FBI completed its probe according to "standard process."
In his letter to Garland, Whitehouse asserted that the FBI ignored multiple witnesses who claimed to have evidence against Kavanaugh to share with investigators. He said their cases were never assigned to an agent and that no evidence was gathered by the FBI.
"This was unique behavior in my experience, as the Bureau is usually amenable to information and evidence; but in this matter the shutters were closed, the drawbridge drawn up, and there was no point of entry by which members of the public or Congress could provide information to the FBI," Whitehouse said.
He also claimed that although the FBI set up a "tip line" for additional allegations and that the FBI received a "stack of information" through the tip line, senators "received no explanation of how, or whether, those allegations were processed and evaluated."
"This 'tip line' appears to have operated more like a garbage chute, with everything that came down the chute consigned without review to the figurative dumpster," Whitehouse asserted.
Whitehouse also criticized Director Wray for giving unsatisfactory answers to and "stonewalling" congressional inquiries.
"If standard procedures were violated, and the Bureau conducted a fake investigation rather than a sincere, thorough and professional one, that in my view merits congressional oversight to understand how, why, and at whose behest and with whose knowledge or connivance, this was done," Whitehouse wrote to Garland.