'Because I said so': 5 takeaways from the Fauci hearing



Former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci was grilled by the Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic for 14 hours in January. In the lengthy interview, Fauci admitted that he was unaware of any scientific studies demonstrating that masking for children worked or that the 6-foot social distancing guidelines — which effectively shut down schools, churches, and businesses — were an effective way of curbing the spread of the coronavirus. Fauci also acknowledged that the lab leak theory was not a conspiracy theory as he previously suggested.

Fauci, who plays a starring role in BlazeTV's "The Coverup," appeared before the committee Monday to speak to these admissions as well as to his role in overseeing the funding of deadly gain-of-function experiments.

''Because I said so.' That's never been good enough for Americans and it never will be.'

Committee Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) told Fauci at the outset, "Whether intentional or not, you became so powerful that any disagreements the public had with you were forbidden and censored on social and most legacy media time and time again. That is why so many Americans became so angry — because this was fundamentally un-American."

"'Because I said so.' That's never been good enough for Americans and it never will be," added Wenstrup. "Americans do not want to be indoctrinated. They want to be educated."

The hearing had the potential to be educational; however, Democratic committee members opted for the latter, celebrating Fauci, defending his preferred narratives, and lobbing attacks on their political opponents.

Republican lawmakers, alternatively, attempted to hold Fauci's feet to a low-heat fire, largely failing to get results.

What follows are five key takeaways from the Fauci hearing.

1. Not so effective after all

When asked straight out by Wenstrup whether the vaccine "stopped transmission of the virus," Fauci answered, "That is a complicated issue because in the beginning, the first iteration of the vaccines did have an effect — not 100%, not a high effect — they did prevent infection and subsequently, obviously transmission."

'I feel extreme confidence in the safety and the efficacy of this vaccine.'

"However, it's important to point out something that we did not know early on that became evident as the months went by is that the durability of protection against infection and hence transmission was relatively limited whereas the duration of protection against severe disease, hospitalization, and death was more prolonged," said Fauci. "In the beginning it was felt that in fact it did prevent infection and thus transmission."

After discovering Fauci would not disavow any of the draconian COVID measures he championed during the pandemic, Rep. Michael Cloud (R-Texas) also asked Fauci about his support for vaccine mandates and the efficacy of vaccines.

Fauci reiterated, "It clearly prevented infection in a certain percentage of people, but the durability of its ability to prevent infection was not long."

Fauci was one of the most visible and consistent exponents of the "safe and effective" mantra, having claimed in December 2020, "I feel extreme confidence in the safety and the efficacy of this vaccine and I want to encourage everyone who has the opportunity to get vaccinated so that we can have a veil of protection over this country, that would end this pandemic."

— (@)

2. Fauci: The blameless victim

Whereas Republican members blasted the former NIAID director for funding dangerous experiments of the kind that may have kicked off the pandemic as well as his years-long promotion of falsehoods, Democrats painted Fauci as a blameless victim and seized on the opportunity, as Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) did, to attack former President Donald Trump and other Republicans.

Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) told Fauci, "You're human, just like the rest of us," and stressed that he "deserve[s] better."

"I've seen your commitment not just to science, but to, again, to the greater good," said Dingell.

'You have been a hero to many for 54 years.'

After singing Fauci's praises, Dingell gave Fauci an opportunity to complain about facing criticism and perceived threats.

Democratic Reps. Dingell, Robert Garcia (Calif.), Jill Tokuda (Hawaii), Katherine Castor (Fla.), Raul Ruiz (Calif.), and Kweisi Mfume (Md.) similarly engaged in hagiography.

"We owe you an apology for the way we have dragged you through the mud," said Mfume.

"You have been a hero to many for 54 years," continued Mfume. "You are a world-renowned scientist and an American patriot."

Mfume made no mention of Americans who have suffered vaccine injuries but instead spoke in the abstract of "thousands of American lives [that] could have been spared" if they had not followed so-called conspiracy theories during the pandemic.

After paying his respects to Fauci, Rep. Garcia asked whether the "American public should listen to America's brightest and best doctors and scientists, or instead listen to podcasters, conspiracy theorists, and unhinged Facebook memes."

"Listening to the people just described is going to do nothing but harm people because they will deprive themselves of life-saving interventions," said Fauci, who was among the so-called experts who cautioned against using ivermectin to fight COVID-19.

Fauci proceeded to accuse the unvaccinated of getting an estimated 200,000-300,000 killed in the U.S. alone.

— (@)

3. Fauci hangs 'inner circle' out to dry

Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.) noted that there is "a troubling pattern of behavior" in Fauci's "inner circle," naming Fauci's David M. Morens, senior scientific adviser to the head of the NIAID, and Fauci's former chief of staff as two offenders.

Comer pressed Fauci on whether Morens violated NIH policy by using a personal email for official purposes. Fauci appeared more than willing to throw his former adviser and frequent correspondent under the bus, indicating Morens' personal email use to avoid transparency was indeed in violation of agency policy.

"Does it violate NIAID policy to delete records to intentionally avoid FOIA?"

"Yes," said Fauci.

'That was wrong and inappropriate and violated policy.'

"On April 28, 2020, Dr. Morens edited an EcoHealth press release regarding the grant termination. Does that violate policy?" asked Comer.

"That was inappropriate for him to be doing that for a grantee as a conflict of interest, among other things," said Fauci.

"On March 29, 2021, Dr. Morens edited a letter that Dr. Daszak was sending to NIH. Does that violate policy?" asked Comer.

"Yes, it does," answered Fauci.

"On Oct. 25, 2021, Dr. Brady provided Dr. Daszak with advice regarding how to mislead NIH on EcoHealth's late progress report. Does that violate policy?" asked Comer.

"That was wrong and inappropriate and violated policy," said Fauci.

"On Dec. 7, 2021, Dr. Morens wrote to the chair of EcoHealth board of directors to quote, 'Put in a word,' for Dr. Daszak. Does that violate policy?" asked Comer.

"Should not have been done, and that was wrong," said Fauci. "Well, I'm not sure of a specific policy, but I imagine that does violate policy. Should not have been doing that."

— (@)

4. Fauci denies funding gain-of-function research

Rep. Debbie Lesko (R-Ariz.) asked Fauci whether the National Institutes of Health funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

'I would not characterize it as dangerous gain-of-function research.'

"I would not characterize it the way you did," said Fauci, contradicting the NIH's account. "The National Institutes of Health, through a sub-award to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, funded research on the surveillance of and the possibility of emerging infections. I would not characterize it as dangerous gain-of-function research."

Elsewhere in his testimony Monday, Fauci said that "according to the regulatory and operative definition of [Proposed Research Involving Enhanced Potential Pandemic Pathogens], the NIH did not fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology."

Lesko quoted NIH Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak as acknowledging the "failure of the Wuhan Institute of Virology to provide us with the data that we requested and the lab notebooks that we requested, [which] certainly impeded our ability to understand what was really going on with the experiments that we have been discussing."

Granted the lack of transparency at the infamous lab, Lesko asked Fauci how he can be certain that the National Institutes of Health did not fund gain-of-function research on coronaviruses in China granted its subcontractor EcoHealth Alliance's reporting failures.

Fauci once again stressed that the NIH did not fund the deadly research in question, which EcoHealth Alliance's subcontractor specialized in.

5. Downplayed likelihood of lab leak

Fauci claimed Monday that the idea he covered up a lab leak was "preposterous."

Fauci indicated in his opening statement that he was informed on Jan. 31, 2020, "through phone calls with Jeremy Farrar, then director of the Wellcome Trust in the U.K., and then with Christian Anderson, a highly regarded scientist at Scripps Research Institute, that they and Eddie Holmes, a world class evolutionary biologist from Australia, were concerned that the genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 suggested that the virus could have been manipulated in a lab."

Fauci then noted he partook in a conference call the next day "with about a dozen international virologists to discuss this possibility versus a spillover from an animal reservoir."

Despite indications to the contrary, Fauci claimed, "The accusation being circulated that I influenced these scientists to change their minds by bribing them with millions of dollars in grant money is absolutely false and simply preposterous. I had no input into the content of the published paper," referencing the March 2020 study published in the journal Nature, "The Proximal Origins of SARS-CoV-2."

"The second issue is a false accusation that I tried to cover up the possibility that the virus originated from a lab. In fact, the truth is exactly the opposite," continued Fauci. "I have repeatedly stated that I have a completely open mind to either possibility and that if definitive evidence becomes available to validate or refute either theory, I will readily accept it."

Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) later asked Fauci whether he downplayed the lab leak theory on account of having funded experimental viruses at the Wuhan lab — funding Fauci copped to but Ranking Member Raul Ruiz nevertheless cast doubt on in his closing remarks.

Fauci, prickled by the suggestion that he tried to downplay the possibility he had fingerprints on research that got millions of Americans killed, answered in the negative.

— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

VAERS chart shows a shocking result of COVID vaccines



For the longest time, anyone – including medical professionals and scientists – who dared to challenge the effectiveness of the COVID vaccine was censored, silenced, and banished to the realm of crazy anti-vaxxers.

However, now the tides are turning as more and more evidence surfaces about the reality of the rapidly developed COVID vaccine. The same companies that once shoved the vaccine down our throats, swearing that it was 100% safe and effective, are now backtracking.

“Last week we talked about the Pfizer scientists admitting the heart disease coming from the vaccine. This week the biggest study so far ever done on the global safety of the vaccine has just been released, and [the CDC] too is now admitting to severe illness, death, and lingering long symptoms,” says Pat Gray.

No longer can these companies deny that the vaccine is “causing problems neurologically … blood problems, and heart-related conditions.”

“I've got a chart here that's going to blow your mind, Pat,” says Keith Malinak before displaying the following data from VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), managed by the CDC and the FDA.

“These are VAERS’ reported deaths by vaccine between the years 1988 and 2021 … over thirty years of data,” says Keith. “All of the deaths from vaccines (not the COVID one) are on the left,” while the COVID vaccine “accounts for half the deaths” even though by 2021, it had only been in circulation for one year.

What’s perhaps most upsetting is that despite this data, the CDC continues to tell people “to go get it,” says Pat.

To hear more, watch the clip below.


Want more from Pat Gray?

To enjoy more of Pat's biting analysis and signature wit as he restores common sense to a senseless world, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Disturbing Details Of Fauci’s Testimony Leave No Option But To Frogmarch Him Down Memory Lane

In the upcoming public hearing, lawmakers need to press Fauci to retrace the decision-making process for social distancing guidelines.

See it: CDC director Mandy Cohen wears mask in photos with Democratic senators, but not in photo with Republican Sen. Mitt Romney



Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Mandy Cohen recently shared an eyebrow-raising post that included four photos of her with U.S. senators. While she was wearing a mask in photos with Democratic Sens. Tim Kaine of Virginia, Jon Ossoff of Georgia, and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, Cohen was maskless in a photo with Republican Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah.

"Busy day meeting with Senators - appreciate the support and partnership!" Cohen's post read, seemingly indicating that all of the photos had been taken on the same day.

People on social media took notice of Cohen's inconsistent masking.

"Why the mask, but then also why no mask with Romney?" Chuck Ross of the Washington Free Beacon tweeted.

— (@)

"Mandy Cohen wears masks when meeting with Democrats but not @SenatorRomney," Matthew Foldi of The Specator World wrote. "Why?"

"Masked meeting the Dems // unmasked meeting Romney," Josh Kraushaar of Jewish Insider noted.

"What happened to your useless mask in the first photo dear?" someone else tweeted.

Cohen began serving as CDC director earlier this year.

Back in 2020, she shared a photo of herself sporting a face mask emblazoned with a photo of Dr. Anthony Fauci.

"Did you know it’s #WorldMaskWeek?" Cohen wrote on that August 2020 post. "Face coverings are one of our strongest tools to slow the spread of #COVID19 in our communities... and like my Dr. Fauci mask, they can be fun too! Join me in masking up this week & beyond – every time you leave the house."

— (@)

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Anthony Fauci was just CONFRONTED by the most UNUSUAL suspect



It's an odd day when CNN makes sense.

This past Saturday, CNN host Michael Smerconish confronted Anthony Fauci with a study that showed masking made little to no difference in the course of COVID-19.

“The most rigorous and comprehensive analysis of scientific studies conducted on the efficacy of masks for reducing the spread of respiratory illness, including COVID-19, was published last month,” Smerconish told Fauci, explaining that the conclusion was “there is just no evidence that they — masks — make any difference.”

Even the N95 masks were found to “make no difference.”

Fauci retorted with what seemed to be more garbled nonsense, saying that on an individual level they work, but “when you’re talking about the effect on the epidemic or the pandemic as a whole, the data are less strong.”

“This dumba** really wants you to believe that somehow it didn’t work on a pandemic level, but on an individual level, they worked,” Sara Gonzales of "The News & Why It Matters" comments. “Well, no, idiot. Because if they worked on an individual level, they would work on a pandemic larger scale.”

Jaco Booyens, while noting how ridiculous Fauci’s reasoning is, isn’t surprised.

“It’s so on par with their whole message,” he says. “The collective.”

“The individual doesn’t really matter, you know. So the collective is made of a bunch of individuals, and the virus attacks the individual, right. And if the mask doesn’t work for the individual, it won’t work for the collective,” he continues.

Gonzales notes that despite the plethora of information now available, like the study the CNN host brought up, people are still beginning to wear masks again.

“I have seen people start wearing masks again in public. I automatically judge you. I am judging you,” she says, adding,

“Like you’re really, you are really going to do this again.”


Want more from The News & Why It Matters?

To enjoy more roundtable rundowns of the top stories of the day, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Triple-Boosted Biden Doesn’t Have Covid But Is Masking Up Again Anyway

Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre announced Tuesday afternoon that President Joe Biden will begin masking indoors.

Medical establishment hypes lockdowns while mask regime signals a return



As fall approaches and another election season nears, there is renewed interest amongst various state and private organizations to resume the coercive COVID-19 protocols of yesteryear — this despite the fallout of the last go-around, the various outstanding doubts about efficacy of such measures, the CDC's estimate that 96.7% of the population over the age of 16 has antibodies, and the non-severity of the so-called "Eris" variant.

According to The Hill, among the organizations now reintroducing masks requirements are: Hollywood movie studio Lionsgate, per the insistence by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health; Kaiser Permanente at its facility in Santa Rosa, California; Upstate Medical's University and Community General hospitals; New Jersey's Rutgers University; and Georgia's Morris Brown College.

The Daily Mail reported that there has also been some indication that the Transportation Security Administration under President Joe Biden's Department of Homeland Security is considering reintroducing face-mask requirements on airplanes, although the TSA has suggested the "rumors are false."

This sudden desire to hide faces is the result of four new hospital admissions for every 100,000 people nationwide in the week ending Aug. 12, reported CNN.

That 0.004% of the population is going to hospital with what is in the vast majority of cases a nonlethal respiratory issue has prompted doctors like Robert Wachter, professor and chair of the Department of Medicine at the University of California San Francisco, to state, "If you're trying to be careful, it's time to whip out the mask again."

Dr. Jonathan Reiner, a cardiologist and professor at George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, said, "If you’re a caregiver for somebody who is at increased risk of complication following infection, then I think you should also consider putting a mask on in public places."

A peer-reviewed meta-analysis of various studies published earlier this year in the highly esteemed Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews called into question the value in whipping out masks again.

In a review of 12 trials comparing wearing medical masks with wearing no masks to prevent the spread of illnesses like COVID-19, the researchers determined that "[w]earing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness compared to not wearing masks."

While the researchers noted that the evidence suggested N95/P2 respirators were better at protecting against influenza-like illnesses than medical masks, this evidence too was placed in doubt.

The researchers concluded with some certainty that the "pooled results of [randomized controlled trials] did not show a clear reduction in respiratory viral infection with the use of medical/surgical masks. There were no clear differences between the use of medical/surgical masks compared with N95/P2 respirators in healthcare workers when used in routine care to reduce respiratory viral infection."

These findings appear to run contrary to former CDC Director Robert Redfield's September 2020 claim that masks are the "most important, powerful public-health tool we have," or his successor, Rochelle Walensky's November 2021 claim that mask-wearing "reduc(es) your chance of infection by more than 80%."

Regardless of the efficacy of masks, there may be greater resistance to their adoption this time around, even by medical professionals.

Dr. Albert Ko, a professor of epidemiology at the Yale School of Public Health, told ABC News, "I don't see that as something that we're likely going to be adopting."

The chief infection control officer for Tufts Medicine, Dr. Shira Doron, made clear that the fearmongering is unwarranted based on current COVID-19 infections, stating, "An upswing is not a surge; it's not even a wave. ... What we're seeing is a very gradual and small upward trajectory of cases and hospitalizations, without deaths really going along, which is great news."

"My hospital has had between zero and three patients who have tested positive for COVID any given day since May," Doron told ABC News. "So, all week, it's been one. If tomorrow, there were two, you'd call that a 100% increase, which sounds so big, but ... it's not appropriate to use percentage terms when you're talking about increases that start really small."

As masks make a comeback, albeit presently in isolated instances, the Western medical establishment appears to be putting a positive spin on lockdowns.

Britain's Royal Society just put out a report singing the praises of lockdowns, social distancing, school closures, and limits on gatherings, calling them the "most effective" form of non-pharmaceutical interventions.

The report concluded that "there is every reason to think that the application of combinations of [non-pharmaceutical interventions] will be important in future pandemics."

Whereas the Cochrane Review suggested that the downsides of mask-wearing were not altogether clear — although studies have revealed the adverse impact they have on toddlers, particularly on their communication skills — there is overwhelming evidence that lockdowns had a devastating impact, especially on youths.

A peer-reviewed 2021 article in the journal Frontiers in Public Health noted that lockdowns were five to 10 times "more harmful to public health ... than COVID-19 can be" at a time when the virus was more potent.

Lockdowns have had a calamitous impact on: the economy; eating behavior; physical activity; academic achievement; and on mental health, especially among children and teens, whose suicide rates, a recent study indicated, are "closely tied" to in-person schooling.

Just the News highlighted how the Biden administration's April announcement that it was pouring $5 billion into developing additional COVID-19 vaccines and treatments did not mention masks or social distancing, but nevertheless signaled the Department of Health and Human Services was still focused on the virus.

Some lawmakers in Washington have speculated more statist alarmism is on the way.

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) tweeted, "I keep hearing whispers of COVID restrictions coming back. Nope, not going to happen. We're not complying with that."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

MSNBC's mask-monger is back, stressing it's 'time to bring them out again'



MSNBC medical contributor Kavita Patel, a former policy official in the Obama White House, appeared bare-faced Tuesday on "José Díaz-Balart Reports" to tell Americans to once again don their masks.

Díaz-Balart led into the segment, saying, "If you’ve noticed more of your friends, neighbors, loved ones are testing positive for COVID, you’re not alone. According to the CDC, COVID-19 hospitalizations are up 12% from last week, and while we’re nowhere near previous levels, it’s still raising concerns."

The CDC indicated that between July 16 and July 22, there were 8,035 hospital admissions for COVID-19 in the U.S., a nation home to well over 335 million souls. The bulk of the hospitalizations appear to have been in parts of Texas near the southern border; southeastern Oklahoma; Mohave County, Arizona; four counties in southern Nebraska; northeastern Oregon; and Colquitt County, Georgia.

Patel, a staunch supporter of coercive vaccine mandates, acknowledged in her introduction that "we are not seeing anywhere near the dramatic rises that we saw in previous summers or previous years ... because a large part of the population has either been infected and vaccinated or both several times."

As of November 2022, an estimated 94% of the American population had already been infected with COVID-19 at least once.

Despite intimating that the population now enjoys herd immunity, Patel stressed that it was prudent to "keep people on alert."

To this end, Patel — who suggested in April 2022 that people should still wear masks on airplanes and foist them on fellow passengers despite the expiration of the TSA's mask mandate — attempted to drum up fear over going out in public.

"When you're in those crowded spaces, think about the cost of colds," said Patel. "Sometimes, many people don't have any symptoms. A mask can be your best friend. Keep it."

Patel told Díaz-Balart it was "time to bring them out again, especially as the school season starts," adding, "We don't want to see kids missing school for things we could have prevented."

— (@)

Despite Patel's invocation of kids' well-being — greatly undermined by the school closures teachers' unions supported in recent years — children have faced an infinitesimal likelihood of succumbing to COVID-19, even early in the pandemic when the virus was ostensibly far stronger. Even if there was more than a nominal risk, studies have indicated that the masks commonly used by the public might be ineffective.

A comprehensive Cochrane analysis of scientific studies concerning the efficacy of masks in reducing the spread of COVID-19 and other respiratory illnesses, led by Oxford epidemiologist Tom Jefferson and published in January, concluded, "Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza‐like illness (ILI)/COVID‐19 like illness compared to not wearing masks. ... Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory‐confirmed influenza/SARS‐CoV‐2 compared to not wearing masks."

Jefferson told journalist Maryanne Demasi, "There’s still no evidence that masks are effective during a pandemic."

The Centers for Disease Control's own peer-reviewed journal, Emerging Infectious Diseases, published a study in May 2020 that found "no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks."

The researchers stated, "There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza."

Also early in the pandemic, Dr. Michael Klompas of Harvard Medical School's department of population medicine and others noted in the New England Journal of Medicine, "We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. ... [T]he desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic."

Dr. Brendan Jackson, the CDC's COVID-19 incident manager, told NPR last week that the CDC presently has no plans to encourage widespread masking again.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!