SARS‑CoV‑2 (COVID-19)

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
40,783
4,082
113
Diaries seem to show Anthony Fauci more interested in fame than facts
Documents reveal public health official obsessed with media attention, while dismissing dissent, lab leak theory

Author of the article:Brian Lilley
Published Jul 28, 2026 • 3 minute read

Dr. Anthony Fauci testifies at a committee.
Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, testifies before the House Oversight and Accountability Committee Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic at the Rayburn House Office Building on June 3, 2024, in Washington, D.C. Photo by Chip Somodevilla /Getty Images
If only Anthony Fauci had cared as much about facts during the COVID-19 pandemic as he did about his fame. The release of his diaries should embarrass him and remind us that many of the people pushing lockdowns and restrictions were deeply flawed.


Fauci’s diaries document his obsession with the media and fame, his conflicting positions on the lab leak theory for the virus and his disastrous dismissal of the Great Barrington Declaration.


Highlights of Anthony Fauci's diary.
Highlights of Anthony Fauci’s diary. Photo by Toronto Sun graphic
From expert to celebrity
In the early days of the pandemic, Fauci served as the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a medical adviser to the president. While his main role should have been providing serious medical advice, clearly he relished his growing celebrity status.

Dinners with CNN’s Jake Tapper, requests for vaccine advice from Barbra Streisand, Julia Roberts fangirling over him during an online chat. Fauci documented each and every media appearance across the United States and around the world, including many Canadian interviews with the likes of CBC News and Global.

“The situation with my national and international fame is explosive and really unimaginable,” he wrote in May 2020. “It is not without hyperbole to say that today I am the most famous and talked-about person in the country and one of the most recognizable (people) in the world.”


Too bad he didn’t pay as much attention to his job of assessing the medical evidence and providing sound advice to elected officials.

An aerial view shows the P4 laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China's central Hubei province on April 17, 2020.
An aerial view shows the P4 laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China’s central Hubei province on April 17, 2020. Photo by HECTOR RETAMAL /AFP via Getty Images
The lab leak dismissal
Fauci spent a lot of time, energy and political capital in the early days of the pandemic trying to undermine the idea that the virus had leaked out of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. He maintained the virus emerged naturally and worked to discredit those advancing the lab leak theory, now considered a “most likely” explanation by officials including a U.S. House committee panel.

“Now we know the market was not the source, it was the amplifier. Having said that, somewhere the virus jumped from animals to humans,” Fauci wrote in his diary on Jan. 26, 2020.

A few days later, on Feb. 1, 2020, Fauci convened a call with other leading public health officials and scientists to discuss the issue of the virus’ origin. He described how there was not a consensus with some arguing that the virus originated naturally. “The rest felt that deliberate insertion was possible and given the fact that Dr. Zheng-Li Shi at the University of Wuhan has been working for years in GOF in coronaviruses.”


GOF, short for gain of function, involves altering an organism’s genetic makeup to enhance specific traits. Fauci has always denied that organizations he oversaw funded gain-of-function research, but the evidence would appear to show that is exactly what happened.

When he wasn’t smearing those who raised the lab leak theory, Fauci was dismissing those who offered alternative ideas on how to deal with the virus.


The ‘stooges’ who were right
In October 2020, three well-regarded scientists and infectious disease specialists, Jay Bhattacharya from Stanford, Sunetra Gupta from Oxford, and Martin Kulldorff from Harvard, issued the Great Barrington Declaration. The declaration argued that COVID-19 posed limited risk to most people and that lockdowns were causing harm. Rather than impose society-wide restrictions, the authors advocated focused protection for the vulnerable and herd immunity among low-risk groups.


Fauci dismissed the three scientists as “stooges” in his diary.

The declaration ultimately proved more prescient than Fauci. One of those “stooges,” Bhattacharya, is now director of the U.S. National Institutes of Health.

Fauci is set to appear before a Senate committee in Washington on Wednesday and he should face tough questions from committee members. Yet much of the media still treats Fauci as a hero. The questions raised by his diaries are likely to make many journalists nearly as uncomfortable as they make Fauci.

That’s too bad because the media that made him a star, including our own, owe readers an apology for failing to ask the questions Fauci was already answering in his private diary.
fauci-diary[1].jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Taxslave2

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
40,783
4,082
113
U.S. Senate panel votes to hold Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress
Rand Paul said he would refer it to the U.S. Justice Department for potential prosecution

Author of the article:Eddie Chau
Published Aug 06, 2026 • Last updated 11 hours ago • 3 minute read

Former NIH Director Anthony Fauci listens during a hearing with the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on July 29, 2026 in Washington, DC. Photo by Anna Moneymaker /Getty Images

A U.S. Senate panel voted on Thursday to hold former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress after he declined to answer its questions and accused its chair, Sen. Rand Paul, of trying to entrap him.


The committee voted 8-7 to hold Fauci in contempt after he repeatedly invoked his Fifth Amendment right not to testify last week in a hearing before the Senate’s government oversight committee.

Paul said if the committee voted to hold Fauci in contempt, he would refer it to the U.S. Justice Department for potential prosecution.

“Dr. Fauci faced no risk of federal prosecution,” Paul said ahead of Thursday’s vote, per The Washington Post. “All he had to do was tell the truth.”

Democratic Michigan Sen. Gary Peters said the contempt vote would harm the committee’s ability to conduct investigations in the future.

Peters said the panel’s work “depends on the legitimacy of our investigations and a recognition by witnesses, courts and the public that Congress is exercising its powers dutifully.”


“The contempt resolution before us today puts all of that at risk,” Peters added.

Wisconsin Republican Sen. Ron Johnson said he got a copy of Fauci’s government phone from the Trump administration on Wednesday night ahead of the vote. He hoped the phone “will address many of the questions he refused to answer at last week’s hearing.

(L-R) Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Senator Rand Paul and US Senator Gary Peters, Democrat from Michigan prepare ahead of a Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs business meeting to consider pending calendar business on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC, on August 6, 2026. Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI /AFP via Getty Images
What happens next?
Ahead of the vote, Paul vowed to send the committee’s recommendation to the Justice Department, which would bypass a full Senate vote in a move that would set up a legal and political test for the Trump administration.

Paul said there’s little precedent for bypassing a full Senate vote before asking the Justice Department to hand down contempt charges, a decision that could hinder any attempts at prosecution.

“There is not a lot of precedent for a lot of this, but it isn’t law so there isn’t any exact procedure that it has to follow,” Paul said in an interview with CNN. “It’s a referral, it’s a recommendation.”


Paul said the committee’s referral would be hand-delivered to the attorney general and U.S. District Court on Thursday.

Vice President JD Vance, who has a constitutional role as president of the Senate, will have to sign off on the committee’s circumvention of rules. From there, it would be up to the Justice Department to decide whether formal charges can be levied on Fauci, something that likely will be challenged by his lawyers.

In a statement to NBC News, Fauci’s lawyer, David Schertler, said the vote was “a crude political stunt intended to punish Dr. Fauci for exercising his constitutional rights.”

“Today’s resolution is a continuation of Senator Paul’s personal vendetta against Dr. Fauci, who spent 50 years in public health and has saved countless lives,” Schertler said. “It is shameful and wrong that Senator Paul is abusing his power by trying to weaponize the Justice Department against an honourable public servant.”


Why Fauci?
Paul and Johnson have spent years criticizing Fauci’s direction during the COVID-19 pandemic, which included vaccine mandates and social distancing.

Earlier this year, Paul subpoenaed Fauci, believing the former National Institutes of Health official wasn’t forthcoming about the alleged laboratory origins of COVID-19, along with other pandemic-related matters, per The Washington Post.

Fauci has denied the allegations made by Paul, noting he’s participated in extensive interviews, including 21 hours of testimony in 2024 with a U.S. House subcommittee that was investigating the government’s response to the pandemic.

At the end of 2022, Fauci left the U.S government, and then-President Joe Biden issued him a preemptive pardon before leaving office.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
32,969
11,848
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
It’s interesting that Anthony Fauci it’s being threatened with contempt of Congress for his use of the fifth amendment, but so many of the Trump sycophants involved in the Epstein files, investigation, and their deplorable testimonies or lack of…aren’t being threatened with contempt of Congress.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
29,385
8,700
113
B.C.
It’s interesting that Anthony Fauci it’s being threatened with contempt of Congress for his use of the fifth amendment, but so many of the Trump sycophants involved in the Epstein files, investigation, and their deplorable testimonies or lack of…aren’t being threatened with contempt of Congress.
Name them ?
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
29,385
8,700
113
B.C.
Name whom? Those that testified before congressional investigative committees regarding the Epstein paedophile hearings?

Like Todd Blanche, Pam Bondi, Cash Patel, etc…& their performances? Or are you asking a different question?
Did they have pardons from the prior administration ? Did they take the fifth for such explosive questions as what color tie are you wearing ?
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
32,969
11,848
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Did they have pardons from the prior administration ? Did they take the fifth for such explosive questions as what color tie are you wearing ?
Did they perform like belligerent adolescents in an extremely condescending manner towards Congress in a hearing? Something bordering upon contemptible behaviour? The end, I guess it’s irrelevant, but it’s an interesting comparison.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
40,783
4,082
113
The vaccine injured told their truth at Allison Inquiry – government should listen
Rather than shun, shame, discredit, ignore and cancel those who had adverse COVID-19 shots, they should be embraced, helped and learned from

Author of the article:Joe Warmington
Published Sep 11, 2026 • Last updated 17 hours ago • 5 minute read

OTTAWA – Moms, dads, daughter, sons, brothers, sisters, grandparents, lawyers, doctors, cops, pilots, military veterans, a United States senator and just plain hard-working, honest Canadians.


They came into the capital from all across the country for one main reason – they just wanted to be heard.


And thanks to the Allison Inquiry on vaccine injuries on Parliament Hill, they finally were. While this does not bring any of their loved ones back, or fix their careers, or end any stigmas they live with, this was still was something these fine Canadians needed.

It was an acknowledgment that what they experienced, witnessed and struggled through was not a figment of their imagination but something very real and worthy of study. The 50 witnesses out of the 1,400 cases who offered to testify are not conspiracy theorists or anti-vaxxers or troublemakers. They are people who shared their lived experience stemming from the vaccination effort to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

“We just wanted to give people a chance to tell their stories,” said Grimsby MP Dean Allison, who added he wanted a setting that was safe and where people could testify without ridicule or being shouted down.


He achieved that.

Now should come a truce between all sides and everybody get on the same side of the table so that all perspectives are considered on public health and public safety.



Unlikely? Yes. Necessary? Definitely.



Allison gave vax injured a voice
Whatever happens next is anybody’s guess. But Allison gave a lot of the COVID era’s voiceless a microphone.

Watching on livestream or in the hearing room in person, it has been a compelling four days. Even legendary UFC fighter Georges St. Pierre gave a shoutout to the brave and courageous people who came to testify.



There were so many participants and compelling stories that it’s difficult to zero in on any one, but here are some of the highlights from my perspective. And brave and courageous people who outweighed the catcalling bullies who labelled what was happening there as a fake and outright “horses—.”

Said Dan Hartman, who’s son Sean got sick four days after getting his first COVID-19 shot so he could play hockey, “I invite any of the people who say that to come to my son’s gravesite or that of the others who also lost loved ones.”

Doctor and cop disciplined for wanting to protect society
It’s real for them. But government and big pharma seemed to not be interested in hearing differing perspectives.



Still working, Ottawa Police Det. Helen Grus, who told the Inquiry her nightmare came when she was alerted by a fellow cop there had been a “double or triple” spike in baby deaths and she took this information to her superiors who subsequently end up charging her and disciplining her.

Dr. Charles Hoffe told the inquiry when he noticed what he thought were six cases of adverse reactions people in his long-running practice, he was not met with people wanting to dig into it but with internal discipline and efforts to take way his medical license.



You don’t want your inquisitive investigators to be afraid to be inquisitive. But that’s what happened. An us versus them scenario incurred and still exists.

Allison told the inquiry he wants to see a day where people constructively talk about all things on the table and leave as friends after considering all sides.

This kind of negative reaction to anybody raising any red flags surrounding vaccinations was a common theme expressed here. That this kind of response is replaced in the future with a more open, fair and inquiring mind may be the most important change that could come from these hearings.


Ottawa Police Det. Helen Grus appeared before the Allison Inquiry to tell she was disciplined for bringing to the attention of her superiors that there was a perceived spike of infant deaths after people starting getting COVID-19 vaccines (Joe Warmington photo)
When someone in a police unit or medical clinic or school or media or research lab notices something, there must be a more open-minded approach to hear them out and not immediately shut them down and freeze them out.

CBC accused of using shows for ‘propaganda’
And you don’t want a media outlet that iss not open to covering all sides of a story and, even worse, scrubbing or censoring it as if it didn’t happen.


By the end of the Allison Inquiry a lot of mainstream media came around and started following the standard already set by independent media and they reported on the events transpiring there.



But that’s not enough. All information should be presented so members of the public can make up their own minds.

Former reporter Rodney Palmer eviscerated his former employer the CBC by saying they went from being a “public broadcaster” to being a state broadcaster, which he recognized from when he was a reporter for CTV in China. Palmer said the CBC used its main on-air talent to show people how to respond to family members raising concerns about the vaccines and to spread outright propaganda and going around parents to spread misinformation on CBC Kids.

CBC‘s Head of Public Affairs Chuck Thompson responded by saying, “CBC News covered the COVID-19 pandemic thoughtfully and thoroughly, addressing all its many complexities. How people assess our coverage of that story is their prerogative.”

Of course, the most important part of Allison inquiry was the testimony of people who were free to speak and shake off groupthink. It included those who have been left with physical disabilities, others who lost loved ones, and many who were subject to ridicule and treated like lepers by some in a loud and cruel pack, callously telling them what they are experiencing is all in their head.

None of that should happen again. And, in the words Hartman, there is something the system can also do.

“Just acknowledge” that sometimes vaccines injure and result in death rather than discredit and avoid. Certainly, something better has to be done than what happened during this pandemic.

The dead and injured deserve a change in approach for their suffering and as part of their legacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2