Tag: coronavirus

Fauci refuses to face the people whose lives he ruined

Anthony Fauci appeared before the U.S. Senate this week alongside his lawyer, where he invoked his Fifth Amendment right to silence repeatedly. At one point, Republican Senator Rand Paul had Fauci’s lawyer removed from the room by security for being disruptive. 

Democratic senators, meanwhile, argued he had saved lives. But the moment of the hearing that Rebel News reporter Tamara Lich described as the mic drop came from Senator Bernie Moreno.

Moreno asked everyone in the hearing room who had lost their job, been called a conspiracy theorist, been fired from the military, been shamed for saying schools should stay open, or been labelled a lesser human being for questioning the science to stand up. Many did. Then, he asked Fauci to turn around and look at them.

Fauci stared at his lawyers.

“You can’t even look at them,” remarked Moreno, prompting Tamara to note “You could have heard a pin drop” during the tense moment.

Ezra and Tamara discussed the hearing on Thursday’s episode of The Ezra Levant Show — and the conversation quickly moved to Canada, where there has been no equivalent accountability and no prospect of one while the Liberals remain in power.

Ezra argued that Fauci’s total damage — the mental illness, addiction, economic devastation, forced medical procedures, destroyed relationships and families — is unrivalled by any non-military or political leader in modern history.

“For a civilian,” he said, “he is more responsible for death, destruction, pain, sorrow, and loss than I can think of anyone.” 

Millions of people, he noted, submitted to a vaccine they didn’t want or understand not because they believed it worked but because the alternative was unemployment and social exile. “The threatener in chief was Anthony Fauci,” stated Ezra.

Sharing a small personal story, the Rebel News boss detailed how he visited a local bakery near the company’s headquarters every morning. Those also patronizing the business included tradesmen and blue-collar workers who enjoyed good conversation.

But during the lockdowns, Ezra said he walked in one day and was asked for proof of vaccination. “It’s me,” he said. “You’ve seen me a hundred times,” he pleaded before being asked to leave.

That bakery has since closed.

“How many families were pitted against each other?” he asked. “How many bosses and employees were turned into enemies? How many families were split in two? We will never know the total cost of Anthony Fauci.”

But while Fauci has faced a degree of scrutiny in the U.S., the equivalent check on power never came north of the border.

Theresa Tam, Canada’s chief health bureaucrat, echoed Fauci’s every position and received the Order of Canada for it. Every party leader filmed a joint public service announcement urging Canadians to get vaccinated.

At the legal level, no court struck any of the oppressive COVID policies down. Medical colleges silenced dissenting doctors — some of whom are still being persecuted. Police stormed a church in Ontario during a religious ceremony, which Ezra noted is itself a criminal offence under section 176 of the Criminal Code.

Keep reading

Pfizer Freezes Air Traffic Control Funds in Poland and Romania Over COVID Vaccine Contract Dispute

Pfizer has frozen funds owed to air traffic control agencies in Poland and Romania as part of a contract dispute over COVID-19 vaccine deliveries, according to a report published July 31 by Children’s Health Defense [1]. The freeze followed an April 1 ruling by a court in Brussels that ordered Poland to pay about $1.5 billion and Romania about $640 million, plus interest and fees, for vaccine doses ordered under a 2021 European Union contract.

Polish and Romanian authorities stopped accepting further deliveries in 2022, citing falling demand. Both governments have said they will appeal the ruling. The enforcement action has raised questions about the financial stability of the two countries’ air navigation agencies, which rely on the funds.

Contract Origins and Refused Deliveries

The contract was signed between the European Commission and Pfizer in 2021, and it obligated participating member states to purchase additional doses. By 2022, Poland and Romania refused scheduled deliveries as demand declined. Poland cited financial pressure from hosting refugees fleeing Ukraine. Romanian political scientist Dragos Moldoveanu said Romania ordered 120 million doses despite a population below 20 million and had one of the European Union’s lowest vaccination rates.

Pfizer filed suit in 2023 after the countries did not pay for doses they declined to accept. Earlier contract terms had already drawn criticism. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism reported in February 2021 that Pfizer was demanding countries put up sovereign assets as collateral for expected vaccine injury lawsuits [2].

Legal Enforcement and Appeals

Because the contract is governed by Belgian law, the case is being heard in Brussels. Polish public broadcaster TVP World reported that Poland asked the Belgian court to delay enforcement while it appeals, but the request was rejected.

Dutch attorney Meike Terhorst called the action “outrageous and unethical” and said it could endanger flights. Lukasz Wojdyga of the Warsaw Enterprise Institute said the creditor has a legal right to enforce the judgment but called targeting air-safety funding “disproportionate and irresponsible.” Both governments have said they will protect the financial stability of the agencies and keep services running.

Transparency and Contract Scrutiny

The dispute has revived scrutiny of the EU vaccine procurement. Brussels Signal reported the EU-Pfizer contract was worth 35 billion euros ($40 billion), one of the largest contract awards in EU history. Governments and Pfizer have declined to release contract terms, saying the information is commercially confidential [3].

The European Court of Justice ruled in 2024 that the European Commission violated EU law when it denied The New York Times’ request to review text messages between Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla [4]. In 2025, a court ordered the disclosure of concealed texts related to the deal [5]. European Parliament member Gheorghe Piperea said the contract “ought never to have existed” because the EU exceeded its treaty powers. Transparency activist Frederic Baldan said von der Leyen negotiated directly with Bourla through self-destructing Signal messages, and that a Belgian Federal Police anti-corruption report found sufficient elements to establish offenses. Baldan said the European Public Prosecutor’s Office moved to have the investigation annulled.

The scale of the purchases also drew criticism from public health writers. Michel Chossudovsky questioned how a vaccine that normally takes years to develop was launched within months [6]. Joseph Mercola and Ronnie Cummins noted that the trials’ only criterion of success was a reduction of moderate to severe symptoms, not prevention of infection [7].

Keep reading

Demoralizing The Whole Citizenry To The Max

The Curse It Is Cast…

“I have nothing to hide. I can explain and validate everything that I’ve done.”

– Dr. Anthony Fauci, recorded for TV in 2022

However you cut this Fauci business, one thing Americans have learned is how slippery and treacherous this thing called The Law has become.

You saw it in the sundry Trump prosecutions of 2024, too – a marvelous demonstration of how to play Hide-the-Salami with the truth about anything and everything.

You saw it in the structured failure to adjudicate election fraud in 2020.

You saw it in the Jan-6 prosecutions and the Congressional Jan-6 Committee charade that followed.

And much more.

And one thing it’s good for is demoralizing the whole citizenry to the max. Who in this land was not mortally depressed watching Rand Paul’s Senate hearing Wednesday starring Dr. Fauci? (One last time, the center of attention!) We have become a procedural republic, slipping into an impotence of legalistic self-fuckery the way old folks slip into dementia, one lost memory at a time. There sits the murderer of millions cloaked in the banality of his evil — as it was at Nuremburg eighty years ago — and this time, you just have to lump it, America. The law can’t touch him at all.

Dr. Fauci ran his own titanically corrupt fiefdom out of the nation’s public health complex. Half-a-million a year wasn’t enough for — let’s call him what he was — an executive bureaucrat. He doled out millions in grants to universities, drug companies, and putative public service orgs, and extracted his vig, about a million bucks in prize money during the Covid-19 episode, not counting his share of royalties from drug patents. A modest million. He must have thought: who will even notice. . . who would ever be bothered by that tiny number when Congress, the Federal Reserve, and everybody else is drowning in numbers with so many zeros it gives them tachycardia just to glance at the balance sheet.

Plus, the thoroughly dishonorable news media was busy making Dr. Fauci a rock-star. He had everything but the stadiums. The grand old gals of Hollywood were going all moist over him. “Julia Roberts sent me flowers today,” he typed into his government-issue diary. Barbra Streisand called him on the phone. “I told her that I work listening to her songs on ALEXA,” He gushed. His work resulted in the deaths of millions and the injury of millions more. Neverminding that, he carefully tracked and marveled at his burgeoning fame:

“Big front-page article abut [sic] me appeared in the Washington Post, [Dr. Fauci wrote]. Very flattering. The situation with my national and international fame is explosive and really unimaginable. It is not hyoperbole [sic] to say that today I am the most famous and talked about person in the country and one of the most recognizable peson [sic] in the world.”

Did Dr. Fauci know that his work-product, the Covid-19 episode and the operations around it, were aimed at setting up conditions to get President Trump bum-rushed out of office in favor of the vacant and pliable tool that was “Joe Biden?” Did others on the White House Covid Task Force know how that would work? Did they know who or what they were in league with?

Anyway, it didn’t turn out as well as they’d planned, of course. The four years of “Joe Biden” only proved how much that coalition of Deep Staters, globalists, and domestic riffraff hated the old American republic and its pain-in-the-ass Constitution. But when they foundered in 2024 — when old Joe-from-Scranton finally gave away the game on that fatal debate stage — and the party had to stuff his idiot veep into the nomination, the Democratic Party crossed an event horizon into total detachment from reality, where they remain to this day.

Keep reading

Fauci Destroyed Millions of Lives, and Truth-Tellers Are Owed Sincere Apologies

The Case That Demands to Be Made

History will not be kind to Anthony Fauci. It will not remember him as a hero of public health, because history records what the living refuse to admit: Fauci is the face of a mass casualty event.

I believe the pardon Joe Biden handed him is the clearest admission of guilt yet. Biden issued a preemptive pardon for Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, shielding him from COVID-19-related criminal prosecution, backdated to 2014 [1]. Innocent men do not need backdated protection; guilty men cannot survive without it.

Ed Dowd described what we all witnessed as “the COVID psyop, the experimental mRNA shots, the mandates that destroyed lives, the injuries, the excess deaths, and the relentless propaganda machine that tried to silence anyone who noticed the bodies piling up” [2]. That is not a conspiracy theory. That is testimony. And the fact that no reckoning ever came only proves the operation was deliberate. Those of us who sounded the alarm were treated as enemies of the state, but we were the only ones telling the truth.

Fauci’s Non-Testimony and the Biological Weapon Cover-Up

The cover-up originated with the U.S. Dept. of Defense and then expanded to Wuhan. The Wuhan Cover-Up documents how the first SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence displayed a standout molecular feature that made it seem like this novel virus, spreading like wildfire, seemed deliberately designed to infect human cells [3]. I have long reported that the spike protein used in some vaccines is part of a more complex concoction derived from the SARS-CoV-2 bioweapon, which includes prions and elements from HIV, among other coronavirus strains [4]. This is not biology by accident; it is the engineering of a depopulation bioweapon.

Project Veritas documents indicate that the work conducted was indeed classified as gain-of-function research, suggesting a discrepancy between Dr. Fauci’s public claims and the reality of his actions [5]. So why did the man at the center of this never face a single day of questioning? Because the people who protected him were part of the same apparatus, of course.

The obvious question remains: why did Trump keep people like James Comey and Anthony Fauci in their positions despite their alleged ties to the deep state [5]?

The Persecution of Truth-Tellers

I lived this persecution. This is what the system does to anyone who refuses to be silent. The landmark lawsuit exposing U.S. government coercion of Big Social reminds us that free speech isn’t an option if you want to live in an open, creative, advanced, free-thinking society; it’s a necessity [6].

Many doctors suffered the same fate. The Fifth Circuit eventually issued a potentially precedent-setting ruling that sides squarely with the First Amendment in a case involving censorship of doctors [7], but the government even created a disinformation office and used the FBI to meddle in social media companies to get them to shut down or censor “unapproved” facts and ideas [8]. This was a coordinated attack on dissent, and the media was happy to cheer it on.

Accountability, Nuremberg, and the Apology That Is Owed

What happened to us all is a Nuremberg crime against humanity. Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s work provides evidence necessary to hold those responsible for this Nuremberg crime against humanity legally accountable [9]. Fauci should be made to face the same kind of public accounting that the Nazis faced at Nuremberg. Not vigilante violence, but a trial in the light where every collaborator, funder, and enforcer is forced to testify.

The backdated pardon is not a shield. As attorney Greg Glaser said, “While Biden’s preemptive pardon is likely to shield Fauci from federal prosecution, it does not preclude state prosecution” [10]. And the House Oversight Committee invalidated over 4,200 executive actions and pardons signed via autopen under former President Joe Biden, citing a lack of proof that he authorized them [11].

Keep reading

Justice Carl Thibault upholds Quebec’s Covid curfew despite finding it violated Charter rights

The Quebec Superior Court has dismissed an appeal challenging Quebec’s controversial COVID-19 curfew, ruling that while the unprecedented measure violated several Charter rights, those infringements were justified under the Constitution because of the pandemic.

In a decision released July 29, Justice Carl Thibault upheld a lower court ruling involving Stéphanie Pépin, who was ticketed on January 9, 2021, after police stopped her while she was driving to attend a peaceful protest against Quebec’s newly imposed nighttime curfew.

Quebec was the only province in Canada to impose a province-wide curfew during the pandemic. Residents were barred from leaving their homes between 8 p.m. and 5 a.m., with fines ranging from $1,000 to $6,000 for violations. The curfew remained in force until May 28, 2021, before being reintroduced from December 31, 2021, to January 17, 2022.

According to evidence presented in court, roughly 46,000 pandemic-related tickets were issued in Quebec between September 2020 and October 2021, including approximately 22,500 curfew tickets, representing an estimated $30 million in fines.

Justice Thibault agreed with the trial judge that the curfew infringed Ms. Pépin’s rights to liberty, freedom of expression, and freedom of peaceful assembly under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The court also acknowledged that peaceful political demonstrations held during curfew hours were effectively prohibited because they were not exempted under the regulations.

However, the court concluded those infringements were justified under Section 1 of the Charter, finding the curfew was rationally connected to the government’s objective of slowing Covid-19 transmission and protecting the healthcare system. Justice Thibault emphasized that courts should exercise restraint when reviewing emergency public health decisions made during an unprecedented crisis.

During the original 2023 trial, constitutional lawyer Olivier Séguin cross-examined Quebec’s former National Director of Public Health, Dr. Horacio Arruda, and his strategic medical adviser, Dr. Richard Massé. Both acknowledged the curfew was intended not only to reduce virus transmission but also to reinforce compliance with other public health measures and send a strong message to the public.

“The Court again recognized that Quebec’s Covid curfew infringed fundamental Charter freedoms,” Séguin said following the ruling. “The central question was whether those infringements were justified during a public health emergency.”

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, which funded the litigation, said its lawyers are reviewing the judgment to determine whether to seek further appellate review.

Keep reading

There Were Thousands Of Faucis

Imagine if we could read all of their pandemic diaries.

Imagine if we could compare all of their public pronouncements to their private knowledge.

Anthony Fauci is a bad person, and he should face profoundly ugly accountability for his duplicity and cruelty. But also, they all should.

Officials and public health “experts,” generally and worldwide, did all of the same things Fauci did, believing one thing but officially declaring something else. Los Angeles County Supervisor Sheila Kuehl voted to order the closure of all restaurants in the county, declaring that it was too dangerous to even allow people to dine outdoors, then left that very meeting and went to dinner at Il Forno in Santa Monica on the last night they were allowed to be open. Of course, she wasn’t alone in condemning restaurant dining while cheerfully enjoying the very same activity.

Imagine if you could read Gavin Newsom’s pandemic diary, for crying out loud.

In Australia, Victoria Premier Daniel Andrews imposed the harshest, longest lockdowns in the world, in a country that relentlessly brutalized people who didn’t wear masks. Andrews ridiculed and demeaned people who didn’t want to wear masks, using his authority to attack the citizens he was supposed to be serving.

Keep reading

Anthony Fauci’s Private Diary and Emails Show He Knew Lockdowns Failed

ometimes you learn that people are exactly who you think they are.

And that may never apply more accurately and comprehensively than it does with Anthony Fauci.

Fauci was portrayed, starting in early 2020, as an objective, brilliant, virtually infallible God-like figure.

He was the voice of opposition to President Donald Trump, a clear-eyed force of evidence-driven policy, contrasting with the evil Trump who didn’t “listen to the science.”

That’s not an exaggeration; there were Christmas tree ornaments made depicting Fauci as a Pope, there were shrines put up in people’s houses, he was on the cover of various magazines, and he was given a parade of endless, relentlessly glowing media appearances from his fawning, adoring fans. Fans like CNN’s Jake Tapper and Dana Bash.

For most critics it was clear almost immediately that these portrayals and friendly media appearances depicted the exact opposite of reality.

Fauci was a narcissist. Someone who enjoyed the attention, power, and influence he now unexpectedly wielded. He was unimaginably arrogant, unwilling to listen to new evidence if it contradicted what he wanted to believe, as well as someone who apparently thought himself a virtually infallible, God-like figure.

Well, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) over the weekend released a series of diary entries, emails, and inside information from Fauci himself and it turns out that the critics were more dead on than they could have ever imagined.

There are so many humiliating, embarrassing, discrediting revelations from the emails and diary entries that many are still compiling them. Combing through the list of statements that he made privately, in direct contradiction to his public pronouncements, could be a full time job. For weeks.

But let’s highlight a few, revisit what he said, and explain what it all means.

One of Fauci’s most heinous legacies was the strong push for lockdowns, school closures, and mask mandates. Those three policies were and remain significant contributors to many of the negative outcomes resulting from our response to the Covid pandemic.

School closures set back an entire generation of children.

Lockdowns led to governments printing money to allow people to stay home, setting off a spiral of runaway inflation that is still not under control.

And masks permanently damaged millions of people, from schoolchildren forced to wear them, to hospital workers who are now indefinitely required to mask in healthcare settings unnecessarily, or for those who continue to mask out of irrational fear and effective propaganda.

Many of these policies can be traced directly back to Anthony Fauci. And now we have proof of just how inept and incompetent his recommendations were, and how dishonest he was, as it became clear he’d failed.

Keep reading

Only the Tip of the COVID Conspiracy Has Surfaced

Dr. Anthony Fauci, now 85 who led the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases from 1984 to 2022, on July 29 refused to answer questions from senators following the release of a diary he compiled while working in government. He took the 5th Amendment to every question. He indeed could to invoke the Fifth Amendment despite receiving a presidential pardon because that covered past events, not perjury in the present.

A presidential pardon generally removes the threat of federal criminal prosecution for past acts. However, it does not automatically eliminate a person’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. The constitutional protection applies if there remains a “realistic prospect of prosecution” from any government—federal or state.

In Dr. Fauci’s case, his legal team identified two specific risks that, in their view, kept the threat of prosecution ver much alive since many would love to see him behind bars.

The pardon was for past actions, but it did not provide immunity for future testimony. If Dr. Fauci gave testimony that contradicted his previous statements, he could face new charges for perjury or making false statements to Congress. A pardon that protects a person from criminal prosecution doesn’t rewrite history. It certainly does not prevent Congress from establishing what actually happened.

The real interesting facet is that his presidential pardon whether by autopen or not, only applies to federal crimes, NOT state crimes. This means there was still a theoretical possibility of prosecution at the state level for related matters. A State governor seeking a presidential run could indict Fauci ro the cheers of many.

Fauci appeared under a subpoena from Chairman Rand Paul. In his opening statement, he cited Senator Paul’s “obvious obsession with calling for my prosecution” as the reason he would not testify, stating that he was following his lawyers’ advice to invoke his Fifth Amendment right. Throughout the hearing, he repeatedly responded to questions by stating: “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.”

Senator Paul argued that the pardon should have compelled Fauci to testify and that he could still be held accountable for lying under oath because the pardon did not cover perjury committed during the hearing. Senator Paul also stated his intention to pursue charges of obstruction of Congress against Fauci for refusing to answer questions.

Keep reading

‘We Won Completely’: Weinstein Says COVID ‘Conspiracy Theorists’ Were Totally Vindicated

Not so long ago, everything below was a bannable offense – usually based on the vapid logic of some 24-year-old “trust & safety” associate. In a clip circulating Thursday, evolutionary biologist Bret Weinstein takes stock of what the dissidents actually won for their trouble, Vigilant Fox reports.

WEINSTEIN: “We live in two worlds simultaneously at the moment. I remember conversations that I had with people I cared deeply about at the beginning of COVID right as the lab leak story was beginning to crack.”

“What I saw was, actually, I think we’re going to win the lab leak story. We’re not yet winning the vaccine story, and we’re way behind on the repurposed drug story.

“In 2026, here’s what we see. We actually won. Completely. All of these things are now visible to anybody who wishes to see them.

Yet, while hearts and minds were won and ‘conspiracy theorists’ vindicated, we have a limp dicked government that won’t hold anyone’s feet to the fire. 

“And we’ve lost completely. Our capacity to do anything about this is now on full display. We have none.”

“Your ability to simply get the story clear enough and enough evidence on the table does not have an impact on what happens next.

“We’re still apparently dispensing these frickin shots. How crazy is that? Right after all that we have unearthed, after all the people who lost their careers to unearth this stuff, they’re still dispensing the frickin shots.”

WEINSTEIN: “We need to figure out now how to talk to the people who actually have goodness in their hearts, but are still so desperately confused.

“You have to figure out how to approach them with enough generosity of spirit that you can get them over the line to just seeing. You can get them to take off the blindfold.”

Keep reading

Clinical Trial Results Were Clear: Pfizer’s COVID Vaccine Delivered More Risk Than Benefit

U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s recent decision to terminate the COVID-19 emergency use authorization (EUA) declarations invites reconsideration of the evidence that launched this extraordinary regulatory chapter.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) first EUA for a COVID-19 vaccine rested on its determination that the known and potential benefits of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine outweighed its known and potential risks. Yet the pivotal trial report did not bring those benefits and risks together within a common quantitative framework.

Better late than never: more than five years later, I did — and what I found was startling.

At first glance, the famous 95% efficacy against protocol-defined, laboratory-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 — based on eight versus 162 cases in a trial that randomized 43,548 participants — seems highly promising.

But when this finding is considered alongside the broader set of participant-relevant outcomes (dispersed across the trial publication, its Supplementary Appendix, and the contemporaneous FDA review materials), the overall clinical picture looks markedly different.

Depending on the counting period used, the vaccine group had 2-8 fewer cases of severe COVID-19, whereas the safety data showed numerical excesses of 4-101 participants across clinically consequential adverse-event categories. These categories are not directly comparable, and some may overlap.

Even so, the evidence did not establish that the vaccine’s clinically consequential benefits outweighed its potential harms. Nor did the trial establish that vaccination reduced the overall burden of COVID-19-like symptoms, let alone that it reduced person-to-person transmission.

Crucially, this conclusion does not rest on hindsight: the relevant evidence was already before the FDA when it issued the EUA.

The full basis for this conclusion is presented in my comprehensive reassessment of the evidence, currently available as a preprint. That reassessment is necessarily detailed because the relevant data are complex, scattered across multiple documents and subject to important methodological and interpretive qualifications.

The present column is not intended to replace that analysis, but to distill several of its central findings and implications for a broader readership.

Keep reading