The Epistle of Paul to the Washingtonians

“Rally to the cause of freedom and reject medical tyranny.”

In a recent hearing, Sen. Rand Paul called out Dr. Anthony Fauci for smearing the authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, distinguished medical scientists from Oxford, Harvard and Stanford, as “fringe epidemiologists.” Fauci and NIH boss Francis Collins had “orchestrated a takedown campaign” instead of debating the facts.

“Dr. Fauci doesn't want to debate,” Paul said. “He wants to squelch debate because ‘he is science’. If you criticize him, you’re criticizing science.” That prompted Paul to author a Fox News commentary in which he cited Nobel laureate F.A. Hayek, author of The Road to Serfdom.

“Most scientists realize that we cannot plan the advance of knowledge, that in the voyage into the unknown—which is what research is—we are in great measure dependent on the vagaries of individual genius and of circumstance, and that scientific advance, like a new idea that will spring up in a single mind, will be the result of a combination of conceptions, habits, and circumstances brought to one person by society, the result as much of lucky accidents as of systematic effort.”

In other words, Paul explained, “the benefits of scientific progress are only realized if science is free from excessive restraint” and “the same arguments against central planning for an economy also hold for science.” When a central planner errs, “the entire economy is threatened.  Likewise, when a central medical planner errs, all patients are threatened.”

According to Paul, Dr. Fauci’s “fundamental decision to ignore natural immunity has led to a cascade of bad decisions, the effects of which have seeped into all of our lives.”  Long before the current pandemic, Fauci authorized secretive trials of toxic drugs such as AZT on foster children in New York City.

Dr. Fauci was not fired, and it remains unclear if the NIAID boss, now 81, has ever been reprimanded or disciplined. The closest thing to a trial for Dr. Fauci took place in a Senate hearing last July 20, when Paul accused Fauci of an actual crime. Sen. Paul, who earned his medical degree from Duke University, had boned up on gain-of-function research that makes viruses more transmissible and lethal.

Back on May 11, 2021, Dr. Fauci denied that the National Institutes of Health had ever funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). It had since emerged that the NIH, through Fauci’s NIAID, had indeed funded the WIV. Sen. Paul cited Rutgers molecular biologist Richard Ebright that gain-of-function research had indeed been conducted at the WIV.

Paul told Fauci  “You misled the public,” by defining it away. “You changed the definition on the NIH website to cover your ass,” and  Fauci was “still unwilling to admit that they [viruses] gained function.” That function was transmissibility to humans, a “clear and present danger” to the nation and the world.

“I disagree,” said Fauci, claiming that gain-of -function was “ nebulous” and needed a  “more precise” definition.

“It is a crime to lie to Congress,” said Paul, citing section 1001 of  the U.S. criminal code. Paul asked Fauci if he wanted to retract his previous statement claiming no NIH funding for Wuhan.

“I have never lied before congress and I do not retract that statement,” said Fauci. What he said in May was a “correct statement,” and the NIAID boss raised the volume a notch.

“Senator Paul you do not know what you are talking about,” Fauci said. That is not an argument and in a court setting it would have drawn objection and been disallowed. The NIAID boss, a government bureaucrat since 1968, wasn’t done.

“I totally resent the lie that you are now propagating, senator.” The alleged “lie” was that the NIH grant for Wuhan had “created” the COVID virus. “That’s where you are going,” Fauci told Paul, who made no such claim in the hearing. In a court setting, Fauci would have been flagged for speculation and lack of foundation.

Paul pressed the point that Fauci was “obfuscating” what had gone on in the Wuhan lab. That charge enraged the NIAID boss, who cranked up the volume to eleven.

It was “molecularly IMPOSSIBLE,” Fauci said, that those viruses could have gained that function. That had been “judged by qualified virologists and molecular biologists,” whom Dr. Fauci did not name. This was an appeal to an expert witnesses, without identification and without any evidence or arguments. In court, an expert witness would be subject to cross-examination.

If Sen. Paul did make the criminal referral, it went nowhere at Biden’s Department of Justice. That was a victory for Fauci who, aside from the facts, has everything going for him.

Joe Biden jokes that Fauci is the real president of the United States, but unlike real presidents, Fauci never has to face the voters. Fauci’s wife, Christine Grady, heads up bioethics at the National Institutes of Health where she covers research on “human subjects.” Whatever Dr. Fauci wants, from secretive drug trials on children to lockdowns to vaccine mandates,  dutiful wife Christine, in charge of “human subjects,” will tell him it’s okay.

This Lysenko figure has succeeded in transforming the United States of America into Soviet Covidistan. Sen. Paul is one of the few legislators brave enough to call him out, and as his commentary explained:

“This rift is the fundamental contrast between the collectivism of Fauci and those who wish to be left alone. While those of us who wish to be left alone are not intent on making anyone accept our beliefs, the central planners and advocates of the mandates won’t be content unless they can inflict their beliefs on everyone.

“The debate over vaccine mandates is a war between individuals who wish to be free to choose their own medical regimen and collectivists who will not be content until everyone is made to submit to the diktats of the government planners.

“Let’s hope Americans will, once again, rally to the cause of freedom and reject medical tyranny and allow each individual to live their life as their own conscience dictates.”  

Share

Wondering what happened to your Disqus comments?

Read the Story