The Patriot Post® · Paul vs. Fauci
Kentucky Senator Rand Paul and Dr. Anthony Fauci, America’s top infectious disease expert, clashed again in a Senate hearing Tuesday. Senator Paul is right and Dr. Fauci is wrong. Here’s the dispute.
At the beginning of the pandemic, Dr. Fauci led the charge in claiming that COVID-19 originated naturally and likely jumped from bats to humans. He provided no evidence to support his theory.
More importantly, there is a Chinese communist bio-hazard lab that was conducting experiments on coronaviruses in the exact same city where the outbreak first occurred.
The Chinese communists didn’t want the world to think that the virus came from their lab. But why were Dr. Fauci and the American media so intent on convincing us that it didn’t come from the lab either? I’ll get to Dr. Fauci’s motives in a moment. But the media were intent on blaming Donald Trump.
The Chinese communists were doing what’s called “gain of function research” at the Wuhan lab. That research involves making a coronavirus more dangerous to humans. Increasing evidence suggests that one of those viruses leaked out of that lab. More than 600,000 Americans and millions around the world have died as a result.
There are a lot of coronaviruses that occur naturally. But this one known as COVID-19 has characteristics that some scientists believe indicate human engineering.
We have since discovered that the federal agency Dr. Fauci works for gave grants to the Chinese communist lab in Wuhan, funds that may very well be implicated in this deadly research.
Is that why Fauci was so intent on convincing us the virus occurred in nature and not from lab experimentation? It looks like he was trying to save his own hide.
While most media commentators and pundits were quick to defend Dr. Fauci Tuesday, one brave Washington Post journalist dared to point out the obvious. Josh Rogin tweeted:
“Rand Paul was right and Fauci was wrong. The NIH was funding gain of function research in Wuhan but NIH pretended it didn’t meet their ‘gain of function’ definition to avoid their own oversight mechanism.”
Fauci has repeatedly played word games in his congressional testimony to mislead the American people. Senator Paul is now calling on the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation. That investigation must take place. We deserve the truth.
The Pro-Abortion Left
Many pro-choice Americans often take offense at the term “pro-abortion.” Sometimes I even hear from conservatives who think the phrase is unfair. It’s not. Sadly, much of the left today is unapologetically pro-abortion.
There’s an old saying in Washington that if you want less of something you tax it, and if you want more of something you subsidize it. Makes sense, right? Well, House Democrats must want more abortions because they are trying to force all Americans to subsidize them.
It wasn’t that long ago when Democrat President Bill Clinton said abortions should be “rare.” But today’s Democrat Party is proudly pro-abortion. So much so that in order to secure his party’s nomination, Joe Biden had to flip flop on the issue of taxpayer-funding of abortions, which is extremely unpopular among the American people.
A few years ago, there was a big campaign on the left to make abortion cool. It was called “Shout Your Abortion.” That’s pro-abortion.
Here’s the latest example. The women’s magazine Marie Claire published a story recently calling on Hollywood to include more onscreen depictions of characters getting abortions in movies and TV shows because that’s just what America needs right now — more death.
Amazingly, the story tries to spin abortion for mothers who already have children as “a serious act of love … to give the children they already have the best possible life.” That’s disgusting, but clearly pro-abortion. I suspect that twisted idea would actually frighten most children.
Glorifying acts of violence in the womb is a gross disservice to women. Far from a “serious act of love,” killing an innocent child is the most violent thing a family member can do to another family member.
The good news is that the left’s desperation to justify abortion shows that it knows it is losing this battle. They are fighting against the increasing evidence of the humanity of the unborn child. Science is pro-life. And anyone who claims to be an ally of justice should be all in on defending innocent life!
Biden’s Extremism Exposed
The Biden Education Department recently sent out a list of resources to school districts across the country about how they can safely reopen after the pandemic. One of those resources was a guide from the Abolitionist Teaching Network.
The network was co-founded by Professor Bettina Love, a 2016 HipHop Fellow at Harvard University, who has been described as having “the mind of a scholar and the heart of a revolutionary.” Well, she certainly has some “revolutionary” ideas when it comes to education.
Her guide urges teachers to “disrupt whiteness,” whatever that means. It also instructs teachers to “remove all punitive or disciplinary practices that spirit murder Black, Brown, and Indigenous children,” whatever that means.
Professor Love says her network is “dedicated to not creating new schools or reimagining schools, but destroying schools that do nothing but harm Black and brown children,” adding, “If you don’t recognize that White supremacy is in everything we do, then we got a problem.”
Spokesmen for the Biden Administration are scrambling to distance themselves from Professor Love, saying the inclusion of the Abolitionist Teaching Network guide in their resource material was an “error.” Consider me skeptical.
The big teachers’ unions have endorsed critical race theory, and some extremist at Biden’s Department of Education thought it was a good idea to include this guide. Will that person be fired? I’m not holding my breath.
As you know, House Democrats rammed through a vote to create a special committee to investigate the events of January 6th. The Justice Department and the courts are already doing that, but everyone knows this is just another partisan “get Trump” waste of time and money.
Further proving the point, Speaker Nancy Pelosi yesterday took the unprecedented step of rejecting two of the Republican members appointed to the committee — conservative stalwarts Jim Jordan and Jim Banks.
Under a previous agreement, Pelosi would name eight members to the committee and House GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy would name five. But Speaker Pelosi clearly thinks she is entitled to name all 13 members.
Remember, Pelosi refused to remove Eric Swalwell from the House Intelligence Committee even after it was revealed that he had been compromised by a Chinese spy. But Banks and Jordan are beyond the pale.
I’m pleased to report that McCarthy is pushing back hard, declaring, “Unless Speaker Pelosi reverses course and seats all five Republican nominees, Republicans will not be party to their sham process.”
By the way, if Pelosi wants to investigate something, she might consider investigating last year’s riots. Two-thirds of Americans support such an investigation. That’s a lot more than the 52% who support a congressional investigation of January 6th.