Thread by @HansMahncke

1/ The Jan 31-Feb 2 timeline is so significant because it reveals the origins of the lab leak cover up. As soon as Fauci saw the Science article he knew he had a big problem. This kicked off a frantic 48h in which Fauci planted the seeds for a natural origins narrative.

https://twitter.com/themarketswork/status/1401303424210141186

2/ The Science article itself wasn't all that bad for Fauci but it linked to a Nature article that was far more troublesome. We know Fauci spotted this problem because he began sending his soon to be collaborators both the Science and the Nature articles.

3/ The Nature article describes gain-of-function experiments at the Wuhan lab and specifically mentions that Fauci (i.e. NIAID) had funded the experiments. Thus, we know for certain that by Jan 31, Fauci *knew* that US taxpayers had funded reckless bat virus experiments in China.

4/ The only thing Fauci could try and do now (he is already trying) is to argue that these experiments were conducted without his knowledge. However that excuse doesn't fly. The mere act of instigating a cover up strongly suggests that he knew exactly what was going on in China.

5/ Even more importantly, the Nature article had been out in public for five years, including its reference to Fauci/NIAID funding. Nature articles are a big deal in Fauci's circles. It is inconceivable that everyone at NIAID overlooked the funding statement within the article.

6/ There is something else that Fauci knew beyond any doubt. That same evening (Jan 31) Fauci reached out to Andersen (we don't know why but we do know that Andersen receives Fauci funding). Andersen replied quickly saying that the virus looked like it had engineered features.

7/ This was another huge problem for Fauci. The next morning Fauci started organizing and the cover up. A number of virologists including Anderson were hastily put on a teleconference call. Notably that teleconference also included three head honchos from the Wellcome Trust. Why?

8/ The Wellcome guys are not affiliated with the US government or US citizens or even virologist. Their role remains shrouded in mystery. After the teleconference Anderson immediately changed his tune, doing a 180 turn away from his earlier "engineered" features analysis.

9/ Andersen sent an email to Daszak (who was not on the teleconference) to say that lab leak theorist are "crackpots". Daszak then organized the infamous Lancet letter that has been used ever since by media and Big Tech to categorically dismiss and suppress any lab leak theory.

10/ Within a few days of the teleconference, Anderson also wrote a letter, which was published in Nature. This was the Proximal Origin letter that purported to prove there was no lab leak. How do you go from engineered to definitive proof of no lab leak within one teleconference?

11/ Andersen's letter was perhaps even more effective in shaping the narrative than Daszak's letter. Fauci famously cited it while standing next to Trump on Apr 17, omitting that he himself was involved in instigating it even feigning not to know Andersen.