Thread summarizing what we've learned so far of the Fauci/Collins email dump on the Great Barrington Declaration:
It starts on 10/14/20 when Collins instructs Fauci and his staff to "take down" the GBD and the "fringe" scientists behind it.
Fauci responds immediately by circulating an article against the GBD from that austere scientific authority, @WiredUK.
The Fauci-endorsed Wired article is noteworthy for having one of the single worst hot-takes of the entire pandemic. It declared in October 2020 that the GBD should be ignored, because lockdowns were a thing of the past and would not be returning!
The next day, Fauci sends Collins an angry rant against the GBD in the @thenation by @gregggonsalves.
Collins approves.
Far from a scientific study refuting the GBD, Gonsalves's article is a political op-ed attacking @jacobin magazine for breaking "solidarity" with other far-left media outlets on lockdowns. Why? Because Jacobin ran an interview with @MartinKulldorff on how lockdowns hurt the poor.
Over the weekend, Collins launches the smear campaign against the GBD in the Washington Post.
Collins and Fauci email each other about the WaPo hit, with Fauci quipping that the White House was "too busy with other things to worry about this" - perhaps an election reference? - and therefore would not push back on the anti-GBD campaign.
In the meantime, Gonsalves also gets in contact with Collins to volunteer his services (along with future @CDCDirector Rochelle Walensky) to attack the GBD in the media.
Collins approves, and forwards it to Fauci and a bunch of NIH underlings.
In the meantime, @gregggonsalves was having a public meltdown against the GBD on twitter.
The emails get murky around 10/14/20, because the NIH redacted a bunch of emails that appear to be between Fauci and Collins.
Surrounding context suggests they were discussing how to trash the GBD if it came up at the WH Covid task force meeting on 10/16.
On the morning of the Covid task force meeting, Fauci sends Deborah Birx this email alerting her about the need to oppose the GBD at the meeting. The unredacted part suggests they are preparing to attack @ScottWAtlas, who was perceived as the task force's champion of the GBD.
10/16/20 is as far as I've gotten in piecing together the story of what happened. Still more documents to go through, including some more explosive revelations about where Fauci was getting his anti-GBD talking points. So stay tuned!
*typo in the above. The first email about "taking down" the GBD was on 10/8/20 - three days after the GBD broke into the news and went viral.
"The rise in anti-Semitism on the right is attributable to a handful of individuals whom Hazony is too cowardly and embarrassed to condemn. Like a vengeful alcoholic at an intervention, he is lashing out and blaming everyone but himself for the wreckage he helped create" commentary.org/articles/james…
Also note: the picture of Hazony in the banner image is from him speaking at an event cosponsored by MCC, aka Viktor Orban University.
I first encountered Hazony ca. 2018 at a dinner sponsored by ISI where he gave a talk on his book. His lecture was vapid nationalist slop that made multiple egregiously erroneous claims about American history and political philosophy.
I remember sitting there shocked that anyone could find this guy even remotely convincing - not because the message was bad (and it was) but because his arguments betrayed utter incompetence with the subject matter. I was not the only one who thought so either. Most of the others at my table were rolling their eyes at him, and whispering about his mistakes in the speech.
When Q&A opened up, I started to raise my hand to push back on some of his claims. George Gilder, who was sitting right behind me, raised his hand at the same time. They called on Gilder, and he proceeded to make some of the same criticisms of Hazony that were going around my table. Hazony's answer to the challenge amounted to meandering babble and evasion.
I didn't think much else about Hazony after that, until he resurfaced as the leader of this NatCon thing. I was not at all surprised when I read the speaker list, and saw it was an eclectic mix of bigots, cranks, and conspiracy theorists. More surprising though is that Hazony has been pushing the same bigots for the last 6+ years now, all the while feigning "shock" that they spew bigotry whenever it spills into public view...and then turning around the next day and inviting the very same bigots back to his conferences.
Earlier today, President Trump made a last ditch attempt to salvage his tariffs before the Supreme Court by claiming that it would be impossible to refund them.
There's a problem. Trump's own DOJ has been admitting in court filings for months that refunds are possible.🧵
Here's the Trump DOJ's initial response on April 29, 2025, admitting that if they lost an unappealable decision, the government would refund the illegal tariffs with interest.
On May 28, 2025 the Trump DOJ filed a motion for a stay of the US Court of International Trade's ruling against them, arguing that the tariffs could be refunded with interest.
The court granted their stay based on this promise.
10 things to listen for in tomorrow's SCOTUS hearing on tariffs:
1. Will the DOJ try to argue that tariffs are not taxes, but regulatory "surcharges" under the international commerce clause out of the hope that this gives them more leeway under delegation of congressional power?
2. Will Roberts accept a "tariffs are not taxes, they're regulations" argument from Trump in light of his (in)famous Obamacare tax argument from Sebelius?
3. Will Kagan clarify her position on when the nondelegation doctrine applies by suggesting that tariffs fit that constitutional test, whereas other cases where she rejected it did not?
In 2016 the @AAUP launched a campaign urging colleges to ban conservative students from recording professors in the classroom.
I FOIA'd emails of Hank Reichman, their VP at the time & author of the policy. It revealed he was working with a Marxist group to secretly record free-market economics faculty at a conference he disliked.
The AAUP has always been a coven of left wing partisan hacks and hypocrites.
@AAUP For those who asked, here is the policy recommendation adopted by Reichman's committee.
@AAUP There are several FOIA'd emails, but here I'll share some of the main documents. Here is the Marxist student group coordinating behind the scenes with Reichman to promote their recordings of economics professors at the conference.
A bibliometric tour of Carl Schmitt, attesting that his alleged "importance" is a very recent phenomenon of only the last ~30 years. 🧵
First we start with English Ngram, which shows Schmitt had a negligible amount of citations until the 1990s.
What about other language groups though? Here's French, where Schmitt had a slightly earlier rise no-thanks to Derrida and a few other postmodernist oddballs started engaging with him. But also, a very recent phenomenon that's almost entirely in the 1990s-2000s...and then drops.
Spanish is interesting because it has a slow, steady uptake - albeit at very modest citation levels - in the 1930s-70s. But it too only really spikes in the 1990s-200s, and then declines a bit like French.