Rough translation of a key section of Wiesendanger taking Drosten to the woodshed.
Drosten, who founded the Gain of Function advocacy group "Scientists for Science" in 2014 has had the entire German media to himself. Finally his lies are being called out. archive.fo/KzjNw
Drosten got excessively triggered by the publication of this Cicero article today, so much so that he called a renowned scientist an extremist. Of course, Drosten never offered an explanation for his fraudulent Lancet letter, which was one of the points raised by Wiesendanger.
Wiesendanger on Proximal Origin:
Wiesendanger on the furin cleavage site.
Wiesendanger on Andersen.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ Interesting supplemental filing from Durham. Horowitz must have complained that Durham publicly exposed him. But the supplemental filing does not address the crucial issues, i.e. it does not address Horowitz's lies and omissions about Sussmann, it only covers Baker's phones.
2/ Remarkably, even though the supplement is limited to Baker's phones, it is speculative on that issue. Horowitz says it's "likely" Durham was told about the phones in 2018. Durham says he does not recall being told. Be that as it may, the main issue is left totally unaddressed.
3/ Never mind what was or wasn't said in 2018. The point is that Horowitz failed to disclose his possession of the phones in Oct 2021 when Durham specifically requested any information that may be relevant to the Sussmann case (Baker is the main witness, his phones are relevant).
There are many ways we know it came out of the lab. This is probably still the best reason.
Daszak's explanation as to why he didn't have a conflict of interest is mind-bogglingly insane. Yet, instrad of taking down Daszak's fraudulent natural origins letter, the editor of the Lancet (himself a CCP stooge) spent a year negotiating with Daszak. What is going on?
2/ On January 24, 2017 @SergeiMillian was falsely outed as the primary source for Steele’s dossier by @MarkMaremont of @WSJ. Maremont identified Millian as being the individual named as both source D & E in Steele’s dossier.
3/ Maremont claimed that “Some of the most explosive parts of a dossier containing unverified allegations that President Donald Trump had secret ties to Russian leaders originated from” Millian. The allegations attributed to Millian are crucial to the Steele dossier.
-you claim that Steele is respected
-you try and make it look like Republicans had something to do with the dossier
-you absolve Hillary
-you fail to tell your readers that NOTHING has been corroborated
-you claim that questions over the dossier are "partisan attacks"
-you unskeptically repeat misinformation about GOP funding
-you mislead your readers about the fact that Steele hasn't been in Russia in decades
-you unskeptically parrot Clinton lies nytimes.com/2017/10/24/us/…
This one is particularly egregious:
-you again misdirect about GOP funding of the dossier
-but then you go all in on creating false innuendo about the role that Washington Free Beacon and Paul Singer might've played in creating the dossier