Alex Washburne Profile picture
Oct 9, 2024 1 tweets 3 min read Read on X
We now have a proper conspiracy.

2017: Fauci, Collin’s overturn the US moratorium on funding GoF research of concern.

2018: Daszak, Shi ZhengLi, Baric et al write a grant that serves as a blueprint for SARS-CoV-2

2019: All the authors of the grant, who never wrote another paper before nor since, were on an NIAID call discussing SARSr-CoVs

2020-Present:

-Andersen writes Holmes that he believes SARS-CoV-2 may be from a lab, they wrote Fauci

-Fauci tells Hugh Auchincloss to answer his phone, attached one of Baric’s papers, says he needs to wait for a call due to important work ahead

-Fauci brings GOFROC lobbyists to a call to berate and challenge Andersen’s thesis.

Eddie Holmes on the call: “Big Ask!”
Andersen: “Destroy the world with sequence data, yay or nay?”

-Andersen, Holmes et al. begin ghostwriting a paper claiming a lab origin is implausible, prompted, edited, and supported by funders of Peter Daszak (Collins/Fauci through NIH/NIAID, Farrar through WellcomeTrust —> CEPI —> GVP). Privately, authors make fun of Daszak, say he couldn’t “PREDICT” a virus coming from his own lab, confess a lab origin is “so friggin likely”.

-Fauci meets with Baric to discuss Baric’s GOF work on CoVs, work Baric did with Baric’s former student Shi ZhengLi.

- Andersen et al. published, Fauci advertises their paper on international television in his capacity as NIAID director briefing Americans on COVID. Farrar advertises paper. None mention their involvement.

- Farrar, Daszak et al. write paper claiming lab origin theories are “conspiracy theories” and conspire with Daszak, Baric, and other blueprint PI’s to not sign it. Baric, Linfa Want didn’t sign it, but Daszak did without disclosing his COIs

- Fauci lied under oath, saying (1) he did not find GOF research in Wuhan and (2) he didn’t know Ralph Baric. FOIAs obtained today show Fauci’s recognition that Baric’s work (with Wuhan scientists) was GoF/P3O work and show Fauci knew Baric.

- NIAID FOIA lady hides everything throughout COVID, but Fauci’s deputy Morens cracks and admits the FOIA lady can “make emails disappear”. Morens was close friends and a confidante of Daszak, said Fauci knew their reputations are tied. Morens demonstrably violated federal records act by using his private gmail for official NIAID business, and FOI lady Marge Moore has plead the fifth.

What does this all mean?

Anthony Fauci overturned the moratorium on GOFROC, funded the group that wrote the blueprint for SARS-CoV-2, and then used his position as NIAID director to cast doubt on the lab origin theory by

(i) pressuring authors to ghostwrite manuscripts claiming a lab origin is implausible
(ii) giving funding to those authors
(iii) advertising their work during official NIAID duties like briefing the American people
(iv) sending the paper in (i) to DoS COVID origins investigators who requested all info on NIAID funded work in Wuhan in 2019
(v) pushing the US to censor a lab origin as “disinformation”
(vi) lying under other about NIAID funding labs in Wuhan, and demonstrating a knowledge of this lie’s consequences by also lying about his connection with Ralph Baric.

Currently, we see a clear pattern of NIAID officials violating federal records laws, misleading to DoS investigators, lying to congress, and hiding their knowledge of risky research behind a thin veil of expertise that an expert like me can confidently see through. Why the lies, ghostwriting, FOIA abuses, perjury, and more?

On a more societal note, why is the media letting Fauci get away with this?

We need full transparency from NIAID to either rule out their involvement in the lab origin of COVID (even if possibly revealing a conspiracy to defraud the US government by Fauci et al), or learn of a lab origin due to two bureaucrats’ terrible decision in 2017 and put all the blame on them, letting there be truth and fair trials and justice as our constitution permits.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alex Washburne

Alex Washburne Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @WashburneAlex

Mar 18, 2024
"Safety" cannot alone be justification for abridged liberties as many arguments over the use of government powers concern tradeoffs between safety and liberty.

Can we citizens never propose policies that advance liberty, even if they are less safe?

1/
Can I be censored for speaking up against public health recommendations that I think are ridiculous?

Is it okay for me to be shadowbanned for expressing my values to drink 3 beers a day instead of the "safe" recommendation of <1 glass of wine a day?

2/
Another point of Murthy v. Missouri concerns who gets to define "safety" to begin with.

As a scientist & statistician estimating risk, can I be censored if my estimates of risk are less than those used by the government?

Whose definitions of safety/risk are primary?

3/
Read 17 tweets
Mar 17, 2024
There's a lot of toxic self-marginalization being used to bypass hard discussions on the probable lab origin of SARS-CoV-2

Providing no evidence of misogynistic behavior, scientists are pulling the woman card to play victim at the expense of critical conversations on biosafety. Image
A more critical and wholistic conversation about lab origin dialogue would focus on the Queen Bee behavior of self-declared "ad hominatrix" Angela Rasmussen and the way she curses and undermines women of color & folk of diverse backgrounds with different paradigmatic perspectives
When I sought to contextualize social scientific systems supporting risky work as banal, with appropriate context given to Hannah Arendt, many Jewish zoonotic-origin people claiming such an effort to draw comparison (through "banality", not "evil") was anti-semitic.
Read 10 tweets
Feb 22, 2024
I wanted to add some clarity and transparency here by providing some first-person perspective on how @eLife handled our manuscript.

BLUF: eLife accepted our paper, fired its editor for expressing his long-held views, and then refused to publish our paper without good cause.

🧵
The paper is our paper documenting the anomalous BsaI/BsmBI map of SARS-CoV-2 and providing the important context that this map is consistent with how people made viruses in a lab pre-COVID.



2/biorxiv.org/content/10.110…
Our preprint received a high volume of public attention. We paid close attention to the feedback we received from the thousands of people who read our MS, and made slight modifications to our discussion section pointing to future work



3/
Read 18 tweets
Jan 19, 2024
SARS-CoV-2 was most likely synthesized in a lab.

We predicted SARS-CoV-2 was assembled in six fragments with BsaI + BsmBI.

@emilyakopp found drafts the proposal to insert a furin cleavage site in a sarbecovirus ALSO proposed to assemble 6 fragments... and ordered BsmBI.

1/
Here's some key context - our thread found the BsaI/BsmBI "cutting/pasting" sites in SARS-CoV-2 to be anomalous among wild CoVs

and exactly what we'd expect from a virus synthesized by Ralph Baric's methods (ZhengLi in Wuhan was a student of Baric)



2/
The DEFUSE proposal is a research proposal that aimed to insert a furin cleavage site in a bat SARS coronavirus in Wuhan.

It was submitted in 2018, there had never been a SARS COV with an FCS in 1K years of evolutionary time until SARS2 showed up with an FCS in 2019.

3/
Read 11 tweets
Jan 9, 2024
Fauci is lying, and I don't say that lightly.

I've treated this piecemeal, but now I'm going to make a thread.

Under any definition of gain of function research of concern (GOFROC), Fauci funded it.

1/
Fauci's main efforts to change definitions are either:

1) bat SARS coronaviruses are not "potentially pandemic pathogens"

or

2) It's not "GOFROC" if you're enhancing potentially pandemic pathogens to make a vaccine.

2/
Let's get super specific.

The NIH/NIAID grant in question, "Understanding the risk of bat coronavirus emergence" funded work on bat SARS-CoVs from 2018-2019 at a time when DEFUSE collaborators were all on the grant.



3/ nih.gov/sites/default/…
Image
Read 11 tweets
Jan 9, 2024
If you think we've had a full investigation into SARS-CoV-2 origins...

think again.

If it weren't for independent sleuths & investigative journalists, we wouldn't have DEFUSE, the blueprint for SARS2, the October 2019 emails of NIAID on a call with DEFUSE authors & more...

1/
Image
Dr. Fauci and NIAID have not been transparent about the nature of research on that call.

David Morens, a program officer at NIAID, was using gmail to coordinate with gain of function allies but we don't know if Morens violated other laws besides federal records

2/ Image
Fauci hasn't disclosed what he discussed with his deputy, Hugh Auchincloss, when he heard SARS-CoV-2 might have come from a lab and demanded Hugh do urgent work.

3/ Image
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(