reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker expresses disappointment that the existence of myocarditis was known very early on. They claim to have written to Fauci in 2020 and 2021 about lymphopenia and the failure to clear the virus, asserting that this failure was also known early on. The speaker states the perception of 95% efficacy was inaccurate and suggests there were perverse incentives at play, and now the consequences must be recognized. Another speaker then states that this is why Fauci needed a pardon.

Fauci was questioned about representing science and his involvement in controversial experiments on beagles. The speaker accused Fauci of making up COVID rules and questioned his ties to drug companies. The speaker criticized Fauci for receiving royalties from drug makers while giving medical advice. The speaker demanded accountability for taxpayer money and questioned the appropriateness of Fauci's actions.

Humanity questions why experts like Fauci delve into unnecessary details. Fauci lacks understanding of electron microscopy and medicine, suggesting he is unfit for his role. Top officials are disconnected from the reality at the bottom, driven by personal agendas rather than public health. They create and change rules as they please, with Fauci even willing to lie to the public on TV.

I was jailed for speaking out, do you agree? I don't want another lockdown. The speaker presents a book exposing research fraud behind vaccine mandates to a senator.

On January 9, 2024, Anthony Fauci admitted that the 6-foot social distancing guideline was arbitrary. He previously claimed that masks were necessary, despite acknowledging they don't provide perfect protection. Fauci also asserted that COVID vaccines would prevent infection, which later proved inaccurate. Both political parties allowed Fauci to dictate pandemic responses, leading to significant consequences for schools, businesses, and the economy, resulting in the highest COVID death rate globally. Critics of Fauci faced censorship and were labeled conspiracy theorists. Recently, Fauci acknowledged that the lab leak theory is a possibility. The speaker calls for a new political path, urging donations to their campaign to break free from the two-party system and restore democracy and moral authority in the U.S.

I don't speculate on the motives of individuals like Anthony Fauci or Bill Gates; I focus on their actions. The narrative reveals serious immoral behavior linked to government positions. Recently, the FDA's chief attorney acknowledged there was no justification for discouraging the use of Ivermectin, which was an effective treatment for COVID. By withholding it and other existing remedies, millions died unnecessarily. The push for vaccines was prioritized, despite a federal rule preventing emergency use authorization if effective treatments were available. This led to a lack of proper testing for vaccines, resulting in alarming health issues, particularly myocarditis in young athletes. The rising number of athlete deaths on the field is unprecedented, and there remains a need for accountability as the science continues to emerge.

The speaker accuses Dr. Anthony Fauci of knowing that the drug remdesivir would be deadly and deliberately denying effective treatments for COVID-19. They claim that treatments like zinc, hydroxychloroquine, and ivermectin, which have been shown to reduce the spread of the disease, were not used. They also allege that remdesivir causes kidney and organ failure and that it was responsible for many deaths during the pandemic. The speaker suggests that the pharmaceutical companies and healthcare organizations should be held liable for the damage caused by their products and actions. They mention the deaths of two teenage boys after receiving the Pfizer vaccine and question the safety and effectiveness of vaccines for children. The speaker accuses Dr. Fauci, Ralph Barrick, and Peter Daszak of colluding to create and weaponize the coronavirus. They argue that these actions constitute genocide and crimes against humanity. They call for the prosecution of those involved and the destruction of the system that allows such crimes to occur.

Dr. Fauci was questioned about representing science and his involvement in controversial experiments. The discussion turned to mask mandates, social distancing, and financial ties to drug companies. The conversation became heated, with accusations of unethical behavior and calls for prosecution. The chair reminded members to maintain decorum. Another member clarified Dr. Fauci's email statements on mask effectiveness. The exchange was marked by tension and disagreements.

The speaker asserts that a dangerous subversive elite has infiltrated the highest levels of Western institutions and governments to implement the criminal plan of Agenda 2,030. In many self-proclaimed democratic states, devices denounced in this global coup are being silenced through censorship, intimidation, psychiatricisation and even arrest. Among the victims of the totalitarian regime quietly establishing itself in Europe, Canada, Australia and other vassal nations of the United Nations, NATO, World Health Organization and World Economic Forum, all private entities founded by the same powers is lawyer Reiner Fulmisch, unjustly imprisoned and still awaiting a fair trial. His crime is having dared to speak the truth in a world of criminal lives. I call on Catholics and all people of goodwill to raise their voices in defence of those persecuted by the globalist regime. It is not Attorney Fulmish who should be imprisoned, but those who committed the greatest crime ever against humanity: Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, Clough Schwab, George Soros, Ursula von der Leyen, Albert Burma and all their accomplishments and emissaries, especially those in institutional positions. Free Reinhard Fulmisch!

Fauci, Soros, Gates, Zuckerberg, and others must be held accountable for their involvement in what is claimed to be the largest mass poisoning in human history.

People are losing security clearances and government contracts, but this is not enough. Dr. Fauci is responsible for the death of millions, and merely losing his job is insufficient. USAID is funding a radical Marxist agenda globally, and business loans are being given to children. Social Security and Medicare payments are being sent overseas and to dead people, including 50-year-olds. No one has been held accountable for any of this.

Everything I said is correct and reflects how the American people feel. Jamie Raskin accused us of worshiping Trump, but I don't worship anyone but God. The Democrats have been attacking my character while avoiding accountability for their actions during COVID, including lockdowns and forced vaccinations, which led to significant suffering. Fauci should be held responsible for these actions and tried for crimes against humanity. This is how I feel and how many Americans feel after that hearing.

Criticism of science and mask effectiveness are discussed. The need for vaccination to prevent serious illness and transmission is emphasized. School closures' impact on mental health is debated. The origins of COVID-19, gain of function research, and lab leaks are disputed. Dr. Fauci defends his recommendations and denies funding gain of function research. Accusations of misinformation and calls for prosecution are exchanged.

"The man thinks you can take a blood sample and stick it in an electron microscope and if it's got a virus in there, you'll know it." "He doesn't understand electron microscopy and he doesn't understand medicine and he should not be in a position like he's in." "Most of those up there on the top are just total administrative people and they don't know anything about what's going on at the bottom." "They've got an agenda which is not what we would like them to have, being that we pay for them to take care of our health in some way." "They change them when they want to and they smugly like Tony Fauci does not mind going on television in front of the people to pay his salary and lie directly into the camera."

The speaker claims that those who oppose the pharmaceutical industry are punished, while those who support it, like Anthony Fauci, rise to the top. Fauci, who has been in his position for 50 years, is highly paid and serves the agency's ambition. The speaker accuses the National Institutes of Health (NIH) of abandoning its mission to understand why Americans are sick and instead focusing on developing drugs for profit. The NIH earns billions of dollars from the Moderna vaccine, with Fauci's employees benefiting from patents and royalties. The speaker suggests that the agency's commercial interests have overshadowed its regulatory responsibilities.

I cannot understand how anyone can recommend the mRNA vaccination and sleep well at night. They seem afraid to admit they were wrong. I want to give you a chance to address your colleagues, fellow pathologists, and medical professionals. My advice is to always question what so-called experts say. You don't need top scientists, you need experienced doctors who think critically. In the past, people died from the flu without it being turned into a pandemic or locking people away.

The speaker believes criticism of them is an attack on science. They stated vaccinated people don't need to worry about serious illness or transmission, but later acknowledged fully vaccinated people can transmit the infection. Masks were described as working "at the margins, maybe ten percent." School closures were considered an appropriate approach initially, but remote learning may have "forever damaged" kids, though the speaker doesn't believe it's "irreparably damaged anyone." The speaker claims they didn't recommend lockdowns, but recommended shutting the country down to the president, knowing it would have serious economic consequences. The speaker suggests the virus originated from the animal-human interface in wet markets, but that the place of origin was not within the market itself. Another intelligence arm concluded COVID began with a lab leak in China. The speaker denies the NIH funded gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute, while others claim NIH funded research that made a bat coronavirus more contagious. The speaker denies that this is gain of function.

I am a scientist who uses the scientific method to gain information. I did not make up COVID rules. You signed off on experiments involving beagles. Your email said masks were not effective. Children were forced to wear masks and learn from home. You should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity.

Critics question the effectiveness of masks and the handling of the pandemic. Dr. Fauci defends his recommendations and denies funding gain-of-function research. The origins of COVID-19 are debated, with accusations of misinformation and calls for accountability. Mental health concerns in children due to lockdowns are raised. The discussion highlights the challenges faced during the pandemic, including balancing public health and economic impacts.

In the exchange, Speaker 1 advocates that a solution to vaccination uptake may require some form of mandatory vaccination, noting that federal officials resist that term. Speaker 2 adds that once people feel legally empowered, educational institutions will require vaccination, with colleges, universities, and employers like Amazon and Facebook signaling that anyone wanting to study or work there must be vaccinated. He asserts that making life difficult for people will cause them to drop ideological objections and get vaccinated. Speaker 0 challenges whether all objections to COVID vaccinations are “ideological bullshit,” insisting that is not what was being referred to and arguing that the claim about making it hard for people to live was made in a broader context about education, travel, work, and overall life, and that she takes offense at the interpretation. Speaker 0 then references Miss Allison Williams, who testified before the committee about losing her job after seeking an exemption from ESPN’s vaccine mandate. Williams’ case involved recommendations from bureaucrats and a fertility expert, highlighting that she and her husband, who were pursuing pregnancy with medical guidance, should not have been forced to vaccinate. Speaker 0 contends she was fired because “you made it hard” as described in the statement, preventing her from working, living, and making health decisions with her healthcare professional, thereby impacting American society’s ability to flourish and self-determine certain rights—stating that America should take offense at this. The dialogue shifts to Doctor Fauci. The speaker addresses him directly, calling him “doctor of fear” and stating that Americans do not hate science but hate having their freedoms taken. The speaker accuses Fauci of inspiring and creating fear through mass mandates, school closures, and vaccine mandates, claiming these policies have destroyed the American people’s trust in public health institutions and will have ripple effects for generations. It is asserted that fear has manifested in areas such as education and the economy, and the speaker concludes by separating their stance from science, saying, “I disagree with you because I disagree with fear.” The exchange ends with Speaker 0 yielding.

"Please wear a mask. There's no reason to be walking around with a mask. I often myself wear two masks. If you wear a mask, you can decrease the likelihood of transmitting or requiring COVID nineteen by fifty, sixty, seventy, maybe eighty percent. Said masks work at the margins maybe ten percent. Mask mandates did nothing. Forget the politics. Look at the data. There is just no evidence that they, masks, make any difference, full stop. The mask that you buy in a drugstore would be not particularly efficient in keeping out virus. Cloth coverings work. Two year old with asthma thrown off a flight. Mom is arrested in front of a young child. Isn't that theater? Isn't it just theater? There's no science behind it. Keep everybody masked."

Speaker 1 says that throughout the Biden administration he sought records about decision-making and why the U.S. funded Wuhan, China research, including why evidence about the virus origin being from a lab accident was being suppressed, but “we got nothing.” He says the Biden administration “stiff-armed” him by preventing access to virtually any documents. He says many of the findings during the Biden administration came from Freedom of Information Act requests by people outside government and from court actions forcing disclosure. He says that after the new election, he received promises from Secretary Kennedy and others that documents would be revealed. He says it took about six months, with resistance he attributes not to Secretary Kennedy but to “minders” around him. He says that after finally receiving documents, they have been reviewed for about a month. Speaker 1 states that in communications between Anthony Fauci and others, including Francis Collins, Fauci is depicted telling others to read materials, then delete them, and that he allegedly instructed them to delete “this material” after reading. Speaker 1 says deleting emails and discussions about government business is illegal for someone in the executive branch. He adds that Fauci testified he did not do that, and says this creates “two crimes”: destroying federal records and a prior sworn statement that he wouldn’t do it. Speaker 1 identifies a “big question” involving what he calls an “auto pen pardon” and says it will have to be challenged. He says there are thousands of auto pen pardons and raises whether President Biden was aware. He says they interviewed the person running the auto pen, who said they never met the president, and that the person said they did not discuss it directly but heard about it from higher-ups who allegedly talked to the president. Speaker 1 says this provides “a lot to go on” and describes it as a chance for the issue to get into court and for the Department of Justice to fight it out. Speaker 1 says he has invited Anthony Fauci involuntarily; if accepted, they will bring him in, and if not accepted, they will subpoena him. Speaker 0 asks whether the alleged wrongdoing falls under the auto pen time frame, noting that in some earlier auto pen matters there were specific time frames. Speaker 1 responds that the “umbrella” was “a decade,” described as leading up to the end of Biden’s term, and says this raises questions about whether a pardon can cover crimes not alleged at the time, whether it can be “all inclusive,” and whether a pardon can be upheld if it doesn’t specify the crime. Speaker 1 contrasts this with how pardons are typically specific to an accused or trial-ready crime. Speaker 0 asks about specific consequences, including prison time, regarding destroying federal records. Speaker 1 says lying to Congress is the biggest issue, that it can be five years in prison as a felony, and that destroying records adds to the crime and is against the law. He then ties this to contemporaneous emails, asserting that while Fauci said publicly he had no idea the virus came from a lab and that it couldn’t have been gain-of-function, privately he was “very worried” about the lab because he knew it did gain-of-function research. Speaker 1 also says gain-of-function research was funded by the United States government with Anthony Fauci’s approval, and claims Fauci’s pandemic guidance about origins and about cloth masks was contradictory to privately discussed concerns, including that Speaker 1 says cloth masks do not prevent transmission.

Fauci should be in prison for mishandling the pandemic. He caused countries in Africa to have no COVID deaths, while shutting down our economy and schools, leading to a lost generation's education. This also resulted in the largest wealth transfer ever. Additionally, a million people died.

Anthony Fauci's actions have raised serious concerns, as many believe he put people at risk without their consent. The research linked to the pandemic has resulted in immense loss, with estimates of 20 million deaths and a staggering economic cost of $25 trillion. There are suspicions that Fauci would rather promote falsehoods than address these issues openly.

Dr. Fauci was criticized for claiming he represents science. Many people see him as similar to Nazi doctor Joseph Mengele, not science. Some believe he will be remembered as the greatest mass killer in history once the truth about COVID is revealed.