TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Gain of function research funded by the NIH in a lab in Wuhan is under scrutiny. Senator Rand Paul accused Dr. Anthony Fauci of funding the lab, which was initially criticized by the media. However, the NIH now admits to funding risky research in Wuhan. The theory that COVID-19 originated from a lab leak gains traction as evidence suggests it came from the lab, not animals. Lab leaks have happened before, and the FBI and Department of Energy support the lab leak theory. Gain of function research involves making viruses stronger, but its effectiveness in creating vaccines is questionable. The media's lack of curiosity about the origins of COVID-19 is concerning. The NIH continues to fund gain of function research, posing a potential risk to humanity.

The U.S. funded risky coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which involved creating new viruses. Intelligence agencies are investigating whether a virus leak from this lab caused the global pandemic. Anthony Fauci, the top medical adviser to the president, did not mention gain of function research during the pandemic's onset, leaving others to uncover its significance. Gain of function research increases the transmissibility or virulence of pathogens, and despite a U.S. ban in 2014, funding continued to flow to China. Fauci oversaw the NIH when the ban was lifted in 2017. Additionally, NIH funds supported research by Chinese military scientists to genetically manipulate coronaviruses, involving both the Wuhan lab and two American institutions. The Wuhan lab is still authorized for funding, with 26 other labs listed on the NIH's website.

According to a report sent to Washington, SARS CoV-two was created in a Wuhan lab with unsafe conditions, funded by Fauci. The US intelligence community was actively involved and aware, using groups like In-Q-Tel. This was allegedly done despite the Chinese Communist Party's desire for bioweapon technology. The speaker calls for investigations into public and private partners connected to EcoHealth Alliance and Wuhan, including Meta Bioda and Rosemont Seneca, questioning if the president was involved in a cover-up to protect his son. Fauci allegedly coordinated a cover-up with Peter Dasek on the lab leak theory. Ralph Barack and UC Davis were also allegedly involved. The speaker accuses Fauci of lying about gain-of-function research and suggests he should be in jail. Fauci and others are allegedly profiting from the pandemic. The speaker advocates for focusing on those responsible for the pandemic instead of internal conflicts. Others discuss the potential for future outbreaks and the need for better preparedness and funding for research and vaccine development, including mRNA technology.

The speakers discuss whether the NIH funded gain of function research and its potential role in the pandemic. There is a heated exchange between a senator and a speaker who denies responsibility for any deaths. The possibility of Dr. Fauci lying under oath is raised, and it is suggested that American tax dollars funded the research. The Luban Institute is mentioned as conducting gain of function research. Dr. Redfield expresses concern that the virus may have been engineered. Gain of function research is defined as increasing a pathogen's transmissibility or pathogenicity. It is concluded that gain of function research did not stop the pandemic, but rather caused it.

NIH did fund research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology through ECHO Health, depending on how you define gain of function research. If you refer to the broader term, then yes, it was funded. This type of research occurs in many labs across the country and is not regulated because it does not pose any threat or harm.

The speaker suggests that American tax dollars funded gain-of-function research that created the virus. They claim that Dr. Fauci and various government agencies, including the NIH, State Department, USAID, and DOD, were involved. They argue that Fauci funded a study that taught Chinese military scientists how to build weapons of mass destruction and hide human tampering on the virus. They question why the U.S. government would fund such research and why they were teaching Chinese scientists. They also mention the CIA's involvement and their role in the cover-up. The speaker raises concerns about the lack of medical benefit and the potential bioweapons implications.

Speaker 0 denies funding gain of function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Speaker 1 reveals that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) funded research on a bat coronavirus at the Wuhan lab, making it more contagious. Speaker 2 questions Dr. Fauci about his previous statement, but he stands by it. Speaker 3 mentions a letter raising concerns about experiments in the Wuhan lab. Speaker 0 interrupts and accuses Senator Paul of lying. Speaker 2 argues that if the virus originated from the lab, those who funded it should be held responsible. Speaker 4 states that the NIH admitted funding gain of function research at the Wuhan lab, contradicting Dr. Fauci's claims. Speaker 0 maintains that he has never lied before Congress.

EcoHealth Alliance was partnering with this Wuhan lab to create to do gain and function research. That's right. We just have never been able to have somebody say it and it was that exact experiment that led to this COVID bug. We are we are working on that with, Jay Bhattacharya and look forward to being able to share that, hopefully, very soon. That that specific Link. Correct. Between the gain of function research and what we saw with COVID nineteen. I mean, that would be extraordinary because just so the audience knows, if that's true, if it was Peter Daszak's research with the Wuhan so called bat lady that caused this pandemic, then we did fund it. Then Anthony Fauci helped fund the pandemic. These things that he denied over and over and over to senator Rand Paul's questioning. That's right. Under oath. It it

Republicans on the subcommittee recount two years of work aimed at linking the COVID-19 origin to a Wuhan lab, arguing that Democrats hindered the pursuit of truth by blocking hearings. They contend mounting evidence supports a lab-origin, and they frame the hearing as a step toward uncovering the truth for Americans who have suffered from COVID-19. Dr. Redfield is cited as having pointed to the lab-leak hypothesis as early as 2020, urging Fauci, Jeremy Farrar, and Tedros to take the lab-leak possibility seriously and to investigate both lab-origin and natural-origin hypotheses. Farrar convened an 11-scientist meeting across five time zones on February 1, inviting Fauci to join, with a note to treat the matter in total confidence. Redfield notes he was excluded from that call despite being included in prior discussions, and asks why he was left out. Emails following the February 1 conference show the four scientists who had attended later told Fauci that they found the genetic sequence inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory. Yet, just three days later, these four scientists drafted the proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 paper, arguing the opposite. The subcommittee asks for the likelihood that these scientists, after making that earlier statement, could conclude with such certainty that COVID-19 came from nature instead of a lab leak, and suggests Fauci prompted the paper to discredit the lab-leak theory. Speaker 0 characterizes the February 2020 approach as antithetical to science, saying science requires debate and that this process squashed debate. They ask whether Fauci used the proximal-origin paper to hide gain-of-function research that created the virus. Speaker 1 responds that they cannot speak to Fauci’s motivation but asserts the paper is inaccurate and part of a narrative to support a natural-origin story. They state the pandemic did not start in January at the seafood market, noting infections as early as September, and allege a narrative was decided to claim a wet market origin and to negate discussion about a laboratory origin. With twenty seconds left, Speaker 0 raises a point that Fauci was told in January 2020 about NIH’s monetary relationship with the Wuhan Institute through EcoHealth Alliance and asks whether Fauci intentionally lied under oath when denying NIH funding of gain-of-function research. Speaker 1 asserts there is no doubt NIH funded gain-of-function research and adds that American tax dollars funded gain-of-function research from NIH, the State Department, USAID, and DOD. The exchange ends with Speaker 0 noting time and recognizing Ms. Dink.

New evidence suggests that Dr. Anthony Fauci may have been involved in bringing a coronavirus strain to the US before the pandemic. Documents reveal that in 2018, Fauci's team visited the Wuhan lab, collected a virus, and transported it to a lab in America. They also obtained Egyptian fruit bats from a roadside zoo in Maryland and combined them with the coronavirus in Montana. Despite knowledge of the Wuhan lab's activities, Fauci acted surprised when the virus began spreading. The White Coat Waste Project uncovered these details, highlighting Fauci's involvement in funding and training researchers at the lab. Concerns are raised about the potential for another pandemic, as the NIH plans to expand its bat labs using COVID relief funds. The Biden administration's NIH nominee supports gain of function experiments and funding labs in China and other unaccountable nations. The urgency to expose and shut down these labs is emphasized.

In 2014, a gain of function moratorium was implemented in the US due to lab accidents. Despite this, gain of function research continued in China with funding from Dr. Fauci. The NIH lifted the moratorium in 2017 without proper consultation. There are concerns that US-funded research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology may have led to the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr. Ebright believes that lapses in oversight of this research could have caused the pandemic and may lead to future ones.

Speaker 0 argues that the world has been lied to for 110 years by a small group of criminal industrial conspirators who aim to subjugate humanity to enrich themselves, impoverish and kill others, and that the words “acceptable death rate” have become an industrial norm. They claim this is not just a political disagreement but a crime, asserting that the World Health Organization (WHO) and pharmaceutical companies authorized to begin the process of killing human beings in the interest of advancing their goals. The speaker declares this is a criminal cartel and states they will show documents proving it, insisting this is not an allegation but something that is provable by their own words. The four-step process alleged for executing nefarious plans is: 1) they begin by planning an exercise, 2) they fund that exercise, 3) they create the rationale for what they will do, and 4) they deploy and profit from it. They claim this violates 15 U.S. code section 19 (and connect it to the Clayton Act and the early formation of WHO in 1947), and they claim violation of the TFEU (the treaty for the functioning of the European Union), asserting Article 101 sets out that this was never public health but racketeering to instill terror to adapt population behavior. Data from Zurich is used to argue there was no pandemic: the speaker notes that during the death pandemic of the globe, life insurance claims fell by $30,000,000,000, stating that the data is unambiguous and that there was genocide rather than a pandemic. They pivot to the 2011 WHO, Welcome Trust, PATH, and Gates Foundation malaria vaccine program for children under six months, highlighting that 66 children in the vaccine group were murdered and 28 in the control group were murdered, with the control described as a cocktail of pathogenic injections rather than saline. The speaker references Article five, section 13, claiming immunity from arrest or legal process was designed as permanent immunity for a criminal organization formed in 1947; they connect the first WHO director general, Renee Sand (sic) from the Dachau-era milieu, to Brock Chisholm, who allegedly advocated population control as a primary objective. The claim extends to funding and influence: Gates Foundation allegedly provides 88% of WHO’s foundation donations, which the speaker says constitutes a tax and competition law violation in Europe and the United States. The four-step process is illustrated again with sourcing: to sustain funding beyond the crisis, to increase public understanding for medical countermeasures like pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccines, and to use media hype to attract investors who see profit at the end of the process, as documented by the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board and Peter Daszak’s partnerships. The 2014 Rand Paul–Anthony Fauci correspondence is cited, showing a letter from NIAID to UNC Chapel Hill stating that gain-of-function research would continue during a moratorium with a budget funded by DARPA and NIH. The speaker quotes that the Wuhan virus was anticipated, citing a 2016 publication stating SARS-like Wuhan Institute of Virology virus one is poised for human emergence, implying foreknowledge and manipulation of the virus in Wuhan and UNC Chapel Hill. The talk shifts to the characterization of the work as biological warfare enabling technologies, referencing Ralph Baric’s 2005 DARPA/MITRE presentation and subsequent NIAID and DARPA funding, concluding that the project was to produce biological warfare enabling technologies rather than public health measures. They highlight substantial profits for Pfizer and Moderna from public funds and accuse the WHO of laundering money via a budget expansion request of 11%. In closing, the speaker maintains this is not a public health crime or constitutional crime, but a criminal conspiracy of criminal racketeers. They call for ending the criminal organization itself and urge everyone to destroy the WHO.

New evidence suggests that Dr. Anthony Fauci may have been involved in bringing a coronavirus strain to the US before the pandemic. Documents reveal that in 2018, Fauci's team visited the Wuhan lab, obtained a virus, and transported it to a lab in America. They also took Egyptian fruit bats from a Maryland zoo to Montana and combined them with the coronavirus. Despite this, Fauci acted surprised when the virus started spreading. The White Coat Waste Project claims that Fauci has a history of experimenting on animals and warns that funding for more bat labs is being allocated from COVID relief funds. The nominee for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) supports gain of function experiments and funding for labs in China and other unaccountable nations. The focus should be on exposing these labs and holding those responsible accountable.

Anthony Fauci's involvement in funding the Wuhan lab is being covered up by multiple government agencies. Despite Congress declassifying information, I am still being denied access to classified and unclassified information. Evidence suggests that Fauci lied in hearings and knew about the lab's activities. Emails reveal his concerns about the manipulated virus and its origins. He dismissed these concerns for the past three years. Fauci bypassed the safety committee that should have reviewed the funding, allowing it to proceed unchecked. This revelation is significant and could lead to Fauci's downfall.

The speaker claims Anthony Fauci funded research at the Wuhan lab, providing them with the technology to develop coronavirus. It's alleged Fauci gave them the precise technology for developing the pathogen and published about it, crediting NIH for financing the studies. Ralph Barack from the University of North Carolina allegedly developed a technique called seamless ligation, which hides the laboratory origins of a manipulated virus. This technique, also called the "no see" technique, conceals evidence of human tampering. The speaker questions why Fauci would give this technology to the Chinese, as the lab was a military lab run by the military.

The origin of the virus is debated, with some suggesting a lab leak in China. The NIH denies funding gain of function research in Wuhan, but acknowledges funding research on a bat coronavirus. The debate centers on whether the research involved gain of function, which aims to increase transmissibility to humans. Accusations are exchanged, with one party claiming misinformation and the other calling for prosecution.

If COVID-19 originated from risky experiments at the Wuhan lab, it's important to note that the lab received funding from America. During a congressional hearing, Senator Paul questioned Dr. Fauci about the NIH's funding of gain-of-function research in Wuhan, to which Fauci denied lying. However, a scientific paper from 2012 written by Fauci supports the benefits of gain-of-function research despite the risk of a pandemic. The decision to lift the ban on gain-of-function research during the Trump administration remains unclear. Former President Trump mentioned that Fauci did not inform him about the Wuhan Institute of Virology's activities, and emails later revealed Fauci's discussions about the possibility of genetic manipulation. Trump stopped the payments to the Chinese lab upon discovering them. Despite the controversy, Trump believes his administration did a great job with the vaccine and Operation Warp Speed.

Project Veritas has obtained military documents revealing information about the origins of COVID-19, gain of function research, vaccines, and potential treatments. These documents contradict Dr. Anthony Fauci's claims that the US government was not involved in gain of function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The documents include a report from DARPA, a US Department of Defense agency, which states that EcoHealth Alliance approached DARPA in 2018 seeking funding for dangerous gain of function research. DARPA rejected the proposal, but the NIAID, under Dr. Fauci's direction, proceeded with the research in Wuhan and other US sites. The question arises as to why the NIH, NIAID, and EcoHealth Alliance disregarded the risks when even the Department of Defense deemed the research too dangerous.

We did not fund gain of function research in Wuhan. A bat coronavirus was enhanced in a lab. NIH funded research at Wuhan Institute, making a virus more contagious. Fauci denies lying to congress. Questions raised about experiments in Wuhan lab. NIH funded EcoHealth Alliance for bat coronavirus experiments. Fauci denies lying, blames Senator Paul. NIH admitted funding gain of function research in Wuhan lab. Fauci insists he did not lie.

NIH funded research at Wuhan Institute of Virology through ECHO Health, including gain of function research. This type of research is common in labs nationwide and is not regulated because it is deemed harmless.

Anthony Fauci was aware of funding for the Wuhan lab from the start and has been involved in a cover-up alongside multiple government agencies. Despite Congress declassifying information, evidence is still being withheld. Emails from February 2020 reveal Fauci's concerns about the virus being manipulated and its potential origins in the Wuhan lab, contradicting his public statements over the past three years. Additionally, a safety committee meant to oversee such funding was bypassed, as Fauci allowed the funding to proceed without their review. This revelation could have significant consequences for Fauci.

Doctor Fauci misled the country by withholding key information about the origins of the virus. He knew American tax dollars funded a lab in Wuhan conducting gain-of-function research. Despite this, he did not disclose the lab's deficiencies or compliance issues. Fauci organized a conference call with virologists who changed their tune on the lab leak theory shortly after. The government failed to share the truth, leading to misinformation about the virus's origins. The Director of National Intelligence believes Fauci and Collins withheld information to avoid scrutiny over their relationships with the lab in China.

Fauci allegedly funded bioweapons research in Wuhan indirectly through EcoHealth, a U.S. based nonprofit. Direct funding to China was supposedly avoided by using this intermediary. The speaker claims the term "gain of function" is a propaganda term. The speaker suggests "death maximization" is a more accurate description of gain of function research. The speaker implies that framing the research as "death maximization" would reveal the true nature of the work.

American tax dollars likely funded gain-of-function research that created the virus, according to the speakers. They mention funding from various government agencies, including NIH, the State Department, USAID, and DOD. They argue that Dr. Fauci, under whose direction the research was conducted, is responsible for teaching Chinese military scientists how to build weapons of mass destruction. They also claim that Fauci funded a technique called seamless ligation, which hides human tampering on the virus. The speakers question the justification for funding such research and highlight the involvement of USAID, the Department of Defense, and the CIA. They suggest a cover-up and raise concerns about the origins of the virus.

The transcript revolves around claims and counterclaims regarding whether the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Dr. Anthony Fauci funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Dr. Fauci denies that the NIH and NIAID "categorically" funded gain-of-function research in Wuhan and states he has never lied to Congress. He asserts Senator Paul does not know what he is talking about. Others claim the NIH provided grant money to a research group that conducted experiments with bat coronaviruses in Wuhan. They allege the NIH acknowledged funding research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology that unexpectedly made a bat coronavirus more contagious. One speaker states that the NIH funded controversial gain-of-function research using coronaviruses at the Wuhan lab, contradicting Dr. Fauci’s claims. Another speaker suggests that evidence points to the virus originating from the lab and that those who funded the lab will be held responsible.