reSee.it - Related Video Feed

We made mistakes during COVID, but some guessed better. Some said closing schools was wrong, now it's acknowledged the virus could have started in a lab. We overreacted, did silly things, and embraced bad ideas. Dissenting opinions were right. No COVID commission, no lessons learned. Gain of function research continues, animals are still mistreated. Money was stolen, blame put on Biden. Trump ignored COVID.

Biden officials now acknowledge the COVID lab leak theory, which was previously dismissed as a conspiracy. Experts and scientists have consistently debunked the idea that the virus originated from a lab in Wuhan, asserting it likely came from a wildlife market where bats were present. The scientific consensus is that the virus was not man-made or genetically modified. Claims suggesting otherwise have been labeled as misinformation, with many emphasizing the dangers of spreading such theories, which can lead to xenophobia and panic. Investigations into the lab leak theory have been deemed unnecessary by the WHO, as the origins of the virus are believed to be natural.

This virus likely did not originate naturally; it stems from scientific arrogance. In the early pandemic days, there were claims about a wet market origin, but evidence soon emerged showing many cases unrelated to it. By early January, I informed the National Security Council and Anthony Fauci that the virus was highly infectious in humans, suggesting a lab origin. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is well-known for coronavirus research, making the lab leak theory plausible. Despite discussions, Fauci maintained a focus on the wet market hypothesis, disregarding other possibilities. I believed a broader scientific investigation was necessary, but only a single hypothesis was considered.

Three years ago, anyone suggesting that COVID-19 originated from a lab was dismissed and censored. Doctor Redfield faced backlash for suggesting it came from a Wuhan lab. Doctor Fauci received emails from doctors Anderson and Gary stating that the virus appeared engineered and not consistent with evolutionary theory. However, he did not share these emails with Redfield or the CDC. Three days later, Anderson and Gary changed their stance, and the only intervening event was a conference call with Fauci. It is worth noting that Anderson and Gary later received a $9 million grant from Fauci. This raises questions about their sudden change in position.

From the start, the lines were drawn regarding the virus's origins. I believed it came from a lab, while others disagreed. My position as head of the CDC was undermined, and I was told it was a White House decision. I find that hard to believe; it seems like a cover-up. Why would we share advanced biotechnology with China? I doubt the measures in place will be foolproof; issues will arise. There have been multiple lies throughout this situation.

President Trump promised to deliver the full American story of what led to the pandemic and is keeping that promise. The goal is to let the chips fall where they may and ensure the American people know the truth. Trump is also delivering on a commitment to prevent future pandemics caused by dangerous scientific experiments. The aim is to never repeat the actions that endangered the world in the lead-up to the pandemic.

Five years ago, when an episode discussing COVID-19 origins came out, people reacted negatively. The speaker believed the episode was correct, and now the COVID-19 website is up, possibly due to Bobby Kennedy's influence. The New York Times reported the virus may have originated in a lab, but the speaker feels they were misled by the media itself. There have been no apologies or corrections from mainstream media, who are now presenting this information as if it's new. The speaker contrasts this with a hypothetical scenario: if podcasters had encouraged experimental shots and people experienced complications, mainstream news would have blamed the podcasters for side effects, unnecessary deaths, strokes, and other issues, potentially calling for their platforms to be shut down.

Before the COVID pandemic, the transcript claims that Dr. Fauci, as head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, provided millions in U.S. taxpayer dollars to fund “dangerous gain-of-function research” on bat coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, work it says is now widely viewed as the source of an unintentional lab leak that sparked the pandemic. It says the speaker, in support of President Trump’s “maximum transparency mandate,” is releasing never-before-seen communications and documents on the speaker’s final day as Director of National Intelligence. The transcript alleges the documents show how Fauci worked with “politicized career leadership” in the intelligence community to suppress the truth about his actions, the virus’s lab leak origins, and his role in directing U.S. funding for the research. It claims the documents expose Fauci’s “direct role” in influencing and manipulating intelligence community assessments on COVID-19 and that Fauci lied to Congress in 2024 under oath by denying knowledge of or participation in discussions with intelligence officials about viral research. It also states that multiple intelligence community whistleblowers testified that they faced retaliation for challenging manipulation of intelligence about the virus’s origins. The transcript says it reveals a “pattern” of suppressing dissent and silencing critics. The transcript attributes three roles to Fauci that it says shield him from scrutiny: (1) funding dangerous gain-of-function coronavirus research linked to “big pharma” and their pursuit of universal vaccines; (2) serving as a behind-the-scenes advisor who, with hand-picked experts, pushed the intelligence community to endorse a natural animal origin to hide the gain-of-function research Fauci funded; and (3) acting as a pandemic pundit who publicly pushed “lies, disinformation, and censorship” across multiple platforms. According to the transcript, “hundreds of reviewed emails” show that the intelligence community “almost always” incorporated Fauci’s recommendations, including promoting a “fraudulent paper” as legitimate information for intelligence consideration. It says senior analysts praised Fauci as an “unbiased guide” to coronavirus experts while ignoring experts who might dissent from Fauci’s narratives. The transcript reiterates that it claims Fauci lied to Congress in 2024 before the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic by denying he spoke to any intelligence agency about COVID, and says the released correspondence directly contradicts that sworn testimony. It further describes alleged whistleblower retaliation, including threats of retaliation, marginalization, career setbacks, a contractor terminated days after coming forward to ODNI, and managers telling those who advocated for or expressed dissent on the lab leak hypothesis that leadership would determine promotions. It also claims senior leaders undermined whistleblowers by removing anonymity required in the process and insisted managers or attorneys be present during ODNI meetings, creating an intimidation atmosphere.

This virus likely did not originate naturally; it stems from scientific arrogance. In the early pandemic, there were claims about a wet market being the source, but evidence soon showed many cases unrelated to it. By early January, it was clear the wet market narrative was misleading. I informed the National Security Council and Anthony Fauci that the virus was highly infectious, suggesting it had been engineered in a lab. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is well-known for coronavirus research, making the lab leak theory plausible. Despite discussions, Fauci maintained a focus on the wet market hypothesis, dismissing the need for broader scientific investigation.

We did not fund gain of function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The NIH has acknowledged funding research on a bat coronavirus that was enhanced in a lab, making it more contagious. Senator Paul questioned whether I wish to retract my statement from May 11, asserting that the NIH never funded gain of function research in Wuhan. I stand by my statement and have never lied before Congress. The NIH provided grants to the EcoHealth Alliance for experiments with bat coronaviruses in Wuhan. If anyone is lying, it is you, Senator. Evidence suggests the virus may have originated from the lab, and those who funded it will be held responsible. The NIH admitted to funding controversial gain of function research, contradicting my earlier claims. I maintain that I have not lied before Congress. Case closed.

Speaker 0 thanks the committee for a complimentary introduction and for dedication to transparency and accountability. Speaker 0 says they are a career CIA operations officer. They report that they were on joint duty at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, working with the National Intelligence Directors Initiatives Group (DIG), from March 2025 to April 2026. Speaker 0 states their responsibilities included leading the DIG’s investigation into COVID origins, anomalous health incidents, and unidentified anomalous phenomena. Speaker 0 says they are appearing to discuss “the COVID cover up,” the national security implications tied to the DIG’s investigative findings, CIA refusal to comply with lawful oversight, and how to remedy these problems. Speaker 0 describes how intelligence community leaders and senior analysts downplayed the possibility that the COVID pandemic originated as the result of a lab incident. Speaker 0 says that motives were difficult to define given the scope of the DIG’s review. Speaker 0 then states that, “intentional or not,” the IC’s actions resulted in a cover up, wasted resources, and a failure to properly inform policymakers. Speaker 0 says that public health policy would have been very different if the American public had been made aware that a virus from a lab in China was going to serve as the foundation for emergency use authorization mRNA products that were mandated by the former administration. Speaker 0 then addresses Doctor Fauci’s role. Speaker 0 states that Doctor Fauci’s role in the cover up was intentional. Speaker 0 says Fauci influenced the analytical process and findings by using his position to ensure that the intelligence community consulted with a conflicted list of curated subject matter experts, public health officials, and scientists. Speaker 0 states that this included some of the authors of the paper “The Proximal Origin of SARS CoV-two.” Speaker 0 further says the process included other public health experts who have been in Fauci’s orbit for the last twenty plus years. Speaker 0 frames these points in relation to the DIG investigative findings and ties them to national security implications, CIA refusal to comply with lawful oversight, and proposed remedies for the problems Speaker 0 describes.

I did not try to downplay the lab leak theory. I have kept an open mind and looked at the facts. Many people find it surprising. That's all I have to say. Thank you.

The speaker believes the government lied about the origins of COVID. Upon starting their job, the speaker claims to have immediately ordered that case to be looked into again. They assert that everyone lied to the American people on purpose. The speaker expresses optimism about finding out the truth and states they have a great investigator working on the case. They anticipate seeing action on the matter shortly.

The lines were drawn early on regarding the virus's origins. I believed it came from a lab, but others disagreed. After being sidelined from the CDC, I was informed it was the White House's decision. I find that hard to believe; it feels like a cover-up. Why would we share advanced biotechnology with China? I doubt this situation will be foolproof; issues will arise. There have been repeated lies throughout this process.

COVID-19 had telltale signs of being made in a laboratory from the beginning. The CIA has stated the virus came from a lab, but what they didn't say is that it was almost surely made in a US laboratory, possibly at the University of North Carolina, and may have been tested in a Chinese laboratory. The Biden administration hid this. One theory is that US scientists wanted to test the virus on a specific bat population in the Wuhan facility. The FBI should crack the case, as it is an inside US job. The University of North Carolina is withholding 2019 emails and fighting to keep them from public scrutiny. There is reason to believe that Tony Fauci funded reckless, dangerous research that went awry.

COVID-19 originated in a lab, and it took too long to reach this conclusion due to the suppression of debate, often framed as a fight against racism. Big tech censored discussions about the virus's origins, which only fueled misinformation. We must learn from this history to avoid repeating mistakes. As president, I commit to holding accountable those responsible for the pandemic's origin, including using financial measures against the CCP, imposing sanctions on officials, and investigating U.S. officials involved in gain-of-function research. It's time to move beyond complaints and focus on delivering real solutions. You have my commitment to do so.

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.

We previously discussed how Trump was briefed on the origins of COVID-19. Initially, there was skepticism about the virus coming from China, with various narratives, including the wet bat theory, being promoted. Recently, it was revealed that Gina Haspel, as CIA director, authorized payments to six intelligence officers to alter their assessments on COVID's origins. This decision aimed to align with the narratives pushed by Fauci and the media, preventing Trump from receiving credit for accurate intel. Now, years later, many still view this as a conspiracy. It's crucial to continue investigating these matters, as more instances of misconduct may emerge through courageous whistleblowers and congressional oversight.

We previously discussed how Trump was briefed on COVID's origins based on available intelligence. Initially, there was strong denial from Fauci and the media about the virus's origins, promoting alternative theories like the wet bat narrative. Recently, it was revealed that Gina Haspel, as CIA director, authorized payments to six analysts to alter their assessments on COVID's origins. This decision was made to align with the narrative favored by Fauci and the media, preventing Trump from receiving credit for accurate intel. Now, years later, many still dismiss this as a conspiracy. It's crucial to continue investigating these issues, as more instances of misconduct may emerge through whistleblowers and congressional oversight, which gives hope for accountability.

We previously discussed the briefings given to Trump regarding COVID's origins and the subsequent narrative pushed by Fauci and the media, claiming it didn't come from China. Recently, it was revealed that Gina Haspel, as CIA director, authorized payments to six intelligence officers to alter their assessments on COVID's origins. This decision was made to align with the narrative favored by Fauci and the media, preventing Trump from receiving credit for accurate intel. Now, years later, the public perception has solidified, with many dismissing the truth as a conspiracy. It's crucial to continue exposing these actions, as more instances may emerge through whistleblowers and congressional oversight.

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.

COVID-19 originated in a lab, and it took too long to acknowledge this due to the suppression of debate through accusations of racism. Big tech censored discussions about the virus's origins in the name of preventing misinformation, which ironically led to more confusion. We must learn from this history to avoid repeating mistakes. As president, I commit to holding accountable those responsible for the pandemic's origin, including using financial measures against the CCP and investigating U.S. officials who may have contributed to the crisis through gain-of-function research. It's time to move beyond complaints and focus on solutions. You have my commitment to do just that.

Scientists and the general public initially followed the guidance of Fauci and the NIH without question, while demonizing those who suggested the Lab Leak theory. However, now the theory is widely accepted, along with many other previously censored conspiracies. People believed they were doing the right thing by following guidelines to stop the spread of the virus, but we need to remember what happened. The speaker emphasizes the importance of not forgetting this playbook for future situations. They mention Bill Gates' actions and how he withdrew his investment in a company and started downplaying the vaccine's effectiveness. They also note the disappearance of the flu and warn against forgetting these events.

I was accused of being part of a propaganda effort to censor those questioning the origin of the virus. I stand by my assertion that the virus is not a lab construct, which aligns with the intelligence community's conclusion. I cannot control how my work is used. It is wrong to censor and lie to the public, and I should have done better.

The speaker claims a CIA whistleblower will testify before a Senate committee that the intelligence community has covered up the origin of COVID for years. The speaker asserts evidence shows the U.S. government funded research in Wuhan and that the virus likely escaped from a lab, adding that CIA scientists concluded it came from a lab leak and that someone later “scribbled out” their conclusion at 2AM and changed the report. The speaker frames CIA involvement as part of a larger effort involving military-related covert operations, stating the CIA has two reasons to live: covert support for the State Department or for the military. The speaker argues that over time, long-term CIA covert actions become USAID programs for logistical reasons, especially when scaling beyond a small “need to know” group and security-clearance constrained operations. The speaker says covert action requires secrecy, skiffs, close-hold communications, and a small number of people, so a public-facing program is needed to broaden participation. In that model, the speaker says USAID or state department programs can engage the private sector, nonprofits, universities, researchers, activists, and media, with public messaging and political support to help scale the underlying aims while keeping the core plan secret. The speaker links this asserted COVID narrative to historical biological warfare and “gain of function” research, citing declassified documents from the 1950s and Operation Northwoods-era plans involving Cuba. The speaker claims Cold War U.S. military and CIA planning included “gain of function” research and the dropping of disease-infected ticks and insects over Cuban agricultural areas to induce crop failures and economically destabilize Cuba without a conventional military invasion. The speaker further claims the plans involved making biological agents appear to be of natural origin and avoiding traceable external attribution, describing discussion of using “nonlethal insect borne biological warfare agents” and coordinating planning information with specific people and labs. The speaker states that, according to their account, biological warfare planning involved references to Fort Detrick and the Rocky Mountain lab in Montana, which they say also played a key role in both COVID-19 and Lyme disease. They claim the same lab used for Lyme was connected to plans for accidental releases intended to look natural. From there, the speaker argues that COVID-origin research ties into personnel and timelines. They claim that in 2015 the CIA and ODNI reached out to Ralph Baric to discuss coronavirus evolution and adapting coronaviruses to humans, and that shortly afterward Baric collaborated with Zheng Li Shi (“the bat lady”) on research funded through USAID’s PREDICT program. The speaker also claims that in 2018 Baric and Zheng Li Shi were listed as collaborators on a DARPA proposal involving a furin cleavage site, and that in January 2020 Baric was summoned by ODNI biological sciences experts to brief officials on coronavirus origins, discussing a possible accidental lab release at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The speaker asserts Avril Haines, then deputy head of the CIA, later became head of ODNI and played a key role in the Event 201 simulator. The speaker concludes by tying these threads back to the alleged CIA-to-USAID scaling mechanism and to CIA contractors and censorship efforts, claiming that the CIA’s role explains why CIA-walked scientists concluded a lab leak and why the conclusion was allegedly altered. They also discuss NIE/DOD/USAID/NED linkages, asserting that NED is suited for the role of supporting covert objectives with indirect public-facing infrastructure.