Fauci Testifies
01:05:23 Share

This season, Instacart has your back-to-school. As in, they've got your back-to-school lunch favorites, like snack packs and fresh fruit. And they've got your back-to-school supplies, like backpacks, binders, and pencils. And they've got your back when your kid casually tells you they have a huge school project due tomorrow.

Let's face it, we were all that kid. So first call your parents to say I'm sorry, and then download the Instacart app to get delivery in as fast as 30 minutes all school year long. Get a $0 delivery fee for your first three orders while supplies last. Minimum $10 per order. Additional terms apply. Summer is supposed to be an opportunity to slow down. But when you look at your kids, you can't help but notice that your kids are growing up fast. Help them build independence as they grow with Greenlight.

Greenlight is a debit card and money app for families where parents can keep an eye on kids' money habits while kids learn how to save, invest, and spend wisely. It's the easy, convenient way to raise financially smart kids. Get your first month free when you sign up at greenlight.com slash wondery. That's greenlight.com slash wondery. You're listening to the Gas Digital Network.

We need to roll back the state. We spy on all of our own citizens. Our prisons are flooded with non-violent drug offenders. If you want to know who America's next enemy is, look at who we're funding right now. Every single one of these problems are a result of government being way too big.

What's up everybody? Welcome to a brand new episode of Part of the Problem. I am Dave Smith and he is Robbie the Fire Bernstein. What's up brother? How you feeling? I'm doing great. I've moved to China and I will be broadcasting from outside of this lab until they finally prosecute Fauci. Who knows what's going on in that lab today? Have they even shut it down yet? Have you seen a lot of activity coming in and out, Rob? I see people walking out and sneezing and I go, you go back inside, sir.

Oh, it was just recently. It was so racist to even make that joke. Luckily for us, it's now science and truth. Here, before we get into today's show, quick reminder, guys, we are just over a week out from me and Rob's shows in Las Vegas at Wise Guys. Very excited to go out there. We had a great time at the Wise Guys out in Salt Lake City. So very excited to go check out their Vegas shows. First of all, we're going to be talking about the show.

Four shows, July 14th and 15th. And of course, both of us will be there for that. And then in July, July 12th through 14th, I will be headlining the best goddamn comedy club in the United States of America and thus the world. The Comedy Mothership. Very excited for that. Me and Rob will be down in Nashville at Zany's later that month in July 14th.

I'll be speaking at the Young Americans for Liberty Revolution Conference in Orlando in August. Omaha City, Tulsa, Kansas City, all just added to the calendar. Go get tickets for all that stuff at ComicDaveSmith.com. And of course...

Summer is coming up and that means it's porch tour season. What do you got going on? I got Doylestown, Pennsylvania this Friday night and then the Icarus Comedy Festival with a bunch of other comics and some good people this Saturday. So if you're around, it's a big Jersey weekend. And then you can go to summer porch store dot com because we got Minnesota and basically a lot of the country. Come hang out.

Very good. And I am slowly getting addicted to these Starbucks Frappuccino things that I know are just no, I know they're just sugary and not good for you. It's we literally stocked the fridge here and I, it was really for you and Brian, but I just been drinking everything in it. There's something about, I would never have one of these, but then my wife just got a little refrigerator and stocked it like right outside my studio and

And it's almost impossible not to take one. Because you walk by it and it's right there. You walk by it and you're like, they're free? They're not free. They were purchased with my money. But that's in the past. They've already been purchased with my money. And so now at this point, they sure feel free. Anyway, I've been drinking too much of them. But just like, oh, you want a little more caffeine while you go? You're like, yeah, I think I do. Okay. Anyway.

So for today's show, we were going to respond a little bit to some of Fauci's testimony before the Senate. It was or was it I'm sorry, it was.

in front of the house, my mistake, congressional testimony by Dr. Fauci, which is, I got to say, it's a little bit strange for me how the timing lined up with my debate with Cuomo and this. So in my world, we've been very thrust back into the topic of COVID. And I do think that

You know, one of the one of the points that Chris Cuomo made, as you recall, I mentioned this on the previous podcast. One of the points that he made during the debate was that no one really cares about this issue anymore. And I I've always felt like I've always rejected that idea. And I think that especially for people who are in the world that we're in.

I would never just accept, oh, people don't care about this idea. Anybody would have told you before Ron Paul ran for president that no one cared about central banks. But he made them care about it because he explained how important an issue it was to them. And I think that's kind of

Your job, if you're talking about things that matter, is that you can't just accept, oh, there's this thing that really matters, but people don't care about it. It's like, well, you can make them care about it by explaining to them how important it is. And in fact, at least from my perspective, the debate with Cuomo went super viral and literally because Cuomo

People had never gotten this. They had never gotten to see one of the main proponents of the covid regime taken to task and fall apart and all of that stuff. And it was like, oh, I don't know. It's it's I think at one point three million views on YouTube and millions and millions of views on Twitter clips. And I don't even know where it's at on other sites, but it's like, oh, there seems to be.

millions of people who do care about this very much. Anyway, that's kind of the feeling I've had watching the response to these, the Fauci testimony is like, no, it does seem like a lot of people still really care. A lot of people haven't forgotten what they did to us for years and how it was all based in on lies and how how much, you know, the

and livelihoods of millions of Americans were affected by all of this evil stuff. And it does seem like there's a lot of people who care about it. I think this is a moment that could be incredibly cleansing where your mom and pops in your life could actually learn that government does not work in their best interests. And maybe we could actually unwind it. We can look into...

why government organizations are able to get $700 million in payments from the exact agencies that, you know, they're supposed to regulate or, you know, why are they working for private interests? I mean, this is a real opportunity to actually hold people accountable and maybe make giant institutional changes in our government to help clean it up and make sure that moving forward, I mean, I'd rather not have the thing, but if we're going to have it,

Let's actually hold it accountable for when it ruins lives and figure out how to, you know, make it better and get some of the corporate interest or whatever the interest was here. It might have been world governments and having you, you know, with a health passport. I don't know exactly what Fauci was going for, but that's why we need to have an actual investigation and hold the guy accountable. Yeah, 100 percent. And, you know.

COVID particularly is an opportunity like in a way that other things even weren't. I mean, even if you think about the the war in Iraq or something like that, which is this like monumental disaster that almost everybody, you know, I like to I often mention that John McCain and his memoir admitted that the war in Iraq was a mistake. So almost everybody you'd be

You'd be hard pressed to find even a neoconservative today who will argue that the war in Iraq was a good call. You know what I mean? Like even though it, so it's this catastrophe where over a million people died and trillions of dollars were wasted and, you know, just totally weakened our country. Not, not to mention weakened Iraq and that part of the world destabilized the region tremendously. But all of that being said, you,

The war in Iraq genuinely touched the lives of a small percentage of Americans. Now, there's it touched a lot of our lives in non direct way. But I mean, like directly, like they had a son who had to go fight over there, who is never the same after he came back, or they lost someone over there, or they had to go fight over there themselves. That that

We have a system with our volunteer military force, which essentially means that we propagandize and bribe the, you know, our poor kids into going and fighting these wars, but that the system works to compartmentalize that. The point that I'm just making is that.

COVID policies affected a much, much, much huger percentage of the population. Huger? Is that right? There's almost nobody in this country who wasn't directly affected by COVID policies. And I'm sure there are some people listening who are like, hey, I lived in a real rural area or something like that, and it didn't really affect me here. But that is the minority. Most people were in some way impacted by this, even if it just meant like

I couldn't go with my wife to her sonogram or something like that. Like it's, it really touched so many people's lives and that, that in itself is,

to an opportunity that you were kind of getting at there, that enough people were like affected by this. And when they find out like it was all lies, if they haven't figured that out already, they're more likely to have a reaction. So anyway, it was weird for me personally, the timing of this. It also did. And I don't mean to, I don't want to like sound depressing, but it did also kind of feel like,

like this might be the best we get. I said that during the Cuomo debate, that it's like, look, man, this is why people are so angry, because really...

Like, in a sense, I did kind of feel bad for for Chris. And I mean that. I mean, there was a point in that debate where I genuinely kind of felt bad for the guy. I didn't feel like he's this bad guy. I felt like he's kind of like the black sheep in his political family who, like, got a gig at CNN and was going to just say what he was supposed to say. He didn't really think it through any deeper than that.

And so, you know, you're embarrassing a guy like that. You know, it feels a little weird. But I said to him at one point, I was like, the reason people are so angry is because like this blame should be shared amongst you and a bunch of other people. Right. Like lockdown governors and other people in the corporate media and Fauci and Hotez, like like all these other people who are pushing this. But none of them are here. None of them are willing to do this except you. Still not sure exactly why he was willing to do it, but.

So you're just getting like all the blame. So anyway, we also get these these, you know, this hearing where Fauci testifies, although, as I'm sure you'll agree, Rob, it's not.

it's not nearly as satisfying of a format because you would so much rather like just pick the sharpest guy, just pick Jim Jordan or something like that and have him three hours with Dr. Fauci where he can't weasel out of these things without it being so apparent. You know what I mean? And instead you have each person gets like a few minutes to get their little point off. That being said, there still were some very interesting moments in this testimony.

All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is YoDelta.com, the official Delta 8 sponsor of the Gas Digital Network. If you are over the age of 21 and living in a state where this is legal, go check out YoDelta. They have gummies and vapes for all your getting stoned needs. And they've been a longtime sponsor of this network and good people over there. So go check them out, YoDelta.com.

All right, let's get back in the show. All right, so Rob did the diligent work of taking down some timestamps for us, moments that he thought were worth going over, and then scribbled it down like a trained monkey on a piece of paper, took a picture of that, and sent it over to us. That's the level of sophistication that we're dealing with here at Part of the Problem. My handwriting is embarrassing. Dude, me too. I have really bad handwriting. And also, I like to handwrite.

I don't like typing. I'd much rather write things out by hand, but there is no hope of anybody else reading my handwriting. But that's the, but I work much better. Like if I'm trying to prepare for something, I will take out still to this day, like a pad of paper and write with a pen on it. That's just, that's what I grew up doing. Not typing. What are you? Some type of nerd? You type? Anyway. I almost never write anything by hand. Yeah.

Yeah, nerd. Well, my hand's too slow for my brain. It gets irritating. I type faster. I will tell you also, genuinely...

Whatever we are, five or six years apart in age, that is a difference. I notice this with my wife all the time, who's like your age. She's like five years younger than me. And we could be talking a lot about things, but then there will be these little things where the age difference shows. Like even that, computers didn't really come in until later. When I was in high school, people still handed in handwritten essays. Right.

Like it was like, that was still totally just how everyone did it. Anyway. Okay. Let's let's jump into this first clip of Fauci testifying before Congress. I have to say that I don't see a big solution other than some sort of mandatory vaccination. I know federal officials don't like to use that term. Once people feel empowered and protected legally, you were going to have schools, universities, education,

Thank you.

Are all objections to COVID vaccinations ideological bullshit, Dr. Fauci? No, they're not, and that's not what I was referring to. Well, in reference to making it hard for people to get education, traveling, working, I'd say it very much was in context. And I take great offense to this. Ms. Alison Williams testified before this committee about losing her job because she sought an exemption for ESPN's vaccine mandate, which came from recommendations from bureaucrats like yourself.

She and her husband were actively working with a fertility expert, a physician, on how to get pregnant and agreed with the premise that she was young, healthy, wanted to get pregnant, and shouldn't get the vaccination for medical purposes. But she was fired because you made it hard, just like you said in your statement, because you didn't want to make sure that the ideological bullshit got in the way of her working, of living her life, of making a medical decision with her healthcare professional.

I think Americans should take great offense to this. That's exactly what you meant when you said making it hard for people to live without getting a vaccination. You affected people's ability to work, travel, be educated, to actually flourish in American society, to self-determine as we're all given God-given rights. Shame on you. Dr. Fauci, you've become Dr. Fear.

The audio of Fauci, which I think comes from an audio book, is just fantastically damning. And to give you the short, he's always playing dumb and he's always playing, oh, it wasn't me. It came from that guy. It was a committee decision. It was a this. We didn't force. We didn't mandate. That gives you the playbook right there. They knew exactly what they were doing.

They're very slick. They understood, hey, we can't mandate or force, but once we put these protocols in place, well, we're effectively doing the exact same thing. And it gets to the heart of the problem, which is the non-accountability that everyone gets to cross-reference that someone else made the decision. There was no force. We got to fix that.

Yeah, well, OK, there's a couple of things there that stuck out to me and you nailed the first one. So no need to add anything to that. But that's exactly right. They play this Weasley game where they're like, I never mandated. What do you mean mandated? But then when you go back and listen to what they were actually saying, it's like, oh, yeah, OK. But in effect, it's the exact same thing. And you know that. And that's why you did it. Yes. And of course, when he's asked now why.

are all objections to the vaccine ideological bullshit? He goes, no, no, no. Because now that all of his lies have collapsed...

He won't even say that. But at the time when it mattered, that's exactly what he was saying. Now, a couple other things that stand out to me. First of all, I just thought it was isn't it precious the way he goes? There's solid evidence to show that when you implement these mandates, people will lose their ideological views or they'll compromise on their views. Like, yeah, right. What do you know? There's evidence to suggest that if you're going to ruin someone's life, right.

You know, Rob, there's evidence to suggest that people who don't want to give me their wallet when I put a gun to their head and threaten to blow their fucking brains out are more likely to give me their wallet. Did you know that? Wow. What a shocker. Yes. Interesting. Yes. If you threaten to ruin people's lives, you can force them to consume a pharmaceutical product that they do not want to. But.

The other thing that's just crazy there, and of course he'll deny it now when asked were all objections to the vaccine ideological bullshit, he'll say no. But just listen very carefully to what he said there. He listed off a bunch of different organizations, one of which was universities, that universities would require. So when you're talking about that, and I bring up this example because I know somebody who's a family friend who was in grad school,

and had gotten double dosed with COVID and then got COVID. And then a month later, they insisted on them getting a booster. Now, I'm sorry, you cannot, there is no scientific argument in the world for this healthy 25-year-old a month out from getting COVID to get a third COVID jab. But these are the exact policies Fauci's talking about.

forcing, forcing a young, healthy person to take on this risk for no reason. And, you know, even, and, and it as dismissive as he was there in the recording is the perfect example of it, right? That it's, oh, this is just ideological bullshit. Like if you have a problem with that 25 year old being forced to get his third jab, it's ideological bullshit. Meanwhile, you are the one who's being

purely religious about this. There is no scientific argument for them. And of course, when you're talking about college universities, I'm not painting with a broad brush here, but a reasonable one to paint with,

There were the overwhelming majority of them. There was just no scientific argument for why they needed to get vaccinated, let alone vaccinated multiple times over and over. This was a demographic of people who in large numbers were living at universities or close to universities. Right. They're around other young people and they were not at risk for this. And many of them had gotten it already.

I mean, if you remember, but, you know, at this point when I'm talking about, you know, even when Fauci is talking about the I don't know the exact date of that transcript or not transcript, but the audio recording being played there. But this is already we're well into 2021 now. This is when I'm talking about the boosters. This is late 2021. Okay.

This simply was beyond this was at a point where a huge percentage of these guys had already had COVID. And so there's just simply no scientific argument for him. It's the ideological bullshit was that this jab ought to be forced into the arms of every single American with no accounting for whether they're at risk, whether this even makes any sense, whether they've already had COVID, whether they're young and healthy. That was the ideological bullshit.

All right, anything else you want to add or we could go to the next clip? To the next one. Mr. Chairman, I think many of us in the committee are really disturbed by revelations to this committee that there were officials at NIH that

deleted government records, they deleted personal or they used personal information, personal emails to communicate and circumvent freedom of information laws. So I just had a couple questions about that. Dr. Fauci, did you delete any emails or records related to the Wuhan lab or the origins of the virus?

No, I did not. Okay. Dr. Morins said in a May 2021 email, he indicated that he was connecting people to you in a, quote, secret back channel. Do you know what he was referring to?

I don't have any idea what he's talking about. There is no back channel at NIAID. Okay, there is, he also sent another email that there is no worry about Freedom of Information Act. I can send stuff to Tony on his private email.

Did you communicate with anyone relating to anything regarding NIH or with Dr. Morins on a private email? I do not do government business on my private email. Okay. So, have you communicated with Dr. Morins via private email, even if it was not necessarily your definition of government business? It might have been because, as I mentioned in my opening statement, one of his functions is to write chapters

medical scientific chapters with me so it is conceivable that i communicated with him on on my private email when we were writing a chapter and that was not official i got to take a glory lap on this one and you guys can catch the clip but before the committee hearing i was doing a joke that

Right. Right.

So why is there any government business? If the protocol is that you have to use your work email for work things, what is this other category of work stuff that you're doing with this Dr. Morenz, who has the title of, I think he's like your chief advisor, which of course Fauci then goes, I never worked with the guy.

I mean, sure, his title is my advice. I never worked with him, though. But here you have, firstly, I think you're going to see in a second they're going to ask him about the sack. And I think that that's either a lie or that they texted and did an email. So he's being technical or he's went through a courier. Well, you can listen. First of all, you got to pay attention to the language these people use when he's asked about the other guy, not Morenz. He goes, it's conceivable. Yeah.

That I emailed with him. Like, it's, you know, okay, I'm not saying you have to remember every single email, but you understand they use this language intentionally when they're under oath so that they can't, you know, get strung up on perjury charges. But also, I mean, you just can't ignore the context here, which is she's reading Dr. Morenza's words as he says, don't worry about freedom of information requests because...

I can just directly email Tony. And that's like he's explicitly saying that we can get out of transparency by not using government emails. And clearly that's the game here. Right. But they can do that. And then Fauci sits there and goes, oh, well, it's conceivable that we emailed about other related things. And OK, we can.

It's just pretty obvious who's being honest and who's not being honest here. This one's interesting because Dr. Morenz, I don't know if we discussed it on the show. I don't remember. But he certainly said that he had back channels and he figured out how to clean up his email and he had a source within NIH that was able to take care of any of the...

FOIAs, whatever those letters are for investigating people's emails. Freedom of Information Act, yeah, FOIAs. And then he's going, hey, as long as you guys directly communicate with my Gmail, we're okay. And he's made all these statements that make it pretty clear. And by the way, he even had an email where he directly asked for a kickback from DeSac and then later said, well, that was a joke.

Anyways, Rand Paul has pointed out one of the two people here is lying. Either it's Fauci or it's Dr. Morenz in terms of the conversations that they had. So if you want to run an investigation, it's pretty easy. You offer immunity to Dr. Morenz if he's willing to testify against Fauci. And then we can get to the bottom of that and you might actually get someone to rat out Dr. Fauci.

However, and now this is already public. This is public that we have either Fauci is directly lying right now and they were clearly, you know, working to cover up information or Dr. Morenz is lying. Right. And then but just 100 percent. But then if you just take it a step further and I'm not saying this is conclusive proof on its own. If there was political will to get these things done, then, yes, what you're describing could take place. But you have Dr. Morenz saying, hey, don't worry about FOIA.

I can just email privately Tony and we communicate that way. And then you have Dr. Fauci saying, no, this never happened. It's very clear why Fauci would be lying here.

It's not at all clear why Morenz would tell that lie. Like, if that's not true, what does that benefit him to say something pretty sketchy and be like, I have a way to get around this transparency? But obviously we can all see why Fauci would be lying if he was trying to get around transparency. So just on its face, it's so much more plausible that Fauci is lying here than Morenz is lying.

And then I guess also, if all you did was write chapters, can you hand over all the personal correspondence that you had between you and Dr. Morenz? Shouldn't be an issue. Right. If it's just boring old scientific chapters, why are you doing it in a way that the rest of us don't get to see it? Okay. All right. Let's keep playing.

I just want to clarify for the record, because today you testified that you did not suppress the lab leak theory, yet in the past you have said, quote, it is a distortion of reality, unquote. You've said, quote, I've heard these conspiracy theories, and like all conspiracy theories, they're just conspiracy theories. That's what you told the American people. And so would you like to clarify what science were you following then versus now? Actually, I've also been very, very clear and said multiple times that

that I don't think the concept of there being a lab leak is inherently a conspiracy theory.

What is conspiracy is the kind of distortions of that particular subject. Like it was a lab leak and I was parachuted into the CIA like Jason Bourne and told the CIA that they should really not be talking about a lab leak. Thank you. Let's pause it right there because God damn, that is just so infuriating. Right.

So first of all, just the little trick that Fauci pulls here. But again, this isn't – the crazy thing about this is that sometimes – you know, I talk about these topics where I do like deep dives on them. And when I'm talking about Ukraine or something like that, and I'll be like, look, the first round of NATO expansion in 1999, there were these guys who argued this and argued that. And I understand. I'm going back 25 years here. But it's like, hey, we were all alive. You know what I mean? It's not like that long. But this is just a few years. This is not – so when he says –

First off, when she goes, did you suppress the lab leak theory? Well, he blatantly did.

on many levels, but the most obvious one is just that you were put forward as America's doctor. If you remember, he wasn't supposed to be a controversial political figure. He was just supposed to be the guy who's given you the science. And he came out and said, it's a conspiracy theory. It's racist. It makes no sense. It's scientifically impossible. All of these things. Now, when he points out and he goes, yes, but I also said at other points that it's not a conspiracy theorist.

But what's the answer to that, though, Rob? He goes, yeah, three years later, three years later, when it became apparent that this had come from the Wuhan lab, then, yes, he walked back those words. But you see, when he he gets to put it out as if, oh, yeah, I said that. But there were also these other statements. But no, no, no. That was three years later at the time when it mattered most.

There was one single message that was coming from Fauci and all of the halls of power. And that was everyone knows this came from a wet market. And you're an awful racist conspiracy theorist if you even dare question that. And people were booted off of all types of platforms for daring to even speculate about this virus coming from a lab. And then the second part of this is just.

I don't even know. Do you even need me to say this? But it's the most blatant straw man, right? It was, oh, I never objected to the fact that it came from the lab. Yes, you did. You're a liar. But I objected to the idea that I was helicoptered in like, like, what's his name? Born. And that was a CIA operation. But that's not what any of us ever claimed. What we claimed is that

a subsidiary of the NIAID funded it. You gave money to a group that then gave money to fund gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab. That's the claim. And that claim is factually true. I'm sure we'll get into this later, but depending on how you've changed the definition of gain-of-function, but whatever...

you know, whatever that means to the layman. That's exactly what happened. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is CrowdHealth. Health insurance is broken. Premiums are increasing. Deductibles are getting larger and claim denials are becoming more common. The headache of health insurance is exactly why CrowdHealth was created. It's not health insurance. It's a

Thank you.

and so much more without doctors networks messing things up. And of course, you'll join the crowd, a group of members just like you who want to help pay for each other's unexpected medical events. It's time you opt out of restrictive health insurance plans and let CrowdHealth help fit your healthcare needs. Get started today for just $50 per month by going to joincrowdhealth.com slash POTP. CrowdHealth is not insurance. Learn more at joincrowdhealth.com slash POTP.

All right, let's get back into the show. Do you want to do more of this one or you want to move on to the next clip, by the way, Rob? But speaking to specifically this, it's such a fake and false distinction where he's now trying to claim that he was when he was saying it was conspiracy. He was only talking about the second part of the story, which was the hey, were you guys involved in bioweapons research or why is it that you were going around the fact that we're not allowed to do gain of function research?

Anyways, firstly, that's not even conspiracy, as you just pointed out. But he's lying when he tries to say, hey, when I was refuting it, I wasn't refuting the lab leak theory. I was just refuting this secondary conversation that perhaps I was involved in funding a

either this specific virus or just this specific style of research. Yeah. But that's not what he did at the time. Yeah, it's look, it reminds me it's the same thing. And as you can see, if you go watch, which I'm sure many of you have, if you watch my debate with Chris Cuomo, you can see that I'm actually kind of like and I will say I think it's the only moment I've debated a lot of people and I've had I've debated some like

than stellar debaters. I've debated some very talented debaters also, but I've debated some people who said some things that were like, yo, that's crazy. I'm going to tear that apart. That's a really bad argument. I don't think I've ever had a moment like I had with Cuomo where I was actually just like, oh,

Roll the tape. But when he goes, so first he goes, he goes, I never shamed people who took ivermectin. He goes, that's not true. Don Lemon did it. And I listened to him, but I never did it. Then we play the clip of him clearly doing it. And then he actually tried to say it's a very similar to what Fauci is doing here. He goes, no, no, no, no. I was just talking about the people taking veterinary ivermectin.

not ivermectin in general and you're like yo you unbelievable liar that's just not true that's such bullshit i can't even believe you have that like i never even uh conceived that that would be one of your responses to this like that oh when we when we were saying horse dewormer what we meant is if you were taking the version of ivermectin that's for deworming horses when it was very clear that

no, that's not what you were talking about. And all of you said Rogan was taking horse dewormer when he was very clearly prescribed ivermectin by a doctor for people, you know, it's just, you can't defend what you were actually doing. And so this idea that Fauci was only saying that, um,

The conspiracy was that he was parachuted into the Wuhan lab, not that the virus came from the Wuhan lab. This is just a lie. It's a blatant lie. That's not what he was saying. And we those of us who can remember the last four years all know this.

And speaking of this is a roll the tape moment where I haven't done this. I'm sure we can find the earlier moments when the lab leak theory was coming up and what Fauci was saying at that time. This is a blatant lie. And going one step beyond that, it was the first instance, from what I recall, of really massive Internet censorship of strikes on channels, information being taken down. I remember an early guest of mine was removed from Twitter recently.

prior to uh when covid became part of even a discussion he was saying hey this thing just leaked from a lab and we're gonna have a problem uh it's so i mean talk about if there was political political will to do an investigation not only do you probably just have

just clear cut clips of Fauci saying differently than what he's saying right now. But there was clearly a massive internet censorship campaign just on the concept of a lab leak theory. I believe from what I remember, it's why the original CDC director either stepped down or was forced out of his position.

So, I mean, just talk about if there was political will to do an investigation. Firstly, what he's saying right now, you can roll news clips just showcasing that it's false. And then also, then what was this entire Internet censorship campaign? Who directed? Who applied this pressure to Twitter? Who applied this pressure to Facebook and YouTube? Where was that coming from? Well, who were those individuals? And the idea that we're not going to get this real investigation and people like Fauci potentially facing jail time is...

i don't know it's just it it's a missed opportunity like i said up front for actually you know cleaning up the country yeah 100 um all right let's keep playing conspiracy appreciate that dr fauci um how much have you earned from royalties from pharmaceutical companies since the pandemic began in 2021 zero it says nih scientists made 710 million in royalties from drug makers

uh you're saying that you you did not receive any of the 710 million dollars on covid i received i think 122 dollars for any for a monoclonal antibody that i made 27 years ago okay so just in general though how much have you received not not related to covid just in general how much have you received in royalties between 2021 and 2023 i think none

Okay, so somebody received the $710 million. Somebody did, but not me. You didn't receive any royalties. Okay. I see no royalties associated with COVID. I mentioned... I said... I'm on the record, and I want to make sure that this is clear, that I've developed a monoclonal antibody about 25 years ago that's used as a diagnostic that has nothing to do with COVID, and I receive an average of about $120 a year from that patent. Okay, but

But the bottom line here is that scientists at NIH did receive $710 million in royalties. And I guess my question is, don't you think that if these experiments are made using American tax dollars, that any of those royalties, this nearly billions of dollars, should be going back to the American taxpayer and not in the pockets of the scientists? Do you believe that's a law that we should consider changing? If you want to change the patent laws and the Bayh-Dole Act, then go ahead.

But that's not for me to say. So this is such a I think it's 400 million dollars from Moderna alone. And I also remember at one point the NIH scientists, I think, were suing for their patents to be recognized to get more. I remember that headline, but it's from a from a while ago and I might not be right about this. But to me, it's like.

you can go, if you believe in the private sector and creating value and getting paid for the value created, you get to go do that. But if you're working within government and you're applying force, you don't get these paychecks anymore. That's not the way, you've picked a different lane. And I mean, just in terms of the things that need to be investigated here, it's what scientists at the NIH were being paid what amount of money and how do they influence the policies that required everyone to go and take these medications? I mean, even if you didn't-

It's unbelievable, dude. It's unbelievable that there's not a law against this. Like even in other fields where they're very corrupt, you know, like like the SEC regulating the big banks or something like that. And you have like a revolving door where a lot of people who work at Goldman Sachs end up working at the SEC and then coming back and then going to the Treasury Department and all of this. And it's pretty corrupt. But even in that industry, it's not as if

Like JPMorgan Chase can just go, hey, if we have a great quarter, we'll pay you. As he said, you know what I mean? Like, it's just so insane that the bureaucrats or regulators can just be on the payroll and

And then the other thing that, you know, it almost seems like she's covering for him with some of the questions she's asking here because she keeps the parameters so small. Like, did you receive anything related to COVID or what did you receive between 2021 and 2024? Why not just ask him the broader question? How much money have you made from these big pharmaceutical companies?

And it could also be none because they all got paid to a trust or they got paid to. I never. Sure. Sure. But even my kids and family's name that pays for our vacation home. Right. Right. Right. But sure. But even that, it's like it seems to be even more blatant corruption than typical. It seems to be that we don't have him on record just saying he hasn't. When you're talking about these numbers of hundreds of millions of dollars. So did you ever get like 10 million dollars from Pfizer or something like that? And that.

seems to be completely unclear. And even his answer at the end is such a cop out where it's like, hey, if you want to change the rule, change the rule. But it's like, yeah, no, but don't you see this as the obvious gross conflict of interest that it is?

Shouldn't you be championing that they change this rule? Oh, no, you shouldn't because you're corrupt as shit. At least leave and then you get your book deal, you get your Disney documentary, you hang out with the devil Bono. You know, you're supposed to make these payments secret. You're not supposed to just be able to receive an exact check from the company. Yeah, geez. That really is something. All right, let's go to the next clip whenever we have that ready. Okay.

I'm going to go through a list of COVID mitigation measures that you supported over the course of the pandemic and ask you to give me a yes or no as to whether you believe these measures were justified. Business closures. Early on when 5,000 people were dying a day, yes. Church closures. Same thing. School closures. Again. Stay-at-home orders.

These were important when we were trying to stop the tsunami of deaths that were occurring early on. How long you kept them going is debatable. Mask mandates for adults, mask mandates for children, mask mandates for children under five.

And going back to what I said before, all of that is in the context of at the time, four to five thousand people a day were dying. Excuse me? There was no study that did masks on kids before. You couldn't do the study. You had to respond to an epidemic that was killing four to five thousand Americans. We can pause there.

I mean, go play the video right now if there's that little kid in that class that they're forcing the mask back onto because zero. You just heard it right from him when they mandated and forced you to be masking your kids. Zero. I think that's what he just said. Yeah. No study. Yeah, that's right.

No study at all. And you, through common sense, could have just figured out that this wasn't going to work and was going to be a disaster. But that's right. That it's and look, it'd be one thing if at the time they had said, listen, we're we don't know. We got to roll the dice here. We got this new virus. And so we're going to roll the dice on the side of, you know, like forcing all of your kids to wear face coverings. But that's not what they said at the time.

What they said was that you were anti-science and you wanted people to die if you were against it. Because if they had said that at the time, we could have very easily just been like, we're going to roll the dice on the side of freedom. We're going to roll the dice on the side of doing no harm to kids. How about that? You know, but they never said that. But there it is. A pretty stunning admission after all these years. It was based on no science.

Turns out it was just Fauci's gut feeling or something. And I just, Hey, well, let's do it rather than not do it. Maybe we have an opportunity to get everybody to, you know, like put their kids through discomfort because they believe they worship at the altar of government bureaucrats or something like that. So there you go. Nothing.

All right, let's keep playing. - Dates for students, vaccine mandates for military. - Vaccines save lives. It is very, very clear that vaccines have saved hundreds of thousands of Americans and millions of people worldwide. - I'm not debating, we're talking about the COVID-19. Did or do the vaccines, the COVID-19 vaccine stop anyone from getting COVID? - I answered that question to the chairman. Early on, it became clear

They did? No, actually no. In the beginning it clearly prevented infection in a certain percentage of people but the durability of its ability to prevent infection was not long. It was measured in months. And they didn't stop you from spreading it either?

Early on, it did if it prevented infection. But what became clear that it did not prevent transmission when the ability to prevent infection went. I think what's troubling is when the American people look at the...

certainty in the case at which people lost jobs, they lost livelihoods. I had rural hospitals in my area that did not have a single case of COVID in their rural community that had to shut down and people not get care that they did need for cancer. And some passed away because of those kind of things. And

time after time again people's lives are destroyed and we have not seen the same sort of once the new data came available we did not see a change of course and you'll point out for example in the schools that the cdc you know put out the guidelines for example but uh but

But we know that those guidelines end up being protection from lawsuits. If you don't want to be sued, you better follow the guidelines. So they're not mandates, de facto mandates, but they turn out to be such a mandate. And when the science began to change, we all understand that in the first couple of weeks,

First few weeks, even a couple months, we were all trying to figure it out. I think there's a lot of grace for that. The concern is that as the science became available, there wasn't like a, oh, maybe we should consider the lab leak theory. Oh, maybe we should consider natural immunity. We never heard this messaging coming from you or from anyone else who stood on the sidelines talking about these things. And it's left the American people with a tremendous distrust.

I want to talk a little bit about the grant process. My understanding from your testimony to us, it says that the- All right, let's pause it there because I think that was really the juice of that part. Because this gentleman makes a great point that, you know, for Fauci to sit here and do this like-

No, it did stop people from getting the virus and it did stop them from transmitting it as long as it stopped them from getting it, which just fairly redundant, but whatever. He goes, but what we didn't account for was the fact that it was waning.

And it was measured in months, not years. So, you know, you might get the vaccine and you had protection for a couple months. But after that, you didn't. Now, the truth is that if you really want to do a deep dive on this, and I've done several, I know you have as well, Rob, actually backing up what he's saying there scientifically is pretty impossible to do. The claim that, no, you really did have great protection just only for a short period of time.

Very dubious claim. Very, very dubious whether this is actually true or not. That, you know, regardless, I mean, they actually didn't start. They counted you as unvaccinated until two weeks after COVID.

your second dose. And then if you just didn't get COVID for a couple months after that, they'll chalk you up as like, yeah, see, the vaccine was working. And if you get it three months after that, then, oh, that's proof that it works for three months. It's like circular logic without any real scientific evidence.

And you have the additional problem of that unknown vaccine status was considered not vaccinated. Exactly. Yes. How you could possibly look at the death numbers. Yeah, we simply as as the head of the CDC herself or she she might be out now. But the Deborah Burke, she was in the CDC, but she was the head like one of the head doctors on the.

White House committee. No, no, no. I wasn't thinking of Burke. I was thinking of the woman, the brown skinned woman who was regardless. Yes. Yes. She said at one point that she's like, we just don't have good data on the vaccinated versus the unvaccinated. And that probably is the most honest thing she's said through this entire ordeal. However, all of that, I think this guy really nails the point where it's like, look, that would kind of be acceptable. Maybe. Maybe.

But the problem is this. Fauci, if you just remember, I was just watching the other day on the Patrick Bette David show. If you remember, say, for example, and there's just one example. He said this on every big stage that he was on, and he was on TV every single day. But he went door to door in Baltimore and knocked up and told them straight up, if you get this jab, you won't get the virus. And then when someone said, well, I've heard you can get the virus, he goes...

And it's very, very unlikely. And even if you got it, it would be so mild you wouldn't even know you were sick and you can't transmit it to anyone else. Now, every I mean, I cannot tell you how many accredited scientists have said since then that this was impossible.

It's wildly irresponsible and inaccurate for Fauci to say because they were like, dude, the studies at this point, the very preliminary studies just didn't back any of that up. It didn't back up. In fact, even in the Pfizer, the Pfizer studies before the vaccine was released, they had someone die of COVID in their study.

vaccinated group so it's not as if they didn't they knew that you still could get the virus you still could get very sick from it and they hadn't tested at all whether you can transmit it so he was making these claims without any type of strong scientific backing behind them but even if you want to grant him that it looked like that at the time and it didn't become obvious until later

that none of that was true and that the vaccine was not gonna stop you from getting COVID or stop you from transmitting. And it wasn't gonna stop you from getting very sick with COVID. If you had been sitting there saying, if you take the jab, you won't get it, you can't transmit it. If you had been saying that the whole time, then wouldn't the onus be on you to then loudly come out and be like, "Hey, listen, it looks like we got that wrong."

Let's reverse course. But in fact, not only did they not reverse course, they spent the following two years continuing to demonize anybody who didn't want to take the vaccine as what? What we just heard him say earlier, ideological bullshit. Oh, in fact, this is why we need to force you to get another one and another one and another one. And these mandates continued for years.

So it's just insane that you could go, oh, at the time it looked like that. Well, even if it did look like that at the time, again, that's not exactly true. It didn't look like that at the time. But even if it did, you never update it.

It never became, you never changed. You never walked it back and went, no, in fact, as that became more and more clear, they doubled down more and more on their demonizing of the unvaccinated. All right, guys, let's take a moment and thank our sponsor for today's show, which is sheath underwear. They have a big deal running as part of father's day and it's

ending on June 10th. So make sure you go take advantage of this right now in celebration of Father's Day. Sheath is giving you 30% off when you use the promo code Big Papa. That's sheathunderwear.com. The promo code is Big Papa for 30% off. Get the

Best pair of boxer briefs you will ever own. If there's a guy in your life, I will tell you, this is a gift they will appreciate. Best pair of boxer briefs, the only underwear I wear. SheathUnderwear.com. Promo code BigPapa for 30% off, but only through June 10th. So go take advantage of that. Let's get back into the show.

Just to add, firstly, you know, the problem is this is years later and I don't remember all these technical details. And just we were overwhelmingly right when we said these mandates don't make sense. And, you know, that the vaccine might make sense for older individuals and risk categories, which could be with the original variant for six months of protection.

until there was herd immunity, that might have made sense. I don't know. These details... All right, one thing that's just missing specifically here is the fact that the rollout was always on a treadmill behind new variants. So as you were updating it and they were talking about, well, you're going to have more antibodies. Yeah, but antibodies that don't do anything for the new variant. Right.

Even if you want to grant him credit for, I guess, the first six months and saving lives within the risk category and as to how you differentiate the live set as you look at current elevated death charts and what was flu, what was with COVID, what was just old people dying, being dragged forward. All that stuff kind of gets confusing and you get lost in the technicals.

Um, I forgot the point I was making. Oh, that happens. Well, I think you were just saying that even granted that it still wouldn't mean that like in the later. So then when he got to the boosters and everything else that he was trying to sell, there was there was nothing backing any of that. And if you were questioning it, you were being censored. And that speaks to this guy's point where he's like, hey, is the science change? He didn't get out. And you weren't you certainly weren't honest about any of that.

The problem that they have, too, because I have dived into some of these studies and I believe there's one he he quotes the Hotez study at some point in there. But the real issue that you have for the people arguing for vaccine, just just technically on the science of it, forget like issues of liberty or things like that, but just the scientific argument. One of the major problems that you have, right, for for people who are advocates of vaccine mandates is that you have people

Look, like if we're just being honest about this, what you just kind of said is basically right. It's like, look, it is debatable that perhaps people this I even conceded in the Cuomo debate. I go probably people who were old and sick and had never had COVID when the vaccines first came out. You could argue it was a good decision for them to have the vaccine. Right. But obviously, for anyone who knows anything about COVID at all, anything, you know, healthy young people just weren't at risk.

of severe illness or death. Statistically speaking, it's like a rounding error. I'm not saying there's no one who had happened to, but pretty much you were not at risk for it. They ended up getting 70% of adults to take two jabs, and then a much lower percentage got boosted and boosted and boosted, and a very low percentage of kids.

They were not able to convince a lot of people to get their kids vaccinated, which is there's a real silver lining in that somewhere. But the real issue they have is when they go, we needed all of these mandates or how many lives were lost because we didn't mandate it or something like that. Is that if you actually look into the demographic of old sick people, they vaccinated the overwhelming majority of them.

Like it was and look, it kind of makes sense to like if you're old and sick, it's like, yeah, this this vaccine is untested and it's experimental or whatever. But you're like, yeah, OK, but I'm 92. You know what I mean? Like I'm worried about getting this virus next month. If there's some other problems associated with the vaccine, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. But they were like and I don't have the numbers off hands. I have read these before, but I have to go back and find them. But I mean, it's like.

close to 90%, maybe over 90% of old sick people ended up getting vaccinated. They already vaccinated the group who needed it, even by their in the most generous measure.

scenario. You know what I mean? So it's not like all of this stuff of targeting universities. It doesn't get you any higher with the demographic of old sick people, which is where you're actually going to prevent deaths if you're preventing any. So the whole thing just falls apart. Let's move on to the to the next clip. Dr. Fauci, one of the controversial regulations of the pandemic was the six foot distancing rule. This rule became an important policy consideration in subsequent regulations.

However, you testified recently, and I'm quoting, this six-foot rule sort of just appeared. Do you think that a rule that sort of just appeared is substantial justification for the regulations that we saw based on that six-foot rule? Congressman, thank you for that question. I answered that, but I'll summarize it briefly for you.

When saying it just appeared, it came from the CDC. Okay, you stated that earlier. What was your relationship with the CDC when you saw a regulation which was not based in the current science? Well, when I say was not based in science, I meant a prospective clinical trial to determine whether six foot was better than three, was better than ten. But once we realized that the virus was...

Because this is important and we're going to play a clip later. But when addressing this a second time, he also adds in 6, 3, 10, and 0. So here he's trying to present it as, well, we knew that this was a good tool. We just didn't know exactly the footage. And so cut us a break here. We are going to play a clip later where he changes this answer and includes 0. So really what he said, I mean, the fact that you don't know 8, 6, 4, 5 means sounds like you didn't study it.

Because there would be, I guess, an exact foot of, oh, four feet safe. Not like you would be able to study for that and have a clear cut answer. Or maybe it'd be a percentage thing at four at four feet. You can get this much exposure, five feet. There would be some sort of a study to be able to validate it. But even here, he's lying because later, later he's going to say even zero because he's trying to present it here. Like, well, we know that this works. We just didn't know exactly how many feet. And that's a lie.

Okay. Here, let's move on to the next clip because we're coming up against time here. And I think we only got a couple more. And then I won't belabor the point, but we talked about the six foot distance an awful lot today. Do you recall if it was ever suggested to be 10 feet?

You know, I don't recall, Mitch, if it was ever suggested it was 10 feet. But when I made my explanation of what it was, I was saying that there was no trial that looked at 10 versus six versus three versus not even worrying about it at all. And you said today that there were discussions at the White House about the six foot. I was wrong when I said zero. But I think he just admitted to the fact that there was no there was no study to back it at all. They never did that study doesn't exist.

Yeah. And as he had previously said, not under oath, it just sort of appeared right that there is not. So just to be clear, again, this thing that swept our entire society, that every single Wawa had six feet markers, every elevator, every every business had it just made up.

Just completely made up. They didn't know. Now let's do this. There was never a study that measured six verse 10 verse not doing it at all. He did say basically zero, not doing it at all. Right. They just, all this follow the science just turns out there was no science. There was no actual science to be following. Just the whims, just the whims of career bureaucrats who happened to be millionaires. You know what I mean? Like,

We won't tell us exactly how they became millionaires from being career bureaucrats. That's what we're, that's what we got here. He might as well have said, we just made it up.

All right, let's jump to the next clip and that'll have to be the last one. - We give advice based on pure public health issues. It's very, very clear now retrospectively looking at the potential collateral negative effects of things like mandating, it would be important for us now,

since the purpose of, I believe, why we're here is to how we can do better next time, is to consider the balance. I think things that we did in the beginning were in the context of horrible situation of 4,000 to 5,000 deaths per day.

but that doesn't mean that you don't go back and look and say did everything we do at that point and the duration for which we did it was that appropriate and do we need to re-examine i believe that's what dr collins was referring to and i agree with him on that and you got to my next question that we are here trying to figure out how to do better next time yeah isn't that something rob um i want

I want to fucking, I'm trying to find this tweet from mine, but I'm looking it up now. Go ahead though. Any thoughts you have on, uh, yeah, it just speaks to the, uh, incredible stupidity and lack of character that at the time you go, everyone needs to listen to me. This is a health issue on the health person. We're not in,

If you remember, you can go back. It's what we were saying at the time. Sure, there might be a health issue out there, but is it better than closing your business? Is it better than not educating your kid? Is it better than not screening for cancer? Look at the rates of addiction going up in this country.

like you got to live your life and there's a cost to being told hey you have to stay in your house or hey you're not allowed to go to your business and at the time he was up there going i'm the health guy everyone needs to listen he wasn't going hey i'm just making the health recommendation and then this is for another body to review and take into consideration these other aspects you were saying i need all authority everyone's got to listen to me what i have to say is more important and as people are on the sidelines going yeah but what about all the unintended consequences

are you doing a full review here of what's going to happen if people don't have their jobs is that going to leave them healthier and then you get in three years later going yeah i guess we should i guess we just overlooked that yeah i guess maybe the next time we should take that into consideration so you're saying you got the entire thing wrong that did it and also just like that didn't pop into your head that there could be cost with it i mean look we're not just talking about like the policy with schools or whatever you do it's like around this time you shut the world down

You didn't think, listen, I'm not even trying to pat myself on the back here. I'm just saying this to make a point, but this is my, my first ever tweet about COVID. Okay. And this is, uh, uh, it's from March 18th, 2020. That's not perfect, but this is what I wrote. I said, and this is, I believe, um,

This is before lockdowns. I could be wrong. Check the date on that. This was March 18th. So it's right around that time. I said, I said, I don't know if people are overreacting to the threat of the coronavirus or not, but people are definitely underreacting to the threat of a Great Depression if we shut down the economy and the dangers of living under a legit fascist state if we accept martial law.

Now, I kind of regret using the term martial law because this was at the very beginning of lockdowns when it was just unclear what enforcement mechanism it was going to be. And so I guess martial law technically isn't exactly right.

But you kind of get the spirit of what I was saying there. But literally, the first thing, this is all it took. It was and I'm just an idiot comedian. This was so obvious to look at this thing and go, OK, you guys are only weighing the factor of this virus. Take into consideration, this is before I knew about whether lockdowns would be effective in slowing the spread or any of this other stuff.

But it was very easy to say nobody is measuring this against what the devastation is going to be of accepting a complete halt to the economy and this type, this level of authoritarianism. And it's just that simple. Anyone with a clear thinking mind who is not a lying shill who could rub two brain cells together could go, oh, well, the question here is,

is about balancing this versus the costs. And he's just saying, oh, we never thought of that? If we could go back, we totally would think of that one. Too bad we didn't think of that at the time. That's what Fauci's got for you. Just pathetic. And this is why, don't you wish, don't you wish he had to do like a three-hour one-on-one with someone competent to just like prosecute the case against him? Because imagine, this is what's frustrating about these things is it's just, you know, you get your one question and then you move on to the next guy.

Think about how much he just admitted there. Oh, yeah, we never thought about that. We never thought about costs and benefits. We never thought about the tradeoffs. You're telling me as you advised to shut the economy down, to shut schools down, to shut businesses down, to not allow people to communicate, to not allow people to have funerals for their father and to have all you didn't. It never dawned on you.

We ought consider the consequences of that. I mean, holy shit. What an admission. All right, listen, I got to we got to wrap this one up here. Thank you guys very much for listening. We'll catch you next time. Comic Dave Smith dot com. Robbie the fire dot com. And what's the site for the summer porch tour? Porch store dot com. Go get some tickets. Hell yeah. All right. Catch you guys next time. Peace.