Dr. Anthony Fauci - who offshored banned gain-of-function research to make bat coronaviruses more transmissible to humans - has been accused by Congressional investigators of having 'prompted' the fabrication of a paper by a cadre of scientists aimed at disproving the Covid-19 lab-leak theory.
On February 1, 2020, Fauci and his boss, NIH Director Dr. Francis Collins, and at least eleven other scientists participated in a conference call during which several of them warned that COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China - may have been intentionally genetically manipulated.
Three days after the call, four participants from the call (Scripps Research virologist Kristian Andersen, University of Sydney virologist Edward Holmes, Tulane School of Medicine virologist Robert Garry, University of Edinburgh virologist Andrew Rambaut and Columbia University virologist Ian Lipkin) seemingly discarded their concerns over a lab-leak, and drafted "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2," which they sent to Fauci and Collins.
Also heavily involved (yet not credited) was Dr. Jeremy Farrar, the current Chief Scientist at the World Health Organization.
As a related aside - the Washington Examiner revealed last week that two authors of "Proximal Origin" who initially expressed concerns over a lab-leak and then changed their tune (Anderson and Garry), received millions in NIH grants under Fauci.
Now, according to the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, Fauci 'prompted' the creation of the paper;
"New evidence released by the Select Subcommittee today suggests that Dr. Fauci “prompted” the drafting of a publication that would “disprove” the lab leak theory, the authors of this paper skewed available evidence to achieve that goal, and Dr. Jeremy Farrar went uncredited despite significant involvement."
More:
So, for those following the bouncing ball...
The US was doing risky gain-of-function research on US soil until 2014, when the Obama administration banned it. Four months before the ban, Dr. Fauci offshored it to Wuhan, China through New York nonprofit, EcoHealth Alliance.
After Sars-CoV-2 broke out down the street from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Fauci engaged in a massive campaign to deny the possibility of a lab-leak from the lab he funded, and instead pin the blame on a yet-to-be discovered zoonotic intermediary species.
And if you'd like to dig even deeper, this is perhaps the best, most comprehensive summary of the "proximal origin" timeline.
The Washington Post is now admitting that President Joe Biden’s college loan forgiveness plan is unconstitutional, but it insists that the “the court shouldn’t stop him.”
The reason is standing and the Post is now apparently a standing hawk forced to accept a half trillion dollar give-away to maintain a narrow view of case or controversies under Article III.
The Post previously ran opinion pieces saying that Biden clearly has this authority, but this is an opinion piece from the editors themselves on the subject.
The Post now admits with some of us that Biden “overreached” in his use of the HEROES Act to allow him to unilaterally cancel roughly 500 billion dollars in loan debts. Executive “overreach” is a common reference to exceeding the authority afforded by Article II. The Post describes the action as “bad” and without congressional approval. Of course, giving away half a trillion dollars without congressional approval was the type of unilateral action that the Framers sought to prevent in giving Congress the power of the pursue. In other words, it is not just “bad.” It is unconstitutional.
President Biden is using a law designed to help service members and their families deal with debt accrued in fighting for this country.
The terms of the Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students (HEROES) Act of 2003 allows the secretary of education “to waive or modify … financial assistance program requirements … affected by a war, other military operation, or national emergency.” Biden had promised to wipe out tuition debt in the campaign and simply hijacked the Act for that unintended purpose. Putting that aside, the Act ties such relief to an inability to cover such costs due to the war or emergency.
The Biden plan would use the law to benefit individuals without such a showing, including many of the 40 million beneficiaries who are relatively wealthy and could pay off the loans.
Various professors including Dalié Jiménez, a law professor at the University of California, Irvine, filed an amicus brief in support of the Administration and claimed that the HEROES Act “is as clear as sunlight” in authorizing the department’s action.
The Office of Legal Counsel, considered the ultimate authority on legal interpretations in the Executive Branch, looked at this issue during the Trump administration. Its memo concluded that “the Secretary does not have statutory authority to provide blanket or mass cancellation, compromise, discharge, or forgiveness of student loan principal balances, and/or to materially modify the repayment amounts or terms thereof, whether due to the COVID-19 pandemic or for any other reason.”
The Biden Office of Legal Counsel issued a new opinion concluding the opposite, due to the ongoing pandemic — a curious argument, since the Biden administration was just in court arguing that the pandemic was effectively over, in order to allow undocumented individuals to enter the country. Citing the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the administration sought to stop the enforcement of Title 42, which allowed the government to turn away migrants at the border.
Now, the Post appears to reject the Biden OLC opinion and calls the policy not only unconstitutional “overreach” but “a regressive and expensive mistake.”
It insists, however, that this unconstitutional, regressive and expensive overreach should stand.
I should admit that I have been described as a “standing dove” due to my more liberal view of standing requirements under Article III. I successfully argued in favor of standing for the House of Representatives as a single house and previously argued (unsuccessfully) on behalf of individual Democratic and Republican members seeking “members standing.” I view narrow standing rules as often inimical to the protection of core structural guarantees of the Constitution.
This case is precisely why I have long favored broader standing rules. This is a clearly unconstitutional action by the President that is being defended largely on the basis of, in my view, an unnecessarily narrow view of standing imposed by the courts.
I recently spoke at the University of Maryland with George Mason law professor Ilya Somin, who argues that the claims of Missouri satisfy standing.
At issue is the right of the state to argue the interests of the the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority (MOHELA) – that services student loans. While MOHELA is an independent agency and is not a party to the lawsuit, Somin argues that detractors confuse this case with prior cases raising individual constitutional injuries: “Unlike individual rights claims, which – on this theory – can only be asserted by people who have suffered specific rights violations, structural claims can be raised by anyone, because structural restrictions on government power provide generalized protection for all Americans.” He believes that standing can be based on existing precedent.
There is a legitimate issue over standing under current case law. It ultimately turns on one’s views on the proper scope of the standing doctrine in raising these structural constitutional concerns. However, the Post, which has previously shown a tendency toward broad interpretations of constitutional provisions, may be premature in citing standing (albeit reluctantly) as a shield for this clearly unconstitutional overreach by President Biden.
Soon after his inauguration on Jan. 20, 2021, Biden ordered the creation of “agency equity teams” to produce reports suggesting a “comprehensive approach to advancing equity for all.”
Last year, 92 federal agencies submitted such reports, dubbed “equity action plans” – which are now required every year under the new order.
Despite Biden’s rhetoric of “equity for all,” many of the plans centered exclusively on racial minorities – from prioritizing persons of color when doling out grants and government contracts to focusing outreach efforts specifically on non-white groups.
The Department of Transportation even codified this narrative in February 2021, adding “racial equity and barriers to opportunity as a consideration for awarding discretionary grants,” according to its report.
Critics call such policies unfair, arguing that introducing race as a factor in deciding who gets what in federal dollars illegally disenfranchises people based on the color of their skin.
Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said equity programs “erode the American commitment to the dignity of hard work.”Mark Peterson/Redux for NY Post
“‘Equity’ policies are routinely used to justify making decisions based on race, gender, and other identity characteristics,” said Russ Vought, who served as director of the Office of Management and Budget under former President Donald Trump. “This administration has turned government-funded racism into an art.”
Behind the benign-sounding language are very real consequences for taxpayer money — such as a $3.8 billion Department of Agriculture debt-relief program that paid up to 120% of loans to farmers or ranchers of color, regardless of their financial status.
That initiative was halted after a series of lawsuits filed by white farmers and later repealed by Congress — only to be replaced by a $3.1 billion initiative tucked in last year’s Inflation Reduction Act to bail out farmers deemed “economically distressed” — who are more likely to be minorities or white women.
Speaking Friday at the Conservative Political Action Conference, former Trump administration Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said such programs “erode the American commitment to the dignity of hard work.”
“The fairness of playing by the rules is abrogated when government steps in and awards bonuses to people based on something other than the fact that they worked hard and were decent and good,” Pompeo said. “And more importantly, it erodes the fundamental decency – the goodness of doing what is right every day.”
“Woke” waste
It’s not just cabinet-level agencies such as the departments of Defense, Homeland Security, Education and Transportation that are required to complete such reports under Biden’s latest order.
All other federal entities – from the CIA and NASA to smaller, lesser-know agencies such as the Denali Commission that supports Alaska – must turn one in.
Other agencies that have filed plans included the Smithsonian Institution, Americorps, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Federal Maritime Commission, and the Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission.
Some agencies went further than simply analyzing their practices in their equity plans; several created entire departments, new senior-level positions and programs dedicated solely to implementing racial equity policies.
The Treasury, for example, created a new “counselor for racial equity” position in October 2021 to “advance equity and advise the Treasury Department on all racial equity policy issues and programs,” according to its report.
The Department of Defense schools’ Diversity, Equity and Inclusion division was started by Kelisa Wing.DODEA
The job and its $161,813 annual salary went to Janis Bowdler, then-president of the JPMorgan Chase & Co. Foundation, according to FederalPay.org.
The Social Security Administration also focused much of its plan on racial equity, promising to prioritize assisting minorities.
“We will increase collection of race and ethnicity data to determine whether our programs are equitably serving our applicants and beneficiaries … ensure equitable access to unrepresented claimants in the disability application process … and increase access to our research grant programs for historically black colleges and universities and minority-serving institutions,” the SSA wrote in its report.
Even agencies already dedicated to addressing inequity – such as the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, US Interagency Council of Homelessness and the National Council on Disability – must follow the new order.
The summary of the EEOC’s 2022 report states that its equity plan “focuses on systemic discrimination, advancing equity in the agency’s activities and improving outreach and access to underserved communities.”
But Vought said such “equity” policies can actually have the reverse effect, introducing racism by forcing agencies to ignore non-minorities with taxpayer dollars.
“This is dangerous and exactly the type of woke and weaponized government we are trying to defund,” said Vought, whose Center for Renewing America think tank works to advance conservative priorities.
That’s because “equity” differs from “equality,” which considers all people as deserving an equal chance at success — if not equal outcomes. Equity, which Pompeo dubbed a “poisonous lie” Friday, instead attempts to level the playing field by providing certain “disadvantaged” groups with opportunities that exclude everyone else.
“We are equal in the eyes of the Lord, the antidote to the poisonous lie of equity wokeness and identity politics,” Pompeo said. “We [Conservatives] should not be ashamed, embarrassed, troubled – we should be proud of the fact that we stand for this central idea.”
Who deserves “equity?”
Those eligible for “equity,” according to Biden, include religious minorities, women and girls, “LGBTQI+ persons,” those “who live in rural areas” and US territories such as Guam and Puerto Rico, as well as anyone else “otherwise adversely affected by persistent poverty or inequality.”
However, many of the 300 current initiatives focus on race, with several directing taxpayer dollars to promote art projects, decorations, memorial plates and signs dedicated to promoting diversity.
In another case, the National Capital Planning Commission’s report lamented a “lack of equitable representation in memorials” in Washington, DC.
Those eligible for “equity” include religious minorities, women and girls, LGBTQI+ persons.REUTERS
The first item on its action plan was launching “a pilot project to broaden subject matter representation and elevate underrepresented stories through a series of temporary commemorative works.”
“As of 2019, 63% of Washington’s memorials emphasize themes related to military, statesmanship, or the nation’s founding, which prominently feature white men,” the commission wrote.
Several of the 2022 agency action plans committed to prioritizing racial and ethnic minoritiesin their procurement processes.
The GSA, for example, made a “goal to increase overall contract dollars awarded to underserved and disadvantaged communities.”
The Department of Homeland Security hyperfocused much of its equity efforts on racial minorities rather than the full expanse of Biden-defined “underserved communities.”
The report focused heavily on ways to counter “domestic violent extremism” aimed at racial and ethnic groups, which its authors claimed is “has become one of the most lethal threats to the homeland.”
“Among DVEs, racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, including white supremacists, will likely remain the most lethal DVE movement in the homeland,” the DHS report said. “DVE threatens not only life and property, but also the ability of persons in the United States to safely exercise their civil rights and civil liberties, especially for religious, ethnic, and racial minority communities.”
Others, such as the Office of the US Trade Representative, noted it had already been prioritizing minority applicants when issuing contracts.
While US law forbids the use of race in hiring practices, “race may be used when the government has a compelling interest supporting its use,” according to Title 6 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
“Compelling interest” is a loosely defined judicial term used to describe what the government must have in mind if intends to use race as a factor in its policy or decision making. In these cases, the compelling interest is generally “promoting diversity,” the same value that currently allows colleges and universities to apply affirmative action.
In November, an 18-page GOP report criticized the Defense Department’s hyperfocus on so-called “equity” and argued that “wokeness” had weakened the military.
In its most recent budget request, the DOD asked for “$86.5 million for dedicated diversity and inclusion activities.”
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), who co-authored the GOP report with Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas), said at the time the Biden administration believes “advancing their woke ideology is more important than keeping our soldiers safe.”
“Our military’s singular purpose is to ‘provide for the common defense’ of our nation. It cannot be turned into a left-wing social experiment,” the report read. “… It cannot be paralyzed by fear of offending the sensibilities of Ivy League faculty lounges or progressive pundits.”
Sen. Marco Rubio claimed that the Biden administration believes “advancing their woke ideology is more important than keeping our soldiers safe.”REUTERS
The Rubio-Roy report was particularly critical of Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s decision to order a daylong “stand-down” in February 2021 to address “extremism” in the ranks.
Months later, the DOD’s Countering Extremist Activity Working Group that studied the topic found just 100 instances of extremist activity out of the total force of 2.1 million.
“Foreign adversaries like China and Russia loved the stand-down,” Rubio and Roy alleged. “Their view was simple: the stand-down sowed further divisions in the United States and allowed them to tell their people that America’s government is a failure.”
The White House’s 2022 National Security Strategylisted “promoting diversity” in the military as a top priority “to drive innovative solutions across the enterprise.”
“In discussing how to ‘strengthen the effectiveness of the force,’ the first topic listed by the Biden Administration is ‘promoting diversity and inclusion,’” the GOP report said. “That ranks above preventing suicide, reducing sexual assault and other forms of violence against and amongst our service members.”
A similar focus is seen in the Pentagon’s 2022 equity plan, which boasts that it is implementing a policy to help transgender troops join the military “in their self-identified gender” and provides a way for such troops to get “gender-affirming medical treatment and recognition of their self-identified gender.”
Pompeo said Friday the DOD’s emphasis on transgender issues is more political than practical, saying he has seen “America’s most senior military leaders obsessed with pronouns and less obsessed with the only noun that matters to a soldier: Victory.”
The Pentagon’s 2022 plan expands equity programs not only to troops, but to their children who attend Defense Department schools.
Since Biden’s first executive order, DOD “organized a division that focuses solely on advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion” for the 900,000 military-connected students who attend its 160 schools in 11 foreign countries, seven states and two territories.
“This division will examine, identify, and eliminate inequities, barriers, and gaps in DEI in all aspects, including recruitment, teaching and learning, and creating a staff and student climate that is growth-producing,” the equity plan said. “Additionally, they are embedding culturally responsive teaching strategies in the professional learning for educators to meet the individual needs of all students.”
Sen. Tommy Tuberville claims the encroachment of wokeness was the reason he successfully ran for office in 2020.Michael Brochstein/SOPA Images/Shutterstock
The DOD schools’ DEI division was started by Kelisa Wing, the self-described “woke” Diversity, Equity and Inclusion chief who drew criticism in September when several of her past racially charged tweets made headlines.
“I’m so exhausted at these white folx in these [professional development] sessions this lady actually had the CAUdacity to say black people can be racist too,” Wing tweeted July 23, 2020, using a portmanteau of “caucasian” and “audacity.”
However, GOP lawmakers have been challenging the equity programs. The outcry over Wing’s comments prompted the DOD to launch an investigation.
While its results remain unclear, a House Armed Services subcommittee continues its pursuit, asking Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin last month whether the DOD has taken any action against Wing.
Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), a former educator and college football coach, told The Post Thursday at CPAC that the encroachment of wokeness was the reason he successfully ran for office in 2020.
“I want [students] to have what we’ve had the opportunity to have, but today they’re being indoctrinated in education with all this woke [policy] – transgender athletes, CRT [Critical Race Theory,] the 1619 [Project,]” he said. “We don’t teach reading, writing and arithmetic anymore.”
“If we don’t change it, we’re not going to change this country back to what all of us in here grew up and had an opportunity to grow up in.”
