Investigate Earth Conspiracy Podcast - Fauci Pleads the Fifth: Is the COVID Cover-Up Finally Unraveling?

Episode Date: July 30, 2026

Dr. Anthony Fauci returned to Capitol Hill for a highly anticipated Senate hearing examining the origins of COVID-19, government-funded research and his actions during the pandemic. Fauci repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment, declining to answer more than 100 questions as Senator Rand Paul accused him of misleading Congress and warned that a contempt vote could follow.Was Fauci protecting himself from a political trap, or did the hearing expose a deeper COVID cover-up? Tonight, we break down the most explosive moments, the questions Fauci refused to answer, the controversy surrounding his presidential pardon and what could happen next.Visit our merch store here

Today is the beginning of the end. Have a star of a find yourself. Welcome to Investigator's podcast. I'm your host chat alongside my beautiful wife, Sherry. Tonight, we're taking a closer look at one of the most anticipated congressional hearings of the year. As former White House Medical Advisor, Dr. Anthony Falsy returned to Capitol Hill to face lawmakers over questions surrounding the government's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The hearing immediately became one of the biggest political stories of the day,

reigniting debates that have divided the country for years. years. And so through tonight's episode, we'll break down what happened during the hearing, the key moments that stood out and why both supporters and critics believe today's testimony could have significant legal and political consequences. Guys, welcome to the show. It is July the 29, 2026. The name of the song as long as I don't give a, and you get the rest of it by Def Leav, because when I think about Anthony Falsy and all of the circus, that is our government these days. That is the song that came to my mind, which is exactly why I played it. But I know we do have to care. And look, we were one of the

biggest podcast during the COVID era. And I can't even tell you how many of you guys have written in over the past two or three, four years and said, hey, I actually found you because of the COVID podcast, the COVID episodes. I actually met one of my very best friends today, which is Nathan, through the whole COVID deal because his company, Clear, was sued by the FTC because they found out that through studies that Nathan funded himself that his product clear nasal spray and this is not sponsored so you're welcome Nathan but his product actually I guess you can say stopped COVID and could have probably prevented millions or at least hundreds of thousands of deaths if they would have just not sued him and tried to shut him to

hell up because the government's plan from the beginning was not to try to save you it was trying, they were trying to profit off of you. They were trying to control you and they were trying to control the narrative. And I think that's what we see. And so on tonight's episode, we're going to look at the actual testimony from Dr. Anthony Fauci or should I say lack of testimony. And we're also going to more, I guess better examine the questioning by the congressmen such as Rand Paul and others.

Where they ask specific questions that I do think we have to talk about? because guys, although yes, COVID-19 is over, we are still in a state of, in my opinion, this desire from our government to become more tyrannical and more controlling. And when I say that COVID-19 was not the last type of thing that we're going to see like that, whether it's pandemic or the flock cameras or you name it,

it's not. And so we're going to talk about all that on tonight's show. So yeah, I'm excited. I am too. And when you're talking about, you know, with Nathan's company, how a simple nasal spray could stop the production of COVID in your nose. And they would not let him do that. There are other things that there were many doctors talking about during the time of COVID that said they saw were benefiting their patients. And they wouldn't let them use that either. Like Ivermectin, for example. You know, and they're like, oh, my God, all these conspiracy theorists are using horse paste now. I mean, this. is how crazy they are. But that stuff actually worked and it was less than $15 to get it. Yeah. Well, and you have to think like Ivermectin, for example, and I do want to talk about this briefly, but Ivermectin was one of the most prescribed medications in world history. And it also, on top of being one of the most prescribed medications in world history, it was one of

the safest medications with the least amount of side effects also in world history because they used to actually prescribe ibermectin for river blindness, which was in Africa. And then they also used it for various other, I guess you can say, parasitic diseases or parasitic type of sicknesses around the world. This was literally one of the most studied, well-known, safest medications on planet earth. And yet, what did the government do? What did mainstream media do when people started to find out about ibermectin?

because certain doctors said, hey, I actually think this is working. They tried to cancel those doctors. They tried to take their medical license away. And they also tried to make it out like if you took Ivermectin, you were going to die. They tried to tell you that. And the funny thing is, at the same time, they're telling you that a simple drug like Ivormectin might kill you.

They're pushing all of these other big pharma medications that actually will kill you. I mean, stuff that like, hey, if you have asthma, we want you to take. take no asthma. It's a new drug, but it might cause you to poop out of your mouth or bleed out of your eyes or you could drop dead suddenly. I mean, you know, you've heard all of the side effects from all the commercials, but yet literally one of the safest medications, Ivermectin, they tried to demonize. They tried to tell you if you took it, you were going to die.

Now, there's a reason why I'm saying all this and there's a reason why we're bringing this up. Who was responsible for all of this messaging? Well, in large part, it was Dr. Anthony Falsci. You have to understand that Dr. Anthony Fulci was the head of the NIH. He was very much responsible for gain of function, which if you don't know what that is, it is basically where you take a everyday virus and you try to replicate that virus and gain function in that virus, meaning make it more deadly, make it more susceptible to people, and especially if it is a zoonotic virus that typically would require a function.

thousands of years of evolution of that virus to actually ever make it into humans. And most times, by the way, zoonotic viruses do not ever make it into humans, but the ones that do are oftentimes not dangerous at all to people because of how long it takes the evolution of it. It usually, once it does cross from animal to person, it is a lot less deadly because it's weaker. It doesn't understand the human body. And then from that point, it takes years and years and years to become more deadly.

So what Anthony Falci, along with his little comrades, his other doctors are doing is they were trying to speed up this multi-thousand-year process and not only speed it up, but instead of when you introduce a virus like COVID-19 into the human body, what they wanted to do was make it more deadly. They wanted to make it as deadly as possible. And that is what gain of function is. And when Anthony Fauci back four years ago was asked by Dr. Rand Paul or Congressman Rand Paul, what the definition of gain of function was. He says, well, it's this. And Rand Paul's like, well, no, this is the actual definition. He's like, well, if you look at the NIH website, this is the definition.

You know why? It's because they literally changed the definition of gain of function two days prior to Anthony Falsh coming up and testifying. Exactly. And it's so crazy because he said, yeah, we're trying to make these things more dangerous, but we need a vaccination in case there's an outbreak. Yeah. But what he's really doing is he's creating.

bio weapons and that's what it's really used for. Yeah. If they, you know, come out and say, yeah, it's for vaccinations. It's to help, you know, health care around the world. That's a bunch of BS. What they were doing is they were trying to do the bio weapons. That's it. Well, and I think that's the thing, guys.

We have to understand. And look, I do 100% understand that we do need medical research for things that we might need from our health care system to potentially cure us or save our life one day. and it's various things. I mean, obviously, cancer research is one. The AIDS research has been an ongoing, which also Dr. Anthony Falsci was behind and probably also created the actual virus itself. If you look at what a lot of people have developed not only from COVID-19, but also

allegedly the vaccine as well, they develop a very similar type of immune disease, which if you look at them side by side, it looks very similar to AIDS. and a lot of people believe that, by the way, if you guys ever heard probably a year or a year and a half to two years into COVID, where there was this quote unquote conspiracy theory going around where everyone was like, well, actually, not everyone, but some people were saying it could give you AIDS. It literally can give you AIDS. There were doctors saying this. And then they were calling the doctors that were saying this quacks and cuckoos.

Well, the reality is that now that we have some more research on the back end of this, it does look like whatever the vaccines have given some people. and also COVID-19 is a very similar instance of an immune suppressant virus that is almost damn near identical to AIDS. And isn't it just kind of coincidental that the person that was kind of, not kind of, in large part, behind and directing the gain of function on COVID-19 and the SARS-CoV-2 virus was Anthony Fauci, which also was the one that was behind the AIDS and HIV pandemic, whether or not you want to say he was behind trying to find a vaccine board or he was actually behind also the gaining function that led to AIDS because we have to remember that they tried to tell us that AIDS or HIV came from people having sex with monkeys and I always

go back to the Dave Chappelle thing in my mind every time I hear this and Dave Spel was like it's not the best explanation you can come up with mother he's like you're saying a human effing a monkey and he's like he's like that's like that's like you know on On Tuesday, you know, my boys, he's like, hey, man, you're trying to come out to the club. And I say, nah, man, I'm home chilling my monkey. You know, anyway, it's, you guys got to go watch the skit of the AIDS and monkey and Dave Chappelle. But either way, Anthony Falshue is in large part behind this. What we do know, though, that during COVID-19, and we've talked about this a billion times until we're blue in the face, and I'm sure that most of you know this, this was a pre-planned pandemic.

and the reason why I say it was a pre-planned pandemic is not only because of event 201, which happened just months prior to the actual virus releasing, allegedly in Wuhan, China, which is keep in mind that the virus got to Wuhan China because of doctors here in the United States, directed by Dr. Anthony Fauci and DARPA, which if you don't know what DARPA is, DARPA is essentially a clandestine biological military unit. you could also, I guess some countries would call them a terror group, but either way, they are a military unit that works on specific things like biological weapons. And if you look at the declassified documents, the ones that at least that we have seen, we know that DARPA was heavily involved in the research and gain a function potentially with Dr. Ralph Barrick and the University of Chapel Hill of North Carolina, also Boston University and other universities across the United States.

and then it just so happens that about a month before the actual virus released from Wuhan Institute of Irology, there were the military games in China where the United States military also attended these games and it was, you know, there was the European militaries, there Australia, there was various others. They all attended the military games and China claimed not very long after this virus released that it was the United States military or someone in. in the United States military that brought the virus over and released it. Now, I don't necessarily believe that.

I believe that Anthony Fauci, with the direction of DARPA and the doctors in the United States, were working on this virus in China, and they were collaborating together, whatever to hell you want to think of that, whatever. And maybe we might have snuck some people over into China that intentionally got this virus released from Wuhan Institute of Virology to make sure it was released. I could see that 100% clearly that that would be a thing. I think at this point, if we believe what our government tells us, we're crazy at this point. And I think that's why also you see that, you know, and Sherry, I think we were talking about this the other day.

Like four years ago, I thought that I had heard every conspiracy. And it's like nowadays, like almost damn near everything that people hear they don't believe because of how much we've been lied to. and also just looking at the track record of everything as far as all the things that especially people like us and the people that are listening right now we've all been called conspiracy theorists so many damn times and discredited and made out to be like we're idiots and we're fools and if you look at our track record we're like what 150 to one or two maybe right and and so that's why most people believe like hey nothing the government says is true most of what the mainstream media says is not true.

And yes, obviously you do have those cultists, and I do call them cultists at this point, because I have moved past the point of understanding why people can see whether it is someone you voted for or not. You see plain as day that this person is doing the exact opposite of what you voted for, but yet you're still going to say, oh, I love this person, and he's the best thing ever. Oh, wasn't he going on X today and saying how wonderful of a job the operation warps? Oh, yeah, Operation Warp Speed. Oh, no, no, no, no. No, no, no.

Oh, okay. About COVID. Yeah, absolutely. Yeah. Trump went on today on truth, social, and said how amazing Operation Warp Speed was. He was touting that, you know, Operation Warp Speed and the vaccine saved millions of lives. And if it had it been for him, then, you know, there would have been millions of more casualties. But yeah, at the same time, you know, Trump was kind of talking shit about Falschi, even though it was him and Falschi.

When this whole thing started, it was him, Fulcii and the girl. I can't remember what her name, Burke, Dr. Burke, you know, every single day they would give you this update and they would tell you all the shit now. In Trump's defense, what I will say is that the group of people or whoever it actually was that is really behind this entire plan, I think Bill Gates and a lot of the big elites had a lot to do with this, but whoever was behind it coordinated this perfectly. But for someone like Trump and for the government, which looked at, I mean, they should have known about like event 201 and it wasn't just event two and one that happened months before the

actual pandemic there were like four other simulations that had happened but there was never a simulation that happened so close to a pandemic in history but better yet there was never a simulation that detailed and outlined and it was almost like a guidebook on exactly how this thing was going to go like event 201 i mean they had media companies there mainstream media social media, they had law enforcement, they had hospitals, they had everybody, government officials, you name it. And in every single situation, in every single, I guess you can say mock classroom type environment, they had at Event 201, if you go back and I think Event 201's actual guidebook

is still online unless they've taken it down, but I think I have a copy of it somewhere, if you go through and you look at what their details were for social media, for mainstream media, for all this stuff, it literally says exactly what happened during COVID-19. So that's important. So I think what we should do now is probably go ahead and get into the line of questioning from Dr. Rand Paul or I say Congressman Rand Paul. And the reason I say doctors is because he actually does know a little bit about the medical field. He's not an idiot. he's not just some dumb congressman that's sitting up there trying to be political about this and you know there's something i want to say actually before this video and sure this is something

we're talking about and this something we've kind of discussed the question here is what is this congressional hearing actually about like what is the purpose of this i want you to think about that before we get on the backside of this clip because it's one thing like if this congressional hearing's really going to pin down anthony falchie to be actually held accountable. We know, number one, that Dr. Falshiet was pardoned by the Joe Biden administration, although, yes, we, at least what Trump told us originally, that this was all done through Autopin.

This was not Joe Biden himself signing this, this pardon. And we know this because everything that was, that Joe Biden was signed in during his presidency, almost damn near all of the executive orders were done by Autopin. And what Autopin is actually designed for is that say that you send a letter to the White House and you get a letter back and it's always a cool thing to do. I actually got a letter back when I was young. I don't even remember what president it was that I sent a letter to the White House for. But you get a letter back and it has a signature right there. And that signature is done with an auto pen.

But that auto pen is not designed to make decisions that matter dramatically to the United States in any way, shape, or form. global affairs whatsoever. But yet that's what the Biden administration was doing. That's what was used in the faulty pardon. So who was behind the auto pen as the question? And then better yet, like we were waiting on Fauci to be prosecuted, which Trump

touted the hell out of that during his run for president leading up to 2024. And it was all the way up until the last day. He could have likely done something to Fauci outside of the pardon, but chose not to. And he also chose not to. to investigate the autopend. Just today, he said that there was probably nothing they could actually

prove. Well, and that was just a less than a month ago that he could have still prosecuted him. And another thing, when we get into this meeting with Fauci today, you're going to hear the same thing over and over about thousand times. And maybe that is why he was exercising his Fifth Amendment right because he was not sure if he could be held liable. Maybe that's why he wouldn't answer any the questions, but I think it's still important to go through some of the important speakers in what they had to say, even though Focchi wouldn't answer anyone, because we do gain a lot of information through this meeting today. Well, and here's the thing, too, it's like, I think the reason why he was not answering

is because he knows, number one, that he was covered under the pardon. He knows that for sure. Anything that happened during his time and what the pardon covered, which I think was his entire time up to, yeah, the whole thing all the way up to basically 2024. Right. He was completely covered. So he has nothing to worry about, right? He could have said any damn thing he wanted to.

The problem is that he knew that he was not going to answer these questions truthfully, because especially the questions that were asked would be very damning at the very least. Even if he was not prosecuted for just telling the truth, it would make him look like the biggest piece of shit on the planet and not just him, but especially all of the Democrats, most importantly, that have supported him. And just like Harvey Levin today from TMZ saying how awful it is that people are going after Fauci and all this shit. And I've seen a lot of Democrats do the same, although there actually was one Democrat that really stood up today at the hearing and made a very good point.

And I was very, I was happy for this because I was like, hey, here's a Democrat. The Democrats are supposed to act like Fauci is Jesus Christ. And this guy lets him. have it, and I loved it, and we do have that clip. But let's listen to a few minutes of Rand Paul and some of the questioning he had for Dr. Fawci. Listen. American people would like to understand your reasoning, your rationale for why you chose to fund

the research in Wuhan. There have been, you know, intelligence agencies, the CIA, the FBI, the DOE have all come to the conclusion that more likely than not. the virus came from the lab in Wuhan. And so we'd like to know what was the rationale, what was the discussion, how, you know, what went behind the decision to fund the research in Wuhan? How did you come to the conclusion that a totalitarian country would be capable of doing this in a BSL2 lab, a lab that lacked the security?

What was the reasoning? And are you sorry, basically, for making the decision? Would you, you know, like given another chance, say, well, gosh, sir. circumstances, now as I know, maybe it wasn't a wise thing. Can you explain to the committee why you chose to fund this dangerous research in China? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. In the red folder on your table is a copy of Section 192 of Title II of the U.S. Code. Your counsel has been provided a copy as well. That section makes it a crime. for a witness appearing under subpoena to refuse to answer any questions pertinent to the question under inquiry.

Do you have that in front of you? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. Let the record record record that the witness has refused to answer whether there's a folder in front of him based on his Fifth Amendment right. It is true that you're appearing under direction of our subpoena. to provide testimony on matters under consideration by the committee, including the origins of COVID-19, risky life sciences research, and your tenure as a federal government employee. Additionally, you've been provided a full and unconditional pardon,

dated January 19, 2025, for any offenses against the United States, which may have been committed or taken part from January 1, 2014, to the date of the pardon for a 10-year period. arising from or in any manner related to your service as director of the National Institute for allergy and infectious diseases, as a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force, or the White House COVID-19 response team, or as Chief Medical Advisor to the President. Have you refused this pardon or do you have any reason to believe this full and unconditional pardon, this grant of immunity, would somehow require you to plead the Fifth Amendment?

On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. Based on the facts presented, I'm going to direct you to answer the questions. The committee has issued a valid subpoena. They have requested your presence here. The questions are very pertinent to your decision-making as head of NIAID, as well as as a chief advisor to the president. Do you still refuse to answer the questions? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. Dr. Fauci, were you ever made aware of gain of function research on monkeypox being conducted at the National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasure Center and back at Fort Dietrich?

On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment. amendment of the Constitution. Okay, so Rand Paul right here is asking him about the gain of function. Did he know or have any intel on gain of function research on monkey pox? Now, for those that do not remember, it was like two or three years into the COVID pandemic. A lot of people started getting monkeypox. They were getting it in California. They were getting it all across the world.

And supposedly this was also a sexually transmitted disease, especially if you were, I guess, gay, a male gay, I think, in particular. but I'm not 100% sure about that. Either way, come to find out, Dr. Falci also was involved in gain a function of a STD known as monkey pox, where you get all these damn pox, you know, these boils on you that apparently was also a zoonotic virus that was then gain of functioned to make more deadly or more transmissible to people. And so that's why Rand Paul is asking him this line of question. Dr. Fauci, did the CIA ever transfer funds to NIH under an interagency agreement?

On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline in to answer based upon my rights on the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. And I got to stop here for a second as well, because the questions that Rand Paul is asking, I want you guys to fully hear. And the reason for that is Rand Paul is not asking these questions because he don't know the answer. He knows the answer because he has the evidence. He's seen the evidence. He's seen the declassified or in some cases classified files. And in some way, shape, or form, he is then asking the questions based on these findings. And what he's saying here is that the CIA was transferring money to NIH and Dr. Falky for various things,

including gain of function likely for biological warfare and maybe even on our own people. That's what you have to understand. When we talk about pandemic, we talk about event 201, we talk about all this stuff, understand that the CIA was funding faulty and the NIH. It wasn't like that this was just some good doctor that was so loved and adored by the people because he saved so many from COVID because that's bullshit. The main thing is that it seems like because of his guidelines during COVID-19, there were more people that died than ever, ever should have. and there were hospitals doing things that they never would have done otherwise, including putting people on ventilators that absolutely did not need ventilators, and especially when you put people on ventilators that have lung infections.

It's literally just making the lung infection worse. You can do that to someone with bronchitis, and guess what happens when you put someone in a lot of cases on a ventilator that has bronchitis? It's going to turn into pneumonia, and then they're going to just go downhill very fast. And so that is what the guidelines from the NIH and Falschi and the U.S. government was, anybody that has COVID, put them on a ventilator. If they're like 95 or 94% auction, let's throw them on a ventilator. Let's not do anything else. Throw them on a ventilator.

And let's definitely not listen to any of the doctors that are actually seeing promise with all these other things, especially not the ventilator. Well, and they did have a protocol to a medicine that they said worked, but it didn't because it was the same medicine. Your mom actually was prescribed. Monoclonal antibodies. No. Well, monoclonal antibodies. Those work, but they were prescribing a medicine in the ER in the hospital that did not work. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah.

And that medicine, your mom was actually prescribed. And you're like, mom, get off that right away. Yeah, yeah. I can't remember the name of it right now. I can't. I can't. Ramdesivir. Yes, that's it.

Yeah, run death is near is what they actually also call it. Yeah, they were prescribing people ramdesifere and it was killing the shit out of people. I mean, it was killing people like crazy. And also, by the way, if we remember Anthony Far. Falchie's the one that recommended that and made sure that all got put into hospitals and they were given all these people and they were getting blood clots and dime. Well, do we remember what Anthony Fauci did during the AIDS thing where he was giving all these people this medication and I will remember the name. I can't write the second. But either way, it was also killing tons of people this medicine.

So Fauci did the same thing with AIDS that he did during COVID. This was like run too. And yet somehow he's probably not even going to be prosecuted this time either. And we'll talk about that. But let's listen to some more. I'm going to do. I'm going to be a long list of the game. I have a few questions.

Dr. Fauci, did the NIH ever conduct research for or in coordination with any element of the intelligence community? CIA, ODNI. On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. The reason why these questions are important is, you know, President Trump has, done a ban, and we're glad that he did it a ban on gain of function research, so we're better off than we were when we had an advocate serving as head of NIAID, an advocate for gain of function research. There is still, though, a question, though, whether or not the intelligence community is adhering to that order. There's a question of whether or not gain of function

research is still ongoing, and these are important questions. The American people deserve to know. Dr. Fauci, have you been read into any classified Department of Homeland Security program, any prospective special access program concerning gain of function research? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. When we look at the research in China, the gain of function research that you've denied was gain of function. One of the things that startled the scientists when they saw COVID in the first couple of weeks was when they looked at the sequence of it, they said, oh, my God, there's a fur and cleavage site in it. And in this particular family of coronaviruses, the sarvico viruses, they'd never seen this before. They were also startled to look at it and see how it was coded for, what the codons were.

and to discover that the codons used out of 36 different possibilities turned out to be the one that was commonly used in gene manipulation by scientists. Dr. Fauci, were the scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology capable of inserting a fur and cleavage site into a coronavirus? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights. And I want to pause here. The reason why Rand Paul is asking him this is because Rand Paul's basically saying that this was done prior to it ever arriving in China.

Now, this is something that's not been heavily talked about or publicized. Nobody from the government's ever actually talked about this. But what Rand Paul is asking here is that were the scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology able to put this firm cleavage site into this virus? Because the answer is probably no, because Anthony Fulci and his doctors did this before it ever got to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. So one of the experiments that was pretty common was they would take the backbone of a SARS

virus. And this would be a SARS virus that the backbone itself wasn't that dangerous. But then they would dig through guano, 300 feet underground, bat guano. They'd find other viruses, unknown viruses. They'd take the S protein off of an unknown virus and stick it on a backbone. And then they would affect mice that have human nigh cells. they were trying to discover if they could create a virus that infects humans. Now, many people would say, well, gosh, that doesn't sound like a really good idea

to create viruses that don't exist in nature to see if they'll infect human cells. What if one escaped? What if you keep infecting this and do serial passage? You actually adapt the virus to be infectious to humans. So the question is, is whether or not Dr. Fauci, the Wuhan Institute of RRU is combined finding an S protein with one virus with the backbone of others. And could this lead to a virus? Maybe it wasn't even predicted, but could it lead to viruses that gained in function

and then could lead to a pandemic? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. One of the arguments that you and others have made against this virus coming from the lab is it couldn't have come from the viruses that have been published. And nobody's really arguing that. I think from the very beginning, people acknowledge that the viruses that have been published are too far evolutionarily distant from a virus

that could have become COVID-19. But what has never been acknowledged by the side who tries to call the other side of conspiracy theory, which is really something you don't usually see in a scientific debate, this is the first time I've ever seen an argument. printed in Lancet by your friends who called this a conspiracy theory. You know, these are the kind of things you see as a screed on a political, you know, website. You don't really see this in science. But when they released this as being a

conspiracy theory, you know, we're wondering that when you do this, when you combine these viruses and are able to grow them in humanized cells, whether or not this kind of risky research, whether or not, whether you call it gain of function or not, whether you use the definition of gain of function, whether this kind of research should have had more scrutiny. I think in your house testimony, you testified that you never traveled to China and that you were unaware that anybody in NIH ever examined the labs, that you trusted the Chinese scientists. I think you said that even recently, that with your discretion, you trusted the Chinese scientists. The problem is that even in our country, we trust our scientists. We trust our scientists.

They're good American scientists, probably doing the right thing for America. But at the same time, we oversight to make sure it's not dangerous research, but we also investigate the lab. I believe Fort Dietrich was one of our main labs was closed down in the last year or two because of, you know, a research institute, a research incident that was dangerous with dangerous pathogens. And so the American people would want to know, how could you approve this dangerous research in China, say that you trusted the Chinese scientists, and then in the end, you had to admit that you'd never been there,

and none of your inspectors had ever been there. Dr. Fauci, had any of the labs where this dangerous research occurring, were any American lab oversight or lab investigators, did they ever appear in these labs to make sure that they were safe labs? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline. Obviously, you know what his answer is going to be, and Rand Paul does ask a few other questions. which we're going to get to in a second. But I want to point out this as well. You know, think about this.

Number one, Falschi or whoever didn't really give a shit about the lab in China because it sounds like, as we have talked about many times, that number one, DARPA was involved. Obviously, CIA was involved. Who knows what other intelligence agencies were involved? Because Rand Paul not only stops with the CIA when he asked Anthony Fulci this, but he says, have you been involved with any other intelligence agencies? CIA, whoever, from wherever. Doesn't matter. Have you been involved? He obviously refused to answer this. And the reason why Falschi did not give a shit necessarily about the fact that whether or not a the Wuhan Institute of Virology was a safe lab or not is because I believe that Falki

throughout many years has been the doctor, the mad scientist for intelligence agencies. I think that is one of his main roles and goals. And I think that's what he's done. I think he has been, yes, the public face of that when it came to it. But I think at the very least, like you look at people like Larry Ellison with Oracle, where he designs this massive infrastructure of back-in and backdoor type software for computers that was a CIA program that's now in many computers around the world. Balshys the same thing just with the medical side of things. And he was the public face inside of this.

But I think from the very beginning, this was a part intelligence agency operation. and also part of an elite operation, such as Bill Gates, Melinda Gates, which also, by the way, we found out today in the hearing that Bill Gates was given a security clearance, two of them, which Fauci refused the answer. Why would a billionaire that has no government ties, no medical background whatsoever be given to, top secret, I believe, security clearances during this time? Oh, because he's given the money. And also, let's not forget that Anthony Fauci,

was the highest paid federal government employee that was not elected. He's the highest paid bureaucrat. Yeah, in the United States. And he made a salary higher than our own president. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, this is this is bureaucracy at his finest. And not only is this guy taking money in millions of dollars from pharma,

but he's also likely taking money that we don't even know about. Well, in aid, he was getting like tons of different aid. And he's like, hey, guys, do you think I could qualify for this? can you like write this up for me he was getting all kinds of money everywhere this guy is a rich guy now oh absolutely is and you know he's they're like look you know you're gonna be rich but you're going to have to deal with this shit and don't worry nothing's going to happen to you this will be all you know and in my opinion a lot of this is just all circus it's all to kind of parade him in front of the public just to make it seem like they give a shit and

they're going to actually do something but we know they're not probably going to do something but either way uh sure did did ran paul say anything else in this that's like really important he goes into the feet the fetus material after that and he talks about using aborted baby tissue okay and part of the lungs and stuff like that all right well we'll play a couple more minutes of this and then i got a i got a pretty explosive one that's really good and then we got a couple other things talk about here you go and to answer based upon my rights under the fifth amendment to the constitution so one of the main theories for those who have looked at, you know, this being created in the lab was the idea that could have come from

a virus not previously published. Dr. Frasio, are you aware that Dr. Shee, who worked for the Wuhan Institute of Virology, was said to, and I think in our own words, to have over 100 viruses that had not been previously published that could have been a close enough relative to create COVID-19. Are you aware of that? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my our rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Under your testimony previously when you denied ever having funded gain of function in China, it was so adamant as to be striking to leave no room for any interpretation of what is or isn't gain of function research.

But there's another important question. Did you fund gain of function research in other biolabs around the world? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. The one research project that we do know you did fund is the one that Ron Fuchier did. And it's important to talk about because this sort of was the beginning of the debate over gain of function. This wasn't just me. I wasn't even aware of the debate 10 years ago. This was other scientists.

Over 200 scientists at the Cambridge Working Group signed a protest because they didn't think you should fund. the research and they didn't think it should even be published because it was sort of a roadmap as to how to make a bioweapon. So what they did was the avian flu, and this is important. It may be the most important question we get to here today. The avian flu has about 50% mortality for humans. The good news, though, about animal viruses is they don't infect humans very well. It will infect humans, but doesn't go human to human very well. Ron Fuchier, with the money that you provided to him, did an experiment where he caused purposeful mutations to create a new virus, an avian flu that didn't just infect birds well, but actually infected mammals well, went ferret to ferret in an aerosolized manner.

People saw this and were aghast, you know, at the decision-making process that you decided to fund this. But this is when, you know, the debate came about and you wrote in support of this in the Washington Post, and you said, even if a scientist is bitten, even if a pandemic should occur, the knowledge is worth the risks. Do you still stand by that? Would you like to qualify at all whether or not the knowledge of gain of function is worth the risks, particularly in this case since we now know 15 million people died worldwide? Many people believe this came from the lab. Do you think that the risks really are worth the benefits for gain of function research?

On the advice of counsel, I respect. declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. We're going to finish with this question. And it's based really on that statement, that general statement and your support for gain of function. The idea that the benefits outweigh the risks. So there are many other people who disagree. And they aren't politicians or not, I don't know what party they're in. David Relman is probably one of the most esteemed. And he is a scientist at Stanford. He, I think, has classified clearance. He's been a consultant to our government probably for a decade or more.

And he's written about this publicly. He says the opposite. He said that the risks of this research do not outweigh the benefits. He said the risk we shouldn't do it. Richard Ebright, who's been involved in this debate for two decades, says the same thing. We really shouldn't be doing this at all. There's a quote also by the Kevin Esfeld quote is that at the very end. Kevin Esfeld, who's a CRISPR scientist at MIT, also wrote about this gain of function.

I implore every scientist funder and nation working in the field. Please stop. No more trying to discover or make pandemic-capable viruses. no more experiments likely to disseminate blueprints for plagues. Dr. Fauci, would you like to at least answer this one question for us today and let us know whether or not you've changed your mind on whether or not the benefits of gain of function research outweigh the risks? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer

based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. All right, so that was all of Ramp. Paul's line of questioning today. No, not. Well, not completely. Yeah. There were some others. There were other lines of questioning that I told you.

Yeah. He was bringing up aborted fetal tissue. And they would send parts of the lungs and the liver over to China to experiment with. And they were doing gain of function on human body cells. Yeah. No, I heard that as well. I didn't know if it was in that particular area or not. My apologies.

That's all good. But either way, yes. So for those that do not know, yes, they absolutely were sending baby aborted fetuses and scalps and all kinds of stuff from babies into these gain of function labs where they were helping create a virus that was going to better infect you. So not only were your taxpayer dollars paying for abortions in many cases through various organizations and whoever, but it was also paying for the gain of function research, which was the money that. that was being used by NIH, using baby aborted fetuses to help infect a virus more for them to control you. That's basically what they were doing. I mean, it's the craziest sounding thing that you will ever hear, but it's true. And also,

there is a lady. I can't remember what her name is. She's a congresswoman. She asked about what you're saying. And that's why I was thinking it was the woman. I don't know if Rand Paul actually asked about it or not. He did. But she also asked.

ask about this. Listen. We have learned that U.S. coronavirus researchers at UNC shipped, quote, humanized or transgenic mice to China by around 2017 for use in their dangerous coronavirus work. Under your NIAID coronavirus, researchers also used aborted baby body parts in mice research, and taxpayers paid for them to do that. NIH-funded coronavirus researcher, Dr. Ralph Barrick, and his colleagues at UNC put parts of livers, thymuses, and chunks of human fetal lung that they got from aborted almost five-month-old human babies. They put those parts in their research mice. They disgustingly named them B-L-T-L-Myes and wrote they had created a, quote, sandwich of aborted body parts in the mice.

Get it, folks. B-L-T. A B-L-T sandwich. Yeah, that's how sick these people were. No joke. A bacon, lettuce, and tomato sandwich out of fetus in mice. Yeah, fetuses and put it into my, or not, yeah, aborted fetuses, livers, all this stuff. I mean, five months and older.

Yes, absolutely disgusting. Let me also quickly go to Democrat Bernie Marino because this was a very interesting line of question and he's a Democrat. But listen to what he says to Dr. Falci. comments about your opening statement, Mr. Chairman, I think it was dead on very, very well done. Mr. Fauci, do you know who David Schertler is? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. What does the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution say? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. No, I'm just asking you what it says. On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.

I'm going to give the Constitution to my aid. I'll bring it over to you so you can have it for future reference. I think it's something that every American should know. the Constitution says. Do you know who wrote the Fifth Amendment? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. So you're invoking a right that you don't know who wrote it or what it says. Is that correct? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Wow. Well, let me tell you who David Shirtler is

for the audience, because he was ejected by the chairman. He's a high-profile criminal attorney. he's represented some really great people, like Senator Bob Menendez. Maybe that's somebody who my Democrat colleagues may remember took gold bars as bribes from the Egyptians. And there's an article here in a Washington Free Beacon that talks about why you would hire Guy Leithervor Shirtler. And the comment is, if you're in deep shit, that's who you call. Do you feel like you're in deep shit? on the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Clearly, what you think today is that somehow you're above reproach.

Somehow you feel like you don't need to be treated like a normal American. Can you do me a favor in the audience and stand up if during the time, of the COVID pandemic, you were called a racist for calling the virus, a Wuhan virus or the China virus. If you thought the six-foot rule was total crap, if you thought the vaccine wasn't something that you should take, if you thought it was outrageous the way the mass policy was rolled out, if you were fired from your job for not taking that vaccine, including members of the military, if you thought closing schools was catastrophically stupid and that you thought that during these times,

saying these things made you somehow a lesser human being. Dr. Frasch, can you just turn around and look at the people behind you? You're not willing to do that? That's not a question. It's not a question. To your lawyer, it's not a question. It's a request. All you have to do is look up from your lawyers

and look at the people who were absolutely shamed. for saying what we know now to be the truth. You can't even look at them? That's a question. Are you able to look at them? You can sit down in the audience. There was a mom in Ohio during the depth of the coronavirus pandemic. Decided to go to our high school football game for her son.

They hadn't been out much. The kids have been learning at school. and then the school got shut down. They hadn't really gotten much out of that education. As any parent knew, that remote learning was no learning at all. But it was a Friday night. Her son wanted to go watch her buddy go play football. So they went to the stadium.

They sat alone, far from everybody else, just a mom, a dad, a few kids. They didn't feel they needed to wear masks. because it was stupid because they were outside. They all live together. They're not near anybody. Dr. Fauci, do you know what happened to that mom and that family? That's a question. On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.

They were dragged out of that stadium and arrested. those policies were put in place because you had moronic politicians that listen to the words of a megalomaniac who was more interested in having met a Kardashian than the suffering of the American people. And that is you. Your advice to communities like that to idiotic politicians who enforce those. those rules, arrested that mom for watching a football game with her own family outside. When that story broke, I said to myself, I cannot stand idly on the side and watch this happen. It was about six years ago today that I decided I'm going to give up my businesses, sell them all, run for office, run through the United States Senate.

Here I am sitting in front of you six years later saying, who the fuck do you think you were for doing that? It is a total disgrace what you did to this country. And if my Democrat colleagues are standing there defending you, I hope the voters, the United States of America, watch the clips of every one of you, doting on a guy who was more interested in being a celebrity than saving American people.

I will make it my mission to make certain that every single one of those Republicans who did that will see that clip over and over and over again. Because defending, there is no defense of what you did. You may have had a 50-plus year legacy of public service, but it ends in total and complete disgrace. So let me ask you an opportunity to answer one question. Will you apologize, just apologize, to the people who you harmed through your actions? Will you say, do you have the dignity to just say you are sorry? On the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. So you won't apologize to the military members who Joe Biden,

and summarily dismissed from the military for not taking a vaccine? On the divisive counsel, I respectfully declined to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Will you apologize to the business owners that lost their business, shattered their lives, and they'll never recover? On the divisive counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Will you apologize to the moms who had to force their infant children, two, three,

four-year-olds to put masks on and what that did and how that traumatized those kids. Under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution. Were you apologized to the family members or the people who died because they took your advice and not only got the first vaccine, but the five, six other boosters that they did not need. All right. So you can get where that was going. He was almost done. By the way, it says he's a Democrat.

I don't think he's a Democrat, but maybe I could be wrong. I don't know. Well, he said along with his Democrat colleagues. Yeah, but I think that doesn't necessarily mean. That's not why I thought. It's literally there's a video that says Democrat, but maybe he's not Democrat. I don't know. I'll find out about that.

But the thing is about this whole thing where he's getting at with the mass in the six-foot rule and everything else and the kids. You know, I was a teacher then. Yeah. And it was so hard to try to even deal with that. You know, the first year when the pandemic happened, I think it was April, Chad, when they shut down all the schools. Thank God we only had until April until June. So it was like a month, a month and a half that we had to do remote learning on the computer, which we really didn't even know how to do that because we were never trained how to do that.

So they lost a month and a half of education. Yeah. Thank God it didn't happen earlier. But at the same time, I was- What happened next year? Yeah, it did the whole next year. But I'm saying that year. But, you know, I was already scared to death the end of that year.

Like, I didn't want to be in the classroom. I was scared of it. Everyone else was scared of it too. But, you know, like I'm saying, April, it was a good time for it to come for school because they didn't lose that much education that year. The next year, you know, some of us went back into the classroom. They had to have plexiglass between each desk. They had to wear masks all day. It was like, how do you teach a child anything with a mask on?

I had a exemption, a medical exemption because of my asthma. So I was able to teach at home because I didn't want to be in that crap. But teaching from home, I mean, I did the best I could do. And I think I did. And you got COVID like five times. And that was after the vaccine because you did to get the vaccine. No, well, okay, the whole year I taught at home, I never got COVID. Yeah.

I stayed home. I didn't go anywhere. But when I went back into the classroom, I got the vaccine. And then I think I had to do the booster. thing like what six weeks later or so i can't remember what it was now but then i got covid five times i was out of school more that year than i had in the whole 24 other years that i've been a teacher yeah and i was so i was deathly ill yeah for a lot of it i mean yeah and that's the crazy thing is like you know the one thing about covid is and this is something i will definitely say that

i'm not saying the virus was was a hoax because there were people that were dying from it i mean although yes keep in mind you know when covid was around there was no flu supposedly somehow i mean no one was dying of flu there was there was basically no flu cases they said this is unlike anything we've ever seen before and it was in my opinion because they were classified in every flu case also as covid but i do think you know like one of my friends died of covid and he was uh 38 years old you know and so he definitely died i mean he he did not take the vaccine um they did put him on a ventilator the second time around when he went, you know, he had got COVID twice. The second time he had got pretty sick made the mistake of going to hospital.

And I think a lot of people, when they got COVID, they were scared because they're like, oh, I can't breathe good, just like maybe you wouldn't, you know, maybe you couldn't breathe good if you had a bad case of bronchitis. But what if you had a bad case of bronchitis and you went to the hospital and they put you on a ventilator? Oftentimes you might die. And that's what happened to a lot of people. I mean, yes, it was a bad lung infection.

Had he not been put on the ventilator during that second. time that he had COVID, he would probably still be alive today. But the problem was that they scared so many people into it. And in some cases, like in some hospital systems, they made you get on the ventilator. Right. It wouldn't even let you leave rooms. Wouldn't let you do this because- They brought security in and literally like tackled people and put them on ventilators.

Yeah. When they're like denying it saying, I don't want this. I'm leaving. They would not let them leave. And they put them on a ventilator. And three days later, they died. Yeah. And that's what was so scary about it because none of us.

knew what we know now, you know, and I... Well, we started knowing a lot. We did. Yeah, that's why we were the top podcast. But at the time, it was like, oh, my God, I'm going back to the classroom. Do I take this, the shot, or do I take a chance of dying? Because that's what I really felt like those were my choices. Well, there were times that you were sick enough to die.

I mean, honestly, like you said, you had five times you got COVID. And there were a couple of those times. you were the sickest I've ever seen you for sure. And lung infection is so bad, you couldn't breathe. Like, it was bad. It was terrible. And I'd seen a lot of people get like this as well. Now.

And the vaccine is supposed to prevent you from getting COVID. But I got it five times after I took a vaccine and a booster. Yeah. I got it five times in one year. And I think in my opinion, it was almost like that was the way in for a lot of this. It was almost like they designed this vaccine to make sure you did get. COVID multiple times. I don't know if you guys remember, but like pre-COVID or right around COVID, I always sounded like this.

And everybody's like, oh, my God, your wife sounds like a smoker. She sounds like grassy, you know, and I think I do have a little bit of a grassy voice, but I was so graspy. Everybody was always saying, oh, my God, you got to lay down the cigarettes. I don't smoke. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, it was nuts back in that time. And so the question we have to ask and sum up from this episode and this, today's hearings are,

Is it possible that they're going to do anything to Dr. Fawkes? Number one, one of the things that Rand Paul said after the hearing was they're going to vote on contempt next week because he refused to answer. Although, yes, he invoked his Fifth Amendment rights. The problem is that when you are pardoned for something and they're asking you specific questions about that, you may not be able to invoke that right because of the pardon. right so it is a constitutional law the only thing is is that and the reason and the reason why that is is because you cannot invoke a fifth amendment right if you cannot be prosecuted for what they're asking you and he was saying he's pardoned so he should be able to answer the questions yeah but according to a i when i looked that up it says that though if you could be held criminally liable

in states right so if the pardon was covering federal things and not state level crimes or whatever the cases, then yes, he would still be able to invoke his Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate himself, even though, you know, the Congress was asking him, but if, say, the state of South Carolina or one of the other states wanted to incriminate him, and maybe that pardon did not cover that, that's what they got to find out. But either way, even if they do get him in contempt because he, you know, invoked his fifth amendment right every single time on every single question, I think the maximum pretty much for that penalty is like a year in prison or jail. And the likelihood of him getting any time whatsoever is slim to none.

Because, you know, that'll go through so many different processes. He'll never actually make it into jail, even if he did get held in contempt. And if Democrats won in 28 or especially, or not 28, but this year or 2020, then there's no chance. This thing will go away. You know, all the Democrats think he's Jesus. And that's just, you know, that's just the way it is. Well, I just wonder if he still works for the NIH. Is he still employed or is he done?

Because that would be a really good question right now. No, I think he's gone. Yeah, I'm pretty sure he's gone. So he just took his money and he is gone. With the NIH. Yeah, I don't think he is because, I mean, that's something that obviously a Trump administration would take care of pretty. Well, he was with Trump during COVID. Yeah, I know he was.

No, Dr. Anthony Fauci is no longer with the National Institute. He retired from the government positions in 2022. He had served for 50 years. he had retired after this whole thing. Now, the last clip I want to play because I did tell you guys I would play this, and I want to make sure I do, is just what Trump said today, because I'm sure that some of you are curious what Trump would have said in specific to this. So here is Trump today when media was in the room,

and they questioned him about the hearings today. Listen. You should be having to do. Mr. President, Mr. President, is Dr. Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times. Senator Rand Paul said he's going to hold a vote on holding him in contempt of Congress. Do you think Dr. Fauci should base repercussions for this? Well, I watched the whole thing today, but more importantly, I was a part of the whole Fauci.

I inherited Fauci. He was here from the 1980s, so I had him for a period of time. And I disagreed with him on a lot. I would have had to close down the whole country if I listened to him. I went the Federalist way, which is basically let the governors decide. And generally speaking, the Republican governors did very well. did very well. The Democrat governors did not very well. But Fauci wanted to have nobody wearing masks, if you remember, and then everybody had to wear five masks, as many masks as you could get. I mean, made a lot of mistakes. And he wasn't a big factor for me. He was a very big factor for Biden.

And if you remember, even though we were sort of prime time in terms of that whole disaster of COVID, far people died fewer in the Trump administration than in the Biden administration. We ran it, well, Operation Warp Speed was talked about as being one of the great success stories anywhere in the world, actually. And we did a good job. But many more people died under Biden than died in the Trump administration from COVID. COVID was a disaster, but Fauci did not help. Do you think that the DOJ should reopen the investigation into the old?

autopen, specifically pertaining to Fauci? Well, the only thing you can really think about is the auto pen because the most powerful thing the president has, they say, is the power of pardon. So he was pardoned by Biden, and I respect that. I know how powerful it is. It's a very powerful, they say it's literally the most powerful thing a president has. Now, whether or not I sign my things directly, always, almost everything, I sign directly. Your witness, to many of them. He signed very few. The only thing I know that he signed was Hunter Biden's pardon, but I'm not sure that he signed. He probably didn't sign this one. So I can't tell you what the law is. I've heard that you have to have a lot of proof. You need to have letters.

You need to have all sorts of things that the person operating the autopen has to know exactly what it's all about. He didn't know what it was about because I saw him testify. So maybe there's something on the otopan. Other than that, the power of partners. So there you go. That is what Trump said about the hearing today. Yeah, and the newscaster said a hundred times. No, he revoked his right, 1700 times, I think.

Yeah. Well, I don't even know. I mean, I don't know if it was that many or not. Yeah, it was a ton. Or whatever he was from Fox News. He said it was like 1,200 times or something like that. Yeah, I mean, it makes sense. And, you know, the thing is, it's like one of the things that Trump ran on was,

locking these people up and holding these people accountable and draining the swamp. And I'll be honest, we haven't saw any of that so far. And in my opinion, you know, I, regardless, Trump says that there was far fewer deaths when he was president than Biden. That's not necessarily true. There was a lot of deaths too. There was people that were still dying during the Trump administration. And also, like I said, you know, who knows?

Like, it just seems like everything that Trump had ran on, he didn't do draining the swamp. It seems like the people that are actually out and going good. for want the best for America and especially America first are the people that he goes after. And it seems like the people that we wanted to lock up or the people that in specific that, especially during COVID, the people that were really behind a lot of this very sinister shit, he's either protected, not prosecuting, or bringing into the Oval Office, including the Pfizer CEOs and whoever. So this is just one big game that you're not a part of. And it doesn't matter necessarily if you're Democrat or Republican.

They're all the same. They're all the same. Doesn't it kind of remind you of the Epstein files? Like he's protecting these people. And I specifically remember when he was asked if he would actually jail Hillary Clinton or not. He said, no, just because of her status, I would never put her in jail. But I did run in campaign with that. Yeah.

Well, I mean, he said lock her up, lock her up all the way up to 2024. And of course, that never happened either. So that's just the way it is, guys. But we're not going to make you listen to any more of Anthony Fawci say I in Boog. the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, whatever. We're not going to do that anymore. We got some great episodes coming up, but we did at least want to cover this briefly for you tonight.

It's not the longest episode tonight, but at the very least, we wanted to let you hear the BS that is this congressional circus. It's like they're parading Anthony Fauci out there to make you think something's going to happen when in reality, it's probably not going to happen. And that's why I picked the song that we started with and we're going to end it with the same song.

I don't give a by death love. Until next time. guys we love you talk to you soon peace out peace out