Category Archives: Big Tech

Fauci Finally Gets Covid: The Significance 

Fauci Finally Gets Covid: The Significance 

By Jeffrey A. Tucker   June 17, 2022   History, Public Health  

What precisely happened in the month of February 2020, when Anthony Fauci and cohorts were plotting their pandemic response, is still a mystery. Jeremy Farrar, of the Wellcome Trust, in his book on the topic says that during these weeks, they went to burner phones, clandestine video calls, and warned family members that something terrible could happen to them. 

Their top concern was the possibility of the lab leak from Wuhan. They needed to get to the bottom of it and prepare the spin. We know that the initial draft of the academic article denying the lab leak came out February 4, 2020, later published in the Lancet on March 16. But what happened in these three weeks – apart from the mid-February NIH junket to China to learn how to control a virus – remains foggy. 

But this much we do know: by March 2, 2020, Fauci had his game plan lined up. Michael Gerson of the Washington Post wrote him on that day and asked about the purpose of social distancing. This was weeks before most Americans had even heard this euphemism for forced human separation. Was the idea to wait for a vaccine, Gerson asked? 

Fauci answered in a private email as follows:

“Social distancing is not really geared to wait for a vaccine. The major point is to prevent easy spread of infections in schools (closing them), crowded events such as theaters, stadiums (cancel events), work places (do teleworking where possible…. The goal of social distancing is to prevent a single person who is infected to readily spread to several others, which is facilitated by close contact in crowds. Close proximity of people will keep the R0 higher than 1 and even as high as 2 to 3. If we can get the R0 to less than 1, the epidemic will gradually decline and stop on its own without a vaccine.”

There we have it: the Fauci theory of how we get rid of the virus. We don’t need a vaccine. Just close things. Stay away from people. Don’t gather. Shut schools. Lock businesses and churches. All people stay away from all people. The R-naught will drop. 

Then the virus will….and this is where the theory gets murky. Does it just vanish? Get bored? Get frustrated, give up, and vanish into the ether? And how long does this new social system of “social distancing” have to last? Years? Forever? And what happens once people start acting normally again?

This is very clearly crank science, one that confuses ex post data collection with causation itself and also seems to deny the workability of the human immune system. That such things would be written by a person in Fauci’s position is truly mind boggling. But the press went along, and still does after all this time. 

What Fauci was imagining – and very few people picked up on it at the time – was the construction of a new social system. It was not just about this virus. It was about all pathogens and the whole functioning of society. He believed – or he decided to come to believe – that a re-engineering of the social order could successfully beat back common pathogens and bring about universal health. 

He finally revealed this in his August 15, 2020, article for Cell that received very little attention at all. He was on his own attempting to implement an entire new social system based on a new ideology

Living in greater harmony with nature will require changes in human behavior as well as other radical changes that may take decades to achieve: rebuilding the infrastructures of human existence, from cities to homes to workplaces, to water and sewer systems, to recreational and gatherings venues. In such a transformation we will need to prioritize changes in those human behaviors that constitute risks for the emergence of infectious diseases. Chief among them are reducing crowding at home, work, and in public places as well as minimizing environmental perturbations such as deforestation, intense urbanization, and intensive animal farming. 

This article reveals the most important point. The pandemic response was not just about this one pathogen. It was about what amounts to a political, economic, social, and cultural revolution. 

It’s not socialism or capitalism. It’s something else entirely, something very strange, like a Rousseauian technocracy, simultaneously primitive and high tech, as managed by a scientific elite, an untested dystopia worthy of the most terrifying literature in the English language. 

No one has voted for such a thing. It is something Fauci and his friends dreamed up on their own and deployed all their enormous power to enact just as a test, until it fell apart. The US and many parts of the world were in their grip for the better part of a year and two years in some places. 

This is a scandal for the ages, one that far outstrips issues of tax-funded gain-of-function research, as important as that is. It’s even more important that reports that Fauci has been earning personal royalty payments from pharmaceutical companies that receive grants that he has personally approved. The real problem comes down to his power and the ability of elected representatives and courts to control him for many decades. 

Regardless of Fauci’s millenarian vision, the course of the virus took the usual path but for one major exception: the waves of infection occurred based on class rank in society. There was a political hierarchy of infection that started with the working classes, moved to the bourgeoisie, hit the professional classes, then high-end journalists, and finally, at the very end came for the elite ruling class itself – Trudeau, Psaki, Ardern, Gates, and finally Fauci – regardless of their multiple vaccines. 

And here is why Fauci’s covid infection is significant, 28 months after the first lockdowns. It’s a sign and symbol that his entire theory of virus control was wrong. He got his way with policy and it did not work. The virus finally landed on him, as if to reenact Edgar Allan Poe’s fictional story of Prince Prospero in his castle that he believed would protect him. 

And as a result of his exposure, Fauci will surely (unless his repeated injection of the same vaccine harmed the operation of his immune system) gain the natural immunity that is already possessed by 78 percent of kids and likely two thirds of the general population. 

It should also alert us to three points of moral urgency:

  • We need to replace Fauci-style feudalism with a new theory of how to reconcile the freely functioning society with the presence of infectious disease, so that neither he nor people in his pay or sway can attempt this again. 
  • We need to act to disable the unmitigated power of administrative-state bureaucrats to seize control of the machinery of government. 
  • We need a new system to decentralize science away from privileged elites so that they can never again have monopoly control over what is considered to be the science much less posses the power to censor dissent. 

These are the lessons, at least the start of them. This virus is either endemic or at least almost so, but we are left with astonishing social, cultural, and economic destruction from Fauci’s attempt to implement an experimental plan on the whole population not only in the US but all over the world. 

We will suffer for many years or generations from it. And yet, in the end, infection is individual and probably unavoidable for most people. The immune system adapts. That’s how we evolved to coexist. To pretend otherwise is the very essence of denying the science. 


  • Jeffrey A. Tucker Jeffrey A. Tucker is Founder and President of the Brownstone Institute and the author of many thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press and ten books in 5 languages, most recently Liberty or Lockdown. He is also the editor of The Best of Mises. He writes a daily column on economics at The Epoch Times, and speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.

Wikipedia Deletes Hunter Biden Investment Firm Entry

Hmm. I will think three times about supporting Wikipedia in the future. mrossol

The Epoch Times, 4/24/2022


Wikipedia editors deleted an entry for Hunter Biden’s investment company Rosemont Seneca Partners, according to comments on the Talk Page of the entry.

Hunter Biden, son of President Joe Biden, co-founded U.S. investment and advisory firm Rosemont Seneca Partners in 2009, along with Chris Heinz, the stepson of former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, and Devon Archer, one of his business partners. The firm has been under congressional scrutiny and has faced questions about the younger Biden’s overseas business dealings.

According to the Wikipedia Talk Page, the Rosemont Seneca entry was deleted on April 20. Some editors said the entry was “not notable” and suggested that it was thin on details.

“This organization is only mentioned in connection with its famous founders, Hunter Biden and Christopher Heinz,” said Wikipedia editor “Alex,” who claimed that “keeping [the page] around” could turn it into “a magnet for conspiracy theories about Hunter Biden.” That editor didn’t elaborate or provide any evidence.


“It’s a non-notable company with a tangential connection to some conspiracy-related thing that didn’t happen,” another wrote.

Other editors, meanwhile, suggested the entire page be merged with the main Hunter Biden entry, which briefly mentions his involvement with Rosemont Seneca. However, arguments in favor of merging the pages were rejected, according to the Talk page.

“There are no in-depth references that discuss the company, only passing references with a mention here and there of a transaction,” one editor wrote. “That fails our criteria for establishing notability. The Hunter Biden article already mentions this firm so I don’t see any need for a Merge or Redirect.”

Rosemont Seneca Partners became a shareholder of a Chinese investment fund called Bohai Harvest RST (BHR), which was incorporated in Shanghai in 2013. Biden resigned from his seat on BHR’s board of directors in 2019.

Curtis Houck, of the Media Research Center, told the New York Post that the decision suggests a double standard.

“If a Trump-linked company had its Wikipedia page wiped or one from the Russia probe, it’s more than a safe bet to say that CNN would be dedicating multiple reporters to following the internet trail,” he told the outlet.

The decision is sure to draw further criticism against Wikipedia’s editors, who have often been accused, including by one of its founders, Larry Sanger, of tilting far to the left.

“There’s a very big, nasty, complex game being played behind the scenes to make the article say what somebody wants them to say,” Sanger said in 2021, accusing the website of disseminating “propaganda.”

For example, editors have attempted to delete the page “Mass killings under communist regimes,” which includes documented atrocities committed by Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, Chinese Communist Party founder Mao Zedong, Ethiopian communist leader Mengistu Haile Mariam, Khmer Rouge leader Pol Pot, and North Korean founder Kim Il-Sung.

Representatives of Wikipedia didn’t respond by press time to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.


Life threats on Twitter deemed not a violation of platforms policy


On Thursday, April 21st, Libs of TikTok, an anonymous account whose identity was recently revealed by the Washington Post, posted screenshots of another tweet showing a post calling for her assassination.

The post also revealed that Twitter deemed that the threatening post did not violent the platforms’ user guidelines. Tagging Twitter Safety in the post, Libs of TikTok tweeted:

“Apparently threatening to assassinate someone doesn’t violate Twitter’s policies. But conservatives get suspended for stating biological facts.”

One of the tweets that Libs Of TikTok shared said:


The tweet also included a video of various guns being reloaded and assembled by people in all-black tactical gear. Libs of TikTok included a second photo, which was of the response the account received from Twitter Support after reporting the tweet:

“Hello, Thanks for reaching out. We’ve reviewed the content and didn’t find a violation of our policies, so no action will be taken at this time.”

Twitter’s violent threats policy very clearly states that it forbids “threatening to kill someone” on its platform.

The assassination threat and post comes just days after an article in the Washington Post written by Taylor Lorenz who revealed the operator behind the Libs of TikTok account, including private work details and address.

Reportedly, that link was later deleted and the Washington Post released a statement claiming they didn’t “publish or link to any details about her personal life.” The entire statement is below:

“Taylor Lorenz is an accomplished and diligent journalist whose reporting methods comport entirely with The Washington Post’s professional standards. Chaya Raichik, in her management of the Libs of TikTok Twitter account and in media interviews, has had significant impact on public discourse and her identity had become public knowledge on social media. We did not publish or link to any details about her personal life.”

The New York Post reported that Lorenz defender her decision to reveal the woman’s identity, tweeting:

“Reporters make phone calls, send messages, show up places, and knock on doors when reporting out a story.”

She added:

“I reported this story out extensively, using every tool I had, to ensure I had the correct woman.”

In response to criticism that she targeted a private citizen who wished to remain anonymous, Lorenz tweeted that the social media user, “isn’t just some average woman with a social media account” but is instead a “powerful influencer operating a massively impactful right wing media shaping discourse around LGBTQ+ rights.”

Another woman with the same name, Chaya Raichik also took to social media stating on Instagram that since the Washington Post article, she has been harassed and that her family is terrified. People began attacking her online, believing and assuming that she is the same person as the one behind Libs of TikTok.

One comment on her account allegedly said:

“You are what’s wrong with this world. You’re vile and disgusting. Your children should be taken away from you and put in a safer home. May you rot in (expletive).”

Other comments included her being called a “Nazi scum,” someone saying, “your [sic] so disgusting we will find you evil trump supporter,” and “you are (expletive) bigoted trash. Your children should be ashamed of you.”


Hunter Biden’s Laptop Is Finally News Fit to Print – WSJ

The Democrats, Deep State and legacy media censoring data, information they don’t like. They care not a whit about truth or this country. Help me understand otherwise. mrossol

WSJ, By The Editorial Board, 

Hunter Biden walks to Marine One on the Ellipse outside the White House on May 22, 2021.

Photo: brendan smialowski/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

Talk about burying the lead—for 17 months. The New York Times has finally acknowledged that Hunter Biden’s business dealings are legitimate news. Implicit apology accepted.

The Times waddled in this week with a story on the “tax affairs” of the President’s son, including this gem in the 24th paragraph: “Those emails were obtained by The New York Times from a cache of files that appears to have come from a laptop abandoned by Mr. Biden in a Delaware repair shop. The email and others in the cache were authenticated by people familiar with them and with the investigation.”

You don’t say. This admission comes six months after a Politico writer published a book that also confirmed that the laptop emails were authentic. But the original scoop belonged to the New York Post, which broke its laptop story in October 2020—only to meet a media wall of denial and distortion.

Rather than attempt to confirm the emails, nearly all of the media at the time ignored the story or “fact-checked” it as false. This in-kind contribution to candidate Joe Biden was all the more egregious given other evidence supporting the Post’s scoop. Neither Hunter Biden nor the Biden campaign denied that the laptop was Hunter’s. And Hunter’s former business partner, Tony Bobulinski, went public with documents backing up some of the laptop’s contents.

The herd of media conformists also echoed the speculation of obviously partisan “intelligence officials.” Some 50 of these officials—headlined by former Obama spooks James Clapper and John Brennan —circulated a statement peddling the Russian “disinformation” line—even as they admitted they had no evidence.

This result was a blackout of the Hunter news, except in a few places, including these pages. Twitter blocked the Post’s account for nearly two weeks, and Facebook used algorithms to quash the story. This deprived voters of information they might have wanted to know before Election Day.

There’s more for our reborn media sleuths to investigate. Mr. Bobulinski provided these pages with documents showing Hunter was looking to use the Biden name to profit from a business deal with a Shanghai-based company with ties to the Chinese government.

One May 2017 “expectations” email from Hunter associate James Gilliar shows Hunter receiving 20% of the equity in the venture, with another “10 held by H for the big guy.” Mr. Bobulinski says the “big guy” is Joe Biden. To this day the Bidens have not had to explain their business arrangement.

The emails make clear that Hunter was cashing in on the Biden name, including as a board member of Burisma, a Ukrainian gas company. That influence-peddling was a potential political liability for Mr. Biden, which was why the facts deserved an airing before the election. They are still relevant, especially with U.S.-China relations so fraught.

The Times won a Pulitzer prize for pushing the Russia collusion narrative, which proved to be much ado about nothing. The New York Post deserves a Pulitzer, but it will probably have to settle for well-earned vindication.