This is the second part of the article “Congressional Report Validates COVID Conspiracy Theories” (Part 1) from January 15, which concluded that the Wuhan lab is the most likely origin of the COVID-19 virus.
Furthermore, it revealed that the federal government funded gain-of-function research and that Fauci not only knew about it but actively suppressed information to keep it hidden from the public.
This article will highlight the reality of coordinated censorship of opposing views, the ineffectiveness of vaccines in stopping the spread of the disease, and the lack of scientific support for mandates, which ultimately caused more harm than good—along with other measures such as lockdowns and school closures.
According to the congressional report, President Trump’s travel restrictions, implemented rapidly during the pandemic, saved lives and were supported by Dr. Fauci, contradicting the narrative that these measures were xenophobic.
However, public health officials frequently spread misinformation through conflicting messages and a lack of transparency, with the federal government unjustly demonizing off-label drug use and the lab leak theory.
The Biden Administration employed undemocratic methods, including pressuring social media companies to censor COVID-19 content it deemed misinformation.
While Operation Warp Speed successfully accelerated the development of the COVID-19 vaccine and saved millions of lives, the vaccine did not prevent the spread or transmission of the virus, as promised.
The FDA rushed vaccine approval to meet the Biden Administration’s mandate timeline, ignoring warnings from senior scientists about potential adverse effects.
Vaccine mandates, unsupported by science, caused harm by undermining individual freedoms, harming military readiness, and ignoring natural immunity from prior infections.
Furthermore, vaccine injury reporting systems created confusion and eroded public trust, while the government failed to efficiently and transparently adjudicate claims for those injured by the vaccine.
Other measures taken by the government, supported by Dr. Fauci, had widespread negative economic impacts on individuals, communities, businesses, healthcare providers, and local governments.
Mandatory lockdowns led to over 160,000 business closures, 60% of which were permanent, while supply chain disruptions worsened disparities for businesses that remained operational.
The healthcare system suffered from reduced quality of care, longer wait times, and missed diagnoses.
Unemployment rates soared to Great Depression-era levels, with low-wage sectors hit hardest by broad mitigation measures like the now-debunked “6 feet apart” guidance.
While the Federal Reserve’s swift actions helped prevent a severe economic downturn, its aggressive approach also fueled soaring inflation.
Prolonged COVID-19 school closures, which lacked scientific justification, caused significant societal harm.
Children, who were unlikely to contribute to the virus’s spread or face severe illness, suffered historic learning loss, increased psychological distress, and decreased physical well-being.
The Biden Administration’s CDC allowed political influence from the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), which edited school reopening guidance to include measures that prolonged closures unnecessarily.
AFT, a political union rather than a scientific organization, advocated for mitigation efforts like automatic closure triggers, further delaying reopenings. Testimony revealed AFT President Randi Weingarten had direct access to CDC Director Rochelle Walensky.
The long-term effects include decades of academic progress lost, mental health crises, and a 51% increase in suicide attempts among girls aged 12-17.
A CATO Institute report similarly highlighted that the long-term closure of schools during the COVID-19 pandemic caused significant harm to children academically, mentally, and physically, with little to no impact on reducing virus transmission or child mortality.
These closures were driven more by politics than science, influenced by powerful teachers unions and their ties to Democratic politicians.
Research from Michigan State University found that decisions on in-person education in 2020 were tied more to local political partisanship and union strength than to COVID-19 severity, despite early evidence showing children were at low risk for severe illness.
The American Federation of Teachers (AFT) successfully lobbied the CDC to include union-driven language in school reopening guidance.
Freedom of Information Act documents obtained by CATO confirmed the findings of the congressional report, namely that the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) successfully lobbied the CDC to include union-driven language in school reopening guidance.
Studies further demonstrated the consequences: districts with in-person learning experienced less academic loss, and remote learning disproportionately harmed older, minority, and low-income students.
The fallout from these decisions has led many families to shift to homeschooling and private education, with homeschooling rates doubling post-pandemic.
Even mainstream media outlets that supported lockdowns and other pandemic measures are now acknowledging the lack of scientific backing behind some public health guidance and the damage done to public trust in government health authorities.
The New York Times reported that during congressional hearings, top NIH officials, including Dr. Anthony Fauci, admitted that key aspects of early COVID-19 guidance were not based on solid science.
Fauci revealed that the six-foot social distancing rule “just sort of appeared” without supporting studies and acknowledged the virus is airborne, contradicting initial claims that it spread primarily through droplets.
According to the New York Times, officials not only promoted questionable guidance but also suppressed dissenting views, with some actively deleting emails to avoid public scrutiny.
Dr. David Morens of the NIH admitted to using his personal account to bypass oversight, writing that they avoided “smoking guns” and deleted sensitive emails.
This lack of transparency and accountability led to poor decision-making, such as closing beaches and parks unnecessarily, delaying school reopenings, and wasting millions on ineffective plexiglass barriers.
These failures, driven by obstinacy and arrogance, had significant negative impacts on Americans’ lives and undermined trust in public health leadership.
Over the past year, several diseases have been highlighted in news reports as potential sources of the next pandemic. Notably, the World Health Organization (WHO) has identified pathogens such as Ebola, Marburg, Nipah, and various coronaviruses as having significant pandemic potential.
Additionally, the emergence of a new, more virulent strain of the mpox virus (formerly known as monkeypox) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has raised concerns among health experts. Despite these concerns, none of these diseases have escalated to a global pandemic over the past year.
Because of the many lies and invasive rights violations during COVID, many people have lost trust in the NIH and CDC. The constant identification of “the next great” pandemic is increasingly falling on deaf ears. With each new cause for panic, skeptics claim victory as the previous one fails to materialize.
Host ALEX WAGNER: It says something as we look towards the broader landscape of the incoming Trump administration about the power of billionaires, right? It’s largely unchecked. This is what Dick Durbin had to say — he’s the outgoing chair of the Judiciary Committee — he says, “Whether failing to disclose lavish gifts or failing to recuse from cases with apparent conflicts of interest, it’s clear that the Justices are losing the trust of the American people at the hands of a gaggle of fawning billionaires.” I mean, you have Elon Musk in the executive branch, you have Harlan Crow in the judicial branch, you have untold billionaires working their way into the legislative branch. I mean, just give me your opinion on this sort of, I’m not going to call it, officially, ‘kleptocracy,’ but man, Melissa, this is deeply problematic on a number of levels when you looking at the amount of money and the outsized influence it could buy.
Slate’s MARK JOSEPH STERN: [Supreme Court Justice] Clarence Thomas has devoted his career to destroying campaign finance laws and granting billionaires a First Amendment right to purchase elections. Elon Musk, the richest man on the planet took advantage of those decisions to essentially buy Trump the presidency, to bail him out and to put Trump back in the White House. And because of Musk’s work now, [Justice Thomas’s wife] Ginny Thomas is going to have access to the Oval Office, Ginny Thomas is going to have meetings with Donald Trump, pushing her preferred policies, and there is no real chance that the President will approve of any kind of accountability for Clarence Thomas’s violation of the law. Come on! We know Trump is not going to approve court reform, he’s not going to impose a code of ethics, or sign one if Congress happens to pass it. His Attorney General is certainly not going to bring the civil or criminal penalties that could be on the table because of Thomas’s law-breaking here. And so it really seems like this coterie of billionaires and benefactors all sort of entrenching and reinforcing each other’s power and privilege. And if that isn’t an oligarchy, Katie, I’m really not sure what is.