Episode 135 - Fauci Takes the Fifth

Anthony "I Am the Science" Fauci took the Fifth 111 times in front of a Senate Committee. What are the possible outcomes?

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:12

Welcome to Careful Consideration of Our Common Concerns. I'm Dr. Ted Noel. Welcome back to the seminar. And please take your cups and join me in the simultaneous sip in honor of Scott Adams. Our issue today is Anthony Fauci, who took the Fifth Amendment 111 times in front of a Senate committee chaired by Rand Paul. Now, Rand Paul is a doctor, so he knows the issues involved in this, and we can look at it really quickly. It's very clear based on Fauci's own testimony in his diary on Fauci's receipts through the Eco Health Alliance and the University of North Carolina, that he paid the Wuhan Institute of Virology to create the COVID-19 virus. There is no doubt about it. He created it. And frankly, he caused the death of millions of people around the world. He is guilty as sin. But that is not a legal decision, that is a moral decision. Because he apparently has a pardon. And we'll talk about some things related to that. But here's the first part. Let's assume that pardon is valid. When he appeared in front of Congress, he was not permitted to take the fifth because the pardon already made sure that he would not be held liable for anything he did as a federal official. Which raises the question: does he think the auto pardon auto pen pardon is valid? We'll get back to that in a minute. And if he thinks it's valid, then the 1951 Supreme Court case of Hoffman v. US says that the Fifth Amendment protects against real dangers, does not protect against somebody doing things or revealing things that harms their reputation. It just doesn't do that. So at least on the federal level, he had no legal basis to take the Fifth Amendment. And this is magnified by the fact that he made an opening statement. If he was going to take the fifth, he should simply have appeared and been sworn in and then answer questions. By taking the fifth, he would say, I have a risk. It's not to my reputation, it's a criminal risk. And you have to ask, where in the world is there criminal risk if you've already been pardoned? Oh, yes. There may be an argument that there is a criminal risk because pardons from the president only affect federal crimes. And it appears that there may be some state-level crimes. For example, demanding that the state of Florida vaccinate people or the state of Indiana or whatever, that could be regarded as a state-level crime when he knew that those vaccinations would result in lots of deaths. And it could be argued that it was a financial crime because in doing this, he made money on the vaccines and on the remdesivir in the state of Florida. And I know Florida's pursuing this, it's a financial crimes pursuit in Florida. And it's likely that that's what it is in other places. So maybe he's got an excuse. This is one of those things that's going to get teased out in court. And one of the things that can happen is when he goes to trial on uh obstruction of Congress or contempt of Congress, excuse me, he may talk to the judge, and it'll be done in camera. Because this is a place where the judge will have to evaluate whether he has a legitimate claim for the Fifth Amendment. And in camera, the Fauci and his attorney will present the case that he stood to have state jeopardy. And that in fact left him vulnerable, and therefore the fifth applies. Or he could argue to the judge that that pardon was in fact not valid. But in either case, it would be just his side because they don't want to reveal to our side why he thinks he has a jeopardy, because that could leave our side to say, oh, let's go look over there, let's bring charges over there. You get the picture? The defense gets all of the tools in this. And we'll just have to see where that goes. That gets teased out. Now, the Fifth Amendment prevents you or protects you if you have compelled testimony that is actually testimonial. It has to bring facts that's self-incriminating, and it has to be done question by question. And the valid, it has to be a valid assertion. And like I said, that's what happens when they go into the courtroom. But there are several things in there. This could also be a conspiracy to commit murder. And Fauci could end up being called as a material witness, even if he has a valid pardon, because you have all of the FDA directors who approved it, the emergency use authorization. Remember, the emergency use authorization was only valid if there was no other proper treatment for COVID. And we already knew that ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine were highly effective at preventing people from needing to go to the hospital. That meant that there was an effective treatment and an emergency use authorization was improper. That means that the FDA could never issue an EUA. And so now you have all of those. Who did he talk to in the FDA to say, hey guys, let's get this going? What about the AMA that was in cahoots and promoted things and made it so that in California, for example, they passed a state law that if you said anything that the state had disapproved of in your medical treatment, you'd lose your medical license? And how many people lost their license, nursing licenses, and licenses to practice medicine because of that? You see, this is a massive conspiracy. How many state boards were co-opted by this? So, for example, when the Texas state board pulled a license of a physician at Fauci's insistence, that's a state-level crime. And oh, by the way, those people were following CDC advice, which was Fauci's advice. Oh, yes. You begin to see what's going on. And how about Deborah Burks? Anyone remember the Scarf Queen? Oh, yes. It turns out if you read uh Scott Atlas's book, A Plague Upon Her House, it was very clear that when he went into the task force meetings and presented studies that said this, this, and this will not work. They're bad ideas. And VP Pence kind of nodded and went, uh-huh, uh-huh. Then Deborah Burks was the one who stood up and said, No, we need to do this, absolutely contrary to all the data. And Pence said, Fine, we'll do it. Pence is a spineless. Well, never mind. But here's the key. Pence has no immunity in this and conceivably could be charged. Deborah Burks was never pardoned whether the pardon's valid or not. And so she can be charged for these things. This was a massive conspiracy, and we still see stuff of this going on. And when all is said and done, remember conspiracy does not have a statute of limitations unless you repudiate it. So, for example, Deborah Burks, if she repudiated it, then she would be starting a statute of limitations on her of five years. She hasn't done it. Fauci, because he's part of this bigger conspiracy that has continued after the pardon cutoff date, could be charged under that. So this gets messy as can be. Oh, and there is one other way to tackle this. How many people lost their positions in the military, in airline pilots, schools, whatever else, because of the COVID vaccine mandate that was pushed by Fauci? Every one of those has cause, and this is beautiful, they have cause to sue him personally, or a class action suit against him for deprivation of rights under color of law. That's 42 U.S. Code Section 1983. And guess what? If he dies while the trial is underway, his estate is at risk, which means it will freeze his estate and no one, none of his heirs can get it. So this is a big deal. There are ways to tackle this. So that's enough for today. Fauci, oh no, we got one more thing to cover. Sorry about that. Is his pardon valid? That is an open question. If you look at the flurry of pardons at the end of Biden's tenancy of the White House, exactly one of them has Biden's signature, and that's Hunter Biden's pardon. All of the rest are auto penned. And the question has to be: is there a paper trail that indicates that these were approved by Biden? I don't think there is. And if one were to try to pierce that veil, it shouldn't be too hard because Trump's in the White House and he probably should say it's time for scorched earth. All of these people are going down. Whether he will or not, different question. But he should. And Fauci is one of those who needs to go down. There's no other question about it. And we need to pursue that. Is it a valid pardon? There is evidence that that pardon actually came at the direction of Obama, not at Biden. So stay tuned. Until next time, the message is what matters. I'm Dr. Ted Noel.