FAUCI PARDON: NOT BULLETPROOF
On the Pardon: Before the hearing @SenRandPaul a former senior Justice Department prosecutor told me there are three, viable legal strategies to challenge the preemptive Bardon pardon.
Cautioned: There is no easy path.
One strategy calls for charging Fauci with a crime, with the expectation he would file a motion with the court to dismiss based on the pardon. This could open the door to challenging the sweeping pardon’s viability and years of litigation.
Another strategy involves Congress. Because Fauci has theoretically been preemptively pardoned against past and future criminal charges related to his NIH work, it can be argued that Fauci has no plausible claim to the 5th Amendment, the right against self-incrimination.
If Fauci takes the Fifth at Senator Paul’s hearing (which he has) the committee could seek to compel Fauci's testimony. A finding of contempt could follow.
Finally, one of Fauci’s closest associates has been criminally charged. With pressure and the right incentives he might be flipped and become a cooperating witness.
Dr. David Morens, who was a senior advisor to Fauci at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was indicted on multiple charges including conspiracy and obstruction, including destruction, alteration or falsification of federal records.
Along with allegations that personal email accounts were used to evade the Freedom of Information Act, this could be a powerful motivator.
From media reports: Dr. David Morens has pleaded not guilty to all five federal criminal counts.
NOTE: @SenRickScott has just raised the Morens case. Fauci continues to take the Fifth.
Consider subscribing to@C__Herridge. Your support makes our independent reporting possible.
On the Pardon: Before the hearing @SenRandPaul a former senior Justice Department prosecutor told me there are three, viable legal strategies to challenge the preemptive Bardon pardon.
Cautioned: There is no easy path.
One strategy calls for charging Fauci with a crime, with the expectation he would file a motion with the court to dismiss based on the pardon. This could open the door to challenging the sweeping pardon’s viability and years of litigation.
Another strategy involves Congress. Because Fauci has theoretically been preemptively pardoned against past and future criminal charges related to his NIH work, it can be argued that Fauci has no plausible claim to the 5th Amendment, the right against self-incrimination.
If Fauci takes the Fifth at Senator Paul’s hearing (which he has) the committee could seek to compel Fauci's testimony. A finding of contempt could follow.
Finally, one of Fauci’s closest associates has been criminally charged. With pressure and the right incentives he might be flipped and become a cooperating witness.
Dr. David Morens, who was a senior advisor to Fauci at the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, was indicted on multiple charges including conspiracy and obstruction, including destruction, alteration or falsification of federal records.
Along with allegations that personal email accounts were used to evade the Freedom of Information Act, this could be a powerful motivator.
From media reports: Dr. David Morens has pleaded not guilty to all five federal criminal counts.
NOTE: @SenRickScott has just raised the Morens case. Fauci continues to take the Fifth.
Consider subscribing to@C__Herridge. Your support makes our independent reporting possible.
❤17👍14👏3🥱3
Findings Regarding Dr. Anthony Fauci Money Payments during and after Covid.
Section 1: Systematic Award Solicitation & Staff MisuseThe text details how Dr. Fauci accumulated dozens of prestigious awards through a coordinated effort involving taxpayer-funded NIH/NIAID staff. Key officials, including the NIH’s then-#2 official, effectively acted as personal "awards managers," drafting nominations and handling ethics paperwork. Documents reveal Fauci actively solicited nominators in 2018, sometimes offering to provide all necessary materials himself, while some of these nominators later received funding from his institute.
Section 2: The Dan David Prize & Ethical ConflictA major point of contention is the ~$900,000 Dan David Prize awarded to Fauci in 2021 by an Israel-based foundation. The report estimates a "low probability" (15–30%) that this process was free of corruption or suspicious optics. The use of government resources to secure a massive personal cash prize from a foreign entity, while Fauci directed an institute funding global science, created significant appearances of self-dealing and conflict of interest.
Section 3: Pandemic Wealth & Highest-Paid StatusDuring the peak pandemic years (2019–2021), the Fauci household net worth surged by approximately $5 million, rising from $7.6 million to over $12.6 million. As the highest-paid federal employee, Fauci’s salary peaked near $480,000. While much of the growth came from investment appreciation and federal salaries, the timing of such significant wealth accumulation during a global crisis remains a focal point of public scrutiny.
Section 4: Record Pension & Post-Retirement Windfall. Following his retirement in late 2022, Fauci secured the largest federal pension in history, estimated at over $350,000–$415,000 annually. His post-NIH earnings include a reported $5 million memoir advance and over $3.5 million in household earnings in 2023 alone from speaking fees and other sources. This transition from a career civil servant to a multi-millionaire media figure highlights the lucrative nature of his post-government career.
Section 1: Systematic Award Solicitation & Staff MisuseThe text details how Dr. Fauci accumulated dozens of prestigious awards through a coordinated effort involving taxpayer-funded NIH/NIAID staff. Key officials, including the NIH’s then-#2 official, effectively acted as personal "awards managers," drafting nominations and handling ethics paperwork. Documents reveal Fauci actively solicited nominators in 2018, sometimes offering to provide all necessary materials himself, while some of these nominators later received funding from his institute.
Section 2: The Dan David Prize & Ethical ConflictA major point of contention is the ~$900,000 Dan David Prize awarded to Fauci in 2021 by an Israel-based foundation. The report estimates a "low probability" (15–30%) that this process was free of corruption or suspicious optics. The use of government resources to secure a massive personal cash prize from a foreign entity, while Fauci directed an institute funding global science, created significant appearances of self-dealing and conflict of interest.
Section 3: Pandemic Wealth & Highest-Paid StatusDuring the peak pandemic years (2019–2021), the Fauci household net worth surged by approximately $5 million, rising from $7.6 million to over $12.6 million. As the highest-paid federal employee, Fauci’s salary peaked near $480,000. While much of the growth came from investment appreciation and federal salaries, the timing of such significant wealth accumulation during a global crisis remains a focal point of public scrutiny.
Section 4: Record Pension & Post-Retirement Windfall. Following his retirement in late 2022, Fauci secured the largest federal pension in history, estimated at over $350,000–$415,000 annually. His post-NIH earnings include a reported $5 million memoir advance and over $3.5 million in household earnings in 2023 alone from speaking fees and other sources. This transition from a career civil servant to a multi-millionaire media figure highlights the lucrative nature of his post-government career.
🤬35❤6
Biden issued a full and unconditional preemptive pardon to Anthony Fauci on or about January 19, 2025—his final full day in office—covering any federal offenses related to Fauci’s official roles from January 1, 2014, through the date of the pardon. The DOJ published the warrant language matching the document you showed. It is not limited to COVID response actions; it explicitly reaches back more than six years before SARS-CoV-2 appeared. 🤔🤔
Why 2014?
That date is not arbitrary. It aligns precisely with two linked events:
The U.S. government pause on certain gain-of-function (GOF) research. On October 17, 2014, the Obama administration halted new federal funding for experiments that could reasonably be anticipated to make influenza, SARS, or MERS viruses more transmissible or pathogenic in mammals. The pause was driven by biosafety lapses at U.S. labs and concern over dual-use research of concern.
The start of NIAID-funded bat coronavirus work involving Wuhan. On June 1, 2014, NIAID (then directed by Fauci) awarded EcoHealth Alliance the multi-year grant R01AI110964, “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.” Project funding began that year. EcoHealth sub-awarded money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and Wuhan University. The work included collecting bat coronaviruses in China, sequencing them, constructing chimeric viruses (putting spike proteins from novel bat CoVs onto SARS-like backbones), and testing infectivity and pathogenicity—including in humanized mice.
Documents later obtained by Congress, The Intercept, and others showed that some of these experiments produced viruses that grew better or caused more severe disease in the animal models. Critics, including molecular biologist Richard Ebright and Sen. Rand Paul, argued this met the definition of GOF research covered by the 2014 pause. NIH and Fauci maintained it did not, claiming the work was molecular characterization or had been reviewed under existing frameworks and did not meet the precise “enhanced potential pandemic pathogen” criteria. Fauci testified under oath that NIH “has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research” at the WIV—a statement that has been repeatedly challenged with the grant documents and progress reports.
The pause remained in effect until December 2017. The EcoHealth/WIV collaboration continued through that period and was renewed. The Trump administration later suspended and then partially terminated the grant amid the pandemic and failure to produce laboratory notebooks from WIV.
Why 2014?
That date is not arbitrary. It aligns precisely with two linked events:
The U.S. government pause on certain gain-of-function (GOF) research. On October 17, 2014, the Obama administration halted new federal funding for experiments that could reasonably be anticipated to make influenza, SARS, or MERS viruses more transmissible or pathogenic in mammals. The pause was driven by biosafety lapses at U.S. labs and concern over dual-use research of concern.
The start of NIAID-funded bat coronavirus work involving Wuhan. On June 1, 2014, NIAID (then directed by Fauci) awarded EcoHealth Alliance the multi-year grant R01AI110964, “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence.” Project funding began that year. EcoHealth sub-awarded money to the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and Wuhan University. The work included collecting bat coronaviruses in China, sequencing them, constructing chimeric viruses (putting spike proteins from novel bat CoVs onto SARS-like backbones), and testing infectivity and pathogenicity—including in humanized mice.
Documents later obtained by Congress, The Intercept, and others showed that some of these experiments produced viruses that grew better or caused more severe disease in the animal models. Critics, including molecular biologist Richard Ebright and Sen. Rand Paul, argued this met the definition of GOF research covered by the 2014 pause. NIH and Fauci maintained it did not, claiming the work was molecular characterization or had been reviewed under existing frameworks and did not meet the precise “enhanced potential pandemic pathogen” criteria. Fauci testified under oath that NIH “has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research” at the WIV—a statement that has been repeatedly challenged with the grant documents and progress reports.
The pause remained in effect until December 2017. The EcoHealth/WIV collaboration continued through that period and was renewed. The Trump administration later suspended and then partially terminated the grant amid the pandemic and failure to produce laboratory notebooks from WIV.
😁11❤6
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
That’s the line.
That’s the line.
💯23🤬13💩9
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
If I had taken the vaccine, watching Dr. Fauci plead the Fifth on repeat would terrify me.
💯39💩13🔥6👍3
Block's Letter to the U.S. Senate (July 29, 2026)
On July 29, 2026, Block Inc. (founded by Jack Dorsey) sent a formal letter to the U.S. Senate urging the immediate passage of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (commonly known as the CLARITY Act).
Key Points of the Letter
1.Urgency of Action: Block emphasized that the Senate must act before the August 10, 2026, recess deadline. The letter describes this as a "pivotal moment" for U.S. crypto regulation.
2.Regulatory Certainty: The letter argues that the CLARITY Act provides the "needed balance" of clear rules to provide certainty for businesses while remaining flexible enough for future innovation.
3.Developer Protections: A major focus for Block is the inclusion of Section 604 (the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act), which provides safe harbors for developers and non-custodial service providers, ensuring they aren't regulated like traditional financial intermediaries.
4.U.S. Competitiveness: Block warned that without a clear federal framework, crypto innovation and talent will continue to migrate outside the United States.
5.Support for Bipartisan Compromise: The letter acknowledges the bill as a bipartisan effort that addresses key concerns including illicit finance and consumer protection.
Context: The CLARITY Act (H.R. 3633 / Senate Version)•Jurisdictional Clarity: Defines the boundaries between the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) and the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission).
•Stablecoin Framework: Establishes a federal regulatory regime for payment stablecoins.
•Ethics Title: A recently added provision (July 2026) that restricts public officials and their spouses from issuing digital assets, aimed at securing bipartisan support.
•Status: The bill cleared the Senate Banking Committee in May 2026 and is currently awaiting a full Senate vote.
On July 29, 2026, Block Inc. (founded by Jack Dorsey) sent a formal letter to the U.S. Senate urging the immediate passage of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (commonly known as the CLARITY Act).
Key Points of the Letter
1.Urgency of Action: Block emphasized that the Senate must act before the August 10, 2026, recess deadline. The letter describes this as a "pivotal moment" for U.S. crypto regulation.
2.Regulatory Certainty: The letter argues that the CLARITY Act provides the "needed balance" of clear rules to provide certainty for businesses while remaining flexible enough for future innovation.
3.Developer Protections: A major focus for Block is the inclusion of Section 604 (the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act), which provides safe harbors for developers and non-custodial service providers, ensuring they aren't regulated like traditional financial intermediaries.
4.U.S. Competitiveness: Block warned that without a clear federal framework, crypto innovation and talent will continue to migrate outside the United States.
5.Support for Bipartisan Compromise: The letter acknowledges the bill as a bipartisan effort that addresses key concerns including illicit finance and consumer protection.
Context: The CLARITY Act (H.R. 3633 / Senate Version)•Jurisdictional Clarity: Defines the boundaries between the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) and the CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission).
•Stablecoin Framework: Establishes a federal regulatory regime for payment stablecoins.
•Ethics Title: A recently added provision (July 2026) that restricts public officials and their spouses from issuing digital assets, aimed at securing bipartisan support.
•Status: The bill cleared the Senate Banking Committee in May 2026 and is currently awaiting a full Senate vote.
🔥12❤6👍1
The wealthiest 1% of US earners now own 50.1% of US equity and mutual fund holdings.
To put this into perspective, their ownership stood at 40.1% in 1990 and 39.6% in 2001.
At the same time, the next 9% wealthiest households own 37.3%, and the middle 40% own just 11.7%.
By comparison, the bottom 50.0% of earners hold just 1.1%.
As a result, the top 10% of earners now own ~87.4% of all equity and mutual fund assets.
Asset owners are the only winners in this economy.
To put this into perspective, their ownership stood at 40.1% in 1990 and 39.6% in 2001.
At the same time, the next 9% wealthiest households own 37.3%, and the middle 40% own just 11.7%.
By comparison, the bottom 50.0% of earners hold just 1.1%.
As a result, the top 10% of earners now own ~87.4% of all equity and mutual fund assets.
Asset owners are the only winners in this economy.
👍11🤯2❤1
It is an order-of-magnitude illustration using the assumptions from the previous analysis: the bottom 90% receive the full tax relief, save/invest ~20% of the extra disposable income into equities over time, and the absolute dollar gain is still modest relative to the existing stock of assets already held by the top.
👍5❤1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
🚨 A New Payment System Will Launch In The United States of America.
David Sacs said it openly in front of President Trump.
And guess what?
President Trump said that they will rewire the entire banking and financial system with blockchain technology.
Guess who also said that exact phrase before President Trump? Brad Garlinghouse and David Schwartz.
They’ve been hinting at mass adoption for XRP and RLUSD!
David Sacs said it openly in front of President Trump.
And guess what?
President Trump said that they will rewire the entire banking and financial system with blockchain technology.
Guess who also said that exact phrase before President Trump? Brad Garlinghouse and David Schwartz.
They’ve been hinting at mass adoption for XRP and RLUSD!
🔥35👏8💯6👍1
"Obama granted Bill Gates top secret Q clearance at Energy Department, DailyCaller reports.
Department of Energy "Q" top secret clearance "typically applies to positions involving nuclear weapons design, national laboratories, critical energy infrastructure and classified scientific research," as per National Security Law Firm."
What a Q Clearance Actually Is?
Q clearance is the Department of Energy’s highest-level access authorization. It is the functional equivalent of a Top Secret clearance for nuclear-related information. Specifically, it authorizes access (on a need-to-know basis) to:
Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data under the Atomic Energy Act — the most sensitive category covering nuclear weapons design, manufacture, utilization, and related materials.
Classified nuclear energy technology, national laboratory work, special nuclear material, and critical energy infrastructure information.
Department of Energy "Q" top secret clearance "typically applies to positions involving nuclear weapons design, national laboratories, critical energy infrastructure and classified scientific research," as per National Security Law Firm."
What a Q Clearance Actually Is?
Q clearance is the Department of Energy’s highest-level access authorization. It is the functional equivalent of a Top Secret clearance for nuclear-related information. Specifically, it authorizes access (on a need-to-know basis) to:
Restricted Data and Formerly Restricted Data under the Atomic Energy Act — the most sensitive category covering nuclear weapons design, manufacture, utilization, and related materials.
Classified nuclear energy technology, national laboratory work, special nuclear material, and critical energy infrastructure information.
🔥19❤12🤬8😱2