An In-Depth Investigative Commentary

Ethical Move to Save Dr. Anthony Fauci from Complete Personal PR Disaster
is to Acknowledge Questionable Funding,
and to Strive Towards 'Defensive-Only' Laboratory Virus Experimentation
Could Also Help Bill Gates Win Nobel Prize

According to an April 25, 2020 Washington Examiner article by Madison Dibble, the United States “'Paid for the damn virus that’s killing us'.” This is an allegation that disturbs many of us, especially if it is correct, even if however tangentially so. And, the allegation should also promote action BEYOND accusations.

When you click the link and read the article above, you will probably have many of the same questions that Rudy Giuliani had. Especially since many of his questions regarding the Wuhan Laboratory itself and the ethics of the Obama Administration approving $3.7 million to the lab and related entities. [Of course, by way of proper disclosure, $700,000 of that grant was administrated under the Trump administration.] By the way, you can hear Giuliani discuss this in an interview on the relatively obscure Cat's Roundtable that came out the day after this story hit:

Granted to some, $3.8 Million might not be an entirely tremendous amount of money – people, especially like Bill Gates, but more about HIM later.

Ethically, however, you've got to wonder WHY the United States chose to assist in such experimental investigations. And, logically, you'd have to wonder if the United States had been expecting the possibility of getting hit by such a virus in the future? And, there's also the broader question of WHY does such research even 'have' to continue, especially if the chance of nature-to-human drift is expected to be so likely limited according to conventional science.

But there are other more pragmatic questions which need to be asked. Why are we giving such a large chunk of change to a research facility that has ”a checkered safety record” and “draws scrutiny” (VOA News, April 21, 2020, John Zie), and has ”safety issues,” (Business Insider, April 15, 20202, Grace Panetta)?

And why are we allowing possibilities of accidental lab release of Covid-19 to be so easily dismissed (Independent Science News, May 5, 2020, Sam Husseini) if we are giving such a LARGE amount of research money to such a QUESTIONABLE facility?

In fact, on April 27, 2020, a Washington Times article by Cheryl K. Chumley made specific note of the apparent and questionable financial ties of Fauci and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in an article called, ”Anthony Fauci should explain '$3.7 million to the Wuhan laboratory'.”

However, the problem is not just that two American presidential administrations allowing such money to be spent on a 'checkered' venue without asking the more questions. The even greater problem is that we have allowed Dr. Fauci to hide behind his expertise and evade the PROPER questions, at least until President Trump has tried to egg him onto doing better things.

Interestingly enough, a look through the internet seems to show a reluctant relating of stories of how, on one hand, Anthony Fauci is such a GREAT communicator, in that he is using a variety of media-types to get out his cautiously expert recommendations. However, he IS demonstrably at risk of becoming perceived as 'too cautious,' and an uncomfortable political (and financial) downer, instead of a media darling (, Nancy Zanona, May 5, 2020), and ”Why Trump's media allies are turning against Fauci amid the pandemic” (The Guardian, April 7, 2020, Jason Wilson).

Fauci may be more than just a bit of a media-hog, but his increasingly TIRESOMEA and tremendously TEDIOUS message has not been made palatable enough for the masses to readily embrace and entirely act upon in a completely positive manner. That much should be obvious to anyone wondering WHY such a learned man is getting such push-back to his seemingly hopeless messages. Even his pleasantly formal, scarfed colleague, Dr. Deborah Brix has – until recently – had her medical messages easily perceived as being more easily consumed and better tolerated. But, what of 'that other guy' who's been funding vaccines – Bill Gates? Isn't he another potential problem? He was.

But, Gates has GOT to change the almost farcical narrative AWAY from the perception that he is somehow managing to put microchips into each dose, so that he can somehow control everyone, and therefore control the world.

He already does that...legally, ethically, and quite successfully with a company called Microsoft.

Ideally, if Bill Gates wants to maximize the positive goodwill being financed by his and his wife's charitable foundation, he should instead consider motivating world governments to accept a position in which virus experimentation can only continue with a 'Defensive-Only' stance. As we have found out with Covid-19, diseases do not respect borders. Perhaps Gates could even win a Nobel Prize for such a laudable effort aimed at saving humanity from itself.

And, if Gates could also manage to motivate Dr. Anthony Fauci to be more ethical, and yet very much 'NICER,' especially with regards to giving some more hopeful news occasionally, THAT would deserve the biggest award of all!