SENATOR RAND PAUL, AND THE RENEWED CRIMINAL REFERRAL OF ANTHONY FAUCI

 “The Renewed Criminal Referral of Anthony Fauci”, and to begin with, ever since the COVID-19 pandemic broke out worldwide in early 2020, Anthony Fauci has been at the center of it. Well, it has been about 5 years later now and no one has been held accountable. In light of this, Senator Rand Paul has said it has been Fauci who must be held accountable; in fact, Senator Rand Paul insisted that the evidence pointed to COVID-19 originating at a laboratory in Wuhan, China, where gain-of-function research was happening – and that it all pointed to Fauci.

But, now there is a vested interest in pursuing criminal action against Fauci, and it this becomes more apparent as Senator Rand Paul renewed his criminal referral of Dr Anthony Fauci to the Department of Justice on Tuesday, accusing the former NIH director of orchestrating a cover-up related to NIH-funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology that allegedly contributed to 18 million global COVID-19 deaths. Paul cited Freedom of Information Act emails showing Fauci’s awareness of the research despite his congressional testimony denying NIH involvement, along with allegations of record destruction and perjury. This follows Paul’s prior referrals in 2023 and 2025, amid ongoing debates over the pandemic’s origins and potential preemptive pardon by President Biden.

In addition, Fauci has been accused by some of overreach and has faced calls for LEGAL accountability. Of course, this has been a subject of interest for many, especially those who experienced significant harm and loss as a result of the made-up covid responses and even the COVID jabs and boosters.

And so, we have to have a detailed discussion on what legal accountability would entail and explicitly establish that Fauci has in fact committed a crime. In light of this, a crime is generally understood as being a deliberate act that causes physical or psychological harm, damage to or loss of property, and is against the law. Different nations may have aspects of the law that are unique to their relative context, but when it comes to criminal law – this is typically standard across different jurisdictions. And so, what is key to establish for the purpose of our discussion, and also in light of the criminal referral of Anthony Fauci, is Fauci’s culpability in committing unlawful conduct. In addition, there must be a causal link between the unlawful conduct and the resulting consequence or harm to the (literal) millions of people in the US and the world at large. But, before we proceed, here is what Senator Rand Paul had to say concerning the rationale behind the renewed criminal referral.

WHY THE CRIMINAL REFERRAL OF ANTHONY FAUCI WAS INITIATED TO BEGIN WITH

But, while we speak of the renewed criminal referral of Anthony Fauci, it is worth noting why this criminal referral was initiated to begin with. In essence, Senator Rand Paul long pointed to an email from February 2020 in which Fauci detailed a call with British medical researcher Jeremy Farrar, who was director of the Wellcome Trust at the time. According to Fauci, those on the task force call, including Francis Collins, former director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, and other “highly credible” scientists with expertise in evolutionary biology, expressed concern about the “fact upon viewing the sequences of several isolates of the nCoV, there were mutations in the virus that would be most unusual to have evolved naturally in the bats and that there was a suspicion that this mutation was intentionally inserted.”

“The suspicion was heightened by the fact that scientists in Wuhan University are known to have been working on gain-of-function experiments to determine the molecular mechanisms associated with bat viruses adapting to human infection, and the outbreak originated in Wuhan.

DID FAUCI COMMIT UNLAWFUL CONDUCT RELATING TO THE COVID VIRUS AND PLANDEMIC RESPONSE?

And so, let’s begin by asking whether Fauci committed unlawful conduct (1) first, while leading the NIAID, (2) second, in his role in the plandemic response that was coerced on states and nations, and (3) thirdly even possibly with respect to the creation and leak of the virus itself. Well, right of the bat, it certainly appears so because in July 2024, the US District Attorneys began working together to criminally charge ANTHONY FAUCI with racketeering, collusion in creating the Wuhan virus and premeditated murder of thousands via Remdesivir and the Covid jabs.

Frankly, we could stop here – because this fairly establishes Fauci’s culpability in both the creation of the COVID virus, and the plandemic response; including the interventions used, being Remdesivir and the Covid jabs – all pointing to unlawful conduct. But, this is not even the gist or end of Fauci’s unlawful conduct. Back in the month of May, Lawrence Tabak, the Principal Deputy Director of the NIH, confirmed that Anthony Fauci committed a federal crime by providing false testimony to Congress under oath. Under US Code Title 18 and section 1001, it is a federal crime to knowingly and willfully make false statements to Congress. The penalties for such an offense can include up to five years in prison.

Then there is the abuse of children. In particular, Fauci used children as guinea pigs for so-called medical interventions. Fauci made sure that none of those children had guardians, which is illegal, and then he hid what he was doing to his board. In addition to all of this, Fauci was also disposing of the corpses of these children who died in illegal experiments.

ASSESSING FAUCI’S MALICIOUS INTENT TO HARM THROUGH COVID PROTOCOLS

Having established Fauci’s unlawful conduct, we then also have to assess whether Fauci acted maliciously to cause harm. For clarity, malicious intent is the intentional desire to cause harm, damage, or injury to someone or something. It is the kind of misconduct that is NOT due to, say, laziness or ignorance, but rather it is a conscious decision to act in a harmful way. Well, with respect to this, not only did Fauci act with malicious intent to cause harm, but he has even done this before in relation to a different case.

First, the proof of Fauci’s malicious intent to cause harm is found in his intentional distortion of information and scientific fact, especially seen in the plandemic responses – including the claimed safety and efficacy of the COVID jabs. In fact, even he conceded that it was mostly guess work or discussions he does not recall, and yet, they formed mandates on their guesses, and subjected society to them.

Secondly, Fauci’s malicious intent is also seen with his dismissive attitude towards the inalienable freedom of choice and the bodily autonomy of people. In particular, he intentionally contributed to a plandemic response that would make vaccine mandates inescapable, thus robbing individuals of the ability to make an informed choice on whether to take the vaccine, while some (among those who did not take it) lost their jobs and livelihoods. This binary outcome where you either take the jab or lose access to basic necessities, or institutions in society was intentionally curated with malice, as you’re about to hear Fauci express. And this resurfaced during a House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus hearing, in which Representative Dr Rich McCormick, being a medical doctor himself, questioned Fauci on him making it difficult for people to live their lives in dignity, and robbing them of the ability to make informed healthcare decisions.

BUT, as alluded to, Fauci has also done this prior; that is to say, he has previously acted with malicious intent to cause harm before! In particular, this relates to the drug AZT. Clinically called Zidovudine, but nicknamed AZT after its components, the drug was said to have shown a dramatic effect on the survival of AIDS patients. But there were tremendous concerns about the new drug. It had actually been developed a quarter of a century earlier as a cancer chemotherapy, but was shelved and forgotten because it was so toxic, very expensive to produce, and totally ineffective against cancer. It was said to be powerful, but unspecific, meaning that the drug was not selective in its cell destruction. Well, Fauci pushed AZT, and it killed an estimated 330,000 people. AND, When doctors found effective treatments as a much safer and plausible alternative, Fauci proceeded to silence them – REFUSING to test those alternatives. All of this is to say that Fauci is not new to the unlawful conduct of maliciously harming people, while instituting measures to silence others.

DID FAUCI BENEFIT FROM THE COVID RESPONSES AT THE EXPENSE OF OTHERS

But, then following this, additional evidence of culpability and malicious intent is found in how Fauci benefited financially from the curated and made-up Covid response at the expense of others. According to RFK Jr, not only does the NIH get the royalty [from the Moderna injection], but the individuals who work for Anthony Fauci, they each get what they call patent margin rights. So they’re gonna collect royalties – around $150,000 a year forever, potentially, from those vaccines. [PAUSE] This reveals that the COVID response was a coordinated effort, for which he knew the likely outcome, hence he was able to profit from it.

Furthermore, in his 492-page book, Robert F. Kennedy reveals how Fauci committed a crime against humanity. In particular, as NIAID Director, Fauci controlled $6.1 billion in annual research funding. NIAID’s funds are expected to improve American health, as well as to eliminate viral allergic illnesses and autoimmune diseases. However, under Fauci’s watch, the chronic disease crisis has become worse. The turning point came in 2000. In Gates’ $127 million mansion, him and Fauci forged an alliance. Their goal was a vaccine empire with unlimited expansion potential. Gates called it “philanthropic capitalism” (which you would have heard him speak about). But, what this meant is that public health became their vehicle for diabolical plans, while profit became their engine.

EVEN IF FAUCI CLAIMS DENIABILITY, HE STILL ENGAGED IN CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE

Assuming that Fauci would attempt to claim deniability, it would also be possible to show that he engaged in a crime of omission through negligence – based on his words. So, Fauci knows that COVID was not a naturally forming virus, and that it was leaked in the lab in Wuhan – because the US worked with China on that virus and leak. However, in private communication, Fauci would merely concede that the COVID virus does not seem natural, BUT, he proceeded to commission the publishing of the ‘Proximal Origins’ letter (which you’d recall from our previous discussions), and this letter, which was published in the journal Nature Medicine on 17 March 2020, was written by a group of virologists including Kristian G. Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin, Edward C. Holmes and Robert Garry. The authors examined possibilities of an accidental leak of a natural or manipulated virus from a laboratory, and (very deceptively) concluded that genomic analyses indicated that “SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.”. So, Fauci’s crime of omission here was not investigating his suspicions as a person curating a pandemic response! He is therefore responsible for silencing critical discourse in 2020 on the origins of COVID.

ACCOUNTABILITY AS THE RESULT OF THE PRAYERS OF THE CHURCH

All of this is to say that there was a lot of planning that went into the COVID hoax, with premeditated outcomes – thus making it easy to establish Fauci’s criminal liability. HOWEVER, if they had it their way, this would not even be a conversation – because they wanted absolute control over people and a monopoly on truth. BUT, they did not plan for the Church of Jesus Christ!

In fact, you’d recall that Anthony Fauci came to Washington even on January 8th last year to answer questions on how he flipped his position on public policy for masks, how the agency he headed funded risky research in China, and how post-infection immunity was downplayed – especially as a chief architect of the US’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. He was behind closed doors for two days of questioning from the US House of Representatives Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. And this was the first time he answered questions under oath since November 2022. Members of the panel asked Fauci about how he flipped positions on mask policy, seeing that he started from the position that masks wouldn’t work to curb transmission of COVID-19, according to emails he sent in early 2020, to then being an ardent supporter of not only wearing masks but mandating masks. Last year, he was also confronted by Senator Rand Paul in a committee hearing about statements he made concerning natural immunity; and this next clip is from the committee hearing in 2022.

ANTHONY FAUCI MIGHT JUST LOSE HIS AUTOPEN IMMUNITY

Then finally, while we are having these discussions, a key part of accelerating the vaccine reckoning is ensuring that the relevant stakeholders do not hide behind legal loopholes. Which brings us to an interesting development where effects are actually being made to ensure that Anthony Fauci is held accountable despite the weird autism immunity from former US president Joe Biden.

Unpacking the revelations from the documentary titled Food Deception: The Global Poisoning Plot, and to begin with, right at the beginning of the documentary, an important fact is communicated, which is that in the last 50 plus years, how or what people eat has significantly changed. And this is a crucial reflection point, which necessitates that we ask the question, on what through this change about?

Well, first, we can note this change in light of the shift towards a higher consumption of ultra-processed foods. So, the term ‘ultra-processed food’ emerged in the 1980s, mostly used in reference to highly-processed convenience foods and snacks, often energy-dense, poor in nutrients, and inclusive of various synthetic additives such as emulsifiers, colours, artificial sweeteners, and flavor enhancers. Concern over such foods was part of the growing holistic and environmental health movements of the 1970–80s; yet, those who raised alarm about the encroachment of ultra-processed foods were often labeled, especially by industry and their powerful allies, as ‘food faddists’ and ‘pseudoscientists’.

Nevertheless, for decades, there was a significant amount of determined advocacy against ultra-processed foods, backed with clinical work, much of it by pioneers within the holistic medicine (now integrative, functional, and lifestyle medicine) movement. For instance, by the early 1970s, the topic of highly-processed foods finally became the subject of intense scientific and public debate. Included in this debate were a small but growing number of physicians and allied health professionals who promoted holistic medicine, an important part of which was dietary advice to limit highly-processed foods. When nutritional medicine pioneer Dr. Jeffrey Bland began lecturing on ‘food as medicine’ in the 1970s, he advocated for the removal of highly-processed foods (donuts, soda, and the like) during conference breaks, replacing them with whole fruits, nuts, and minimally processed items.

But, certainly the entrance and prevalence of ultra-processed foods did not occur on its own. In fact, it turns out that it was brought about by an industry that had little to do with food – being the cigarette industry – so much so that in the 90’s, the two largest food companies in the world were RJ Reynolds and Phillip Morris (which are both cigarette companies. And happened because, when the Surgeon General of the US announced during this same period that cigarettes were problematic (which was obviously going to hinder the profits of cigarette companies), well, cigarette companies used their profits to buy entire sections of Food Companies.

In fact, the two biggest Mergers and Acquisitions deals in world history up until the 90’s were the Cigarette Companies buying food companies. These 2 cigarette companies (being  RJ Reynolds and Phillip Morris) shifted their thousands of scientists from making cigarettes addictive to focusing on making food addictive. The Cigarette Industry further shifted all of their lobbying to lobbying for food… and created the horrible Food Pyramid where carbs and sugar were the base of the Pyramid. The Food industry then paid off the FDA, USDA, Harvard to create reports that sugar isn’t a cause of obesity. This is why America significantly shifted their diets to ultra high processed foods.

So, evidently, the nature of food eaten has changed from non-processed to ultra-processed foods, and this is because of the deliberate efforts of food corporations, and even non-food corporations – which is to say that there is a way on food and nutrition. Well, this necessitates that we question who else is involved in this plot, and what structures exist to hold them all accountable.

MANY FOOD CORPORATIONS KNOW THEIR PRODUCTS ARE HARMFUL TO CONSUMERS

Well, for one, a lot of the food corporations in the status quo are among the culprits in the war on food and nutrition. In fact, food corporations have known for a long time that they were harming people with high levels of sugar in their foods. For instance, in the year 1999, a group of men who controlled America’s largest food companies attended a meeting in the Minneapolis headquarters of Pillsbury. In attendance were CEOs and presidents from Nestle, Kraft and Nabisco, General Mills and Procter & Gamble, Coca-Cola and Mars. The agenda was the emerging obesity epidemic and how to deal with it. These men were in constant battle with each other over what they called “stomach share” – the amount of consumers that any one company’s brand could take away from their competition.

Pillsbury’s chief technical officer ran the meeting. His intent was to get these men to agree that they had gone too far in creating and marketing products that posed the greatest health concerns–foods laden with sugar, salt and fat. He and others wanted these food giants to agree to be part of the solution, not the problem, by reformulating their foods to make them healthier. But, by looking at today’s obesity epidemic it is quite clear that the food companies did not agree, and only proceeded to fuel the problem further.

HOW LOBBYING PRACTICES HAVE CORRUPTED FOOD REGULATION

However, it is not the people over at the 1999 meeting in the Minneapolis headquarters of Pillsbury that learned to corrupt the vices of dissenters, regulators and credible science, because lobbying has become a highly weaponised tool from food corporations, and many diabolical corporations alike.

For instance, have you ever noticed how cheese is practically everywhere and in almost everything? Pizza crusts are stuffed with it. Salads are sprinkled with it. Burgers are smothered in it. Even vegetables, supposedly the healthy part of a meal, are often drowned in melted cheese sauce. Well, this is NOT an accident. It’s the result of decades of manipulation by one of the most quietly powerful food lobbies in the United States: being the dairy industry. And before we proceed, I certainly am aware that dairy can be among the healthier food groups, but make no mistake – this should not be a blanket assumption, being that cheese is either processed or ultra-processed, and pasteurised milk is not as healthy as it is marketed to be in comparison to the often unjustly vilified raw milk. And so, in essence, behind the dairy industry as well is a cartel-like structure of trade groups, marketing boards, and government partnerships that have worked together to artificially inflate the place of cheese and dairy in the human diet.

Let’s look at the US as a case study. The roots of America’s dairy dominance go back to World War I and II. During wartime, the government encouraged farmers to ramp up dairy production to feed troops overseas and keep the home front nourished. Milk, butter, and cheese were essentials. But when the wars ended, production didn’t stop. Farmers had built massive infrastructure to deliver milk in quantities that no longer matched demand.

Instead of scaling back, the US government stepped in. Federal price supports and subsidy programs propped up the dairy sector, buying up excess milk and converting it into shelf-stable products like cheese, powdered milk, and butter. These items were cheap to store and even cheaper to push. And so, over time, cheese went from being a relatively healthy food to a storage solution! And then, they got creative. In the 1980s, the USDA began working directly with fast food companies to (quote-unquote “solve” the surplus problem. One of the biggest partnerships was with Pizza Hut. With government assistance, they created the “cheese-stuffed crust pizza” to push more dairy.

By the way, pizza hut was NOT the only one. Domino’s pizza partnered with Dairy Management Inc. (a USDA-funded front group) to launch a new pizza with 40% more cheese. Taco Bell’s cheesy menu items were developed with the same organization’s help. Even McDonald’s began tweaking its menu to boost cheese consumption. And so, just like that, public health policy was working against public health!

Now, if this sounds like a conspiracy, it is likely because it practically is—only it’s all legal, tax-funded, and publicly documented. Here’s how it works: Dairy Management Inc is a marketing organisation funded by mandatory fees (checkoff programs) on dairy farmers. Dairy Management Inc also works in partnership with the USDA, meaning the same government that’s supposed to be promoting healthy eating is also helping the dairy industry sell more products. Then, between 1995 and 2023, the US provided over $50 billion in direct subsidies to the dairy industry, even though demand for liquid milk has been dropping for decades. All meaning that companies, regulators and government departments have all colluded in a corporatism plot, which prioritised private profit that is supported by public spending and shielded from normal market consequences. But, by the way Canada also has its own version of the dairy cartel that is currently colluding with the government to enforce a dairy production quota system that is detrimental to small farmers, as it is only the big dairy corporations that can afford them.

WHAT ARE THE RAMIFICATIONS OF THE SHIFT TOWARDS ULTRA-PROCESSED?

Now, one of the things we have to understand about the current predicament with regards to health is that however bad the effects of, say, phthalates or PFAS are on their own, things become so much worse in combination. This is considering that lab studies generally try to pinpoint the effects of individual chemicals, but the truth is that, out there in the real world, no-one is just exposed to one chemical. Instead, they’re exposed to dozens, maybe hundreds at a time.

The combination of particular substances is likely to result in enhanced negative effects or even new effects, as this study (which I’ve never seen anybody discuss) reveals. The common food emulsifier glycerin monostearate, which is readily found in processed food, significantly enhances the hormone-disrupting effects of phthalates, leading to increased testosterone decline and increased testicular damage in rats.

Similarly, Nitrosamines in processed meats can cause DNA alkylation damage leading to double-strand breaks (or DSBs). Acrylamide in fried foods also generates what is called Reactive Oxygen Species (or ROS), which is a neurotoxin. And so, the short-term takeaway is that eating processed food – which contains untold chemical additives – is probably one of the worst things you can do in a context where food corporations are pushing estrogenic and obesogenic substances. If you haven’t already, you would kindly need to consider stopping to eating processed and ultra-processed food, opting instead for whole foods.

THE PROBLEM WITH FLUORIDATED MILK

Now, a warning about fluoridated milk was re-echoed in the documentary Food Deception: The Global Poisoning Plot, specifically in light of how many milk brands contain fluoride, and how this has health ramifications for children. Now, Fluoride is a naturally occurring mineral found in rocks, soil, and water. It’s a form of fluorine, a chemical element, and it exists in small amounts in plants, animals, and even our bodies. BUT, on average, the human body contains about 2,600 mg of fluoride, mostly stored in bones and teeth, which is far more than what is naturally acceptable; in other words, it is far more than what people would be exposed to if they only interacted with in the small, naturally occurring amounts found in plants, soil and water.

Well, while fluoride is promoted for preventing cavities, the levels that people are exposed to through specifically tap water, toothpaste, and processed foods are unnaturally high, and that’s where the trouble begins. But, in addition, fluoride is NOT a harmless nutrient like vitamin C or magnesium. It’s a toxin that can wreck your body when you get too much of it. Unlike other minerals, your body struggles to excrete fluoride, so it builds up in your bones, teeth, organs, and even your brain over time. And this accumulation can even lead to a range of health issues, many of which you might not immediately connect to fluoride.

Here is why this is concerning: Studies have linked high fluoride exposure to cognitive problems, including reduced IQ in children and brain fog in adults. Fluoride can cross the blood-brain barrier, potentially disrupting neurological function and contributing to memory issues or difficulty concentrating. But, as troubling as it is for adults, it is especially alarming for children, whose developing brains are more vulnerable. Research from places like China and India, where fluoride levels in water are naturally high, shows a clear connection between fluoride exposure and lower cognitive performance.

Then, in addition, there is also the problem of mineral displacement. More specifically, fluoride displaces iodine, which your thyroid needs to regulate metabolism, energy, and hormones. This can, in turn, lead to hypothyroidism, leaving you feeling sluggish, gaining weight, or just not strong in your body. It also competes with calcium and magnesium, essential for strong bones and muscles, potentially weakening bones and causing joint pain – and so, ironically, fluoride weakens bones that strengthen them. And so, considering that milk is a staple in the diets of billions, the fluoridation of milk – just like the fluoridation of water – makes many susceptible to health risk if they do not know these facts.

GOT RAW MILK? THE WAR ON A CRUCIAL DAIRY SOURCE

During the Biden-Harris administration, small farms and companies were being mandated by the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development to destroy all of their raw dairy products after receiving a cease and desist order from the state – primarily because of raw milk. So, why was there this effort to target raw milk, which is non pasteurised and non-fluoridated. Well, first, raw milk proprietors tend to be small operations with limited political clout who giant agricultural interests see as competition they would like to wipe – much like Monsanto does with smaller farmers. Second, raw milk is actually full of beneficial bacteria that get wiped out during pasteurisation. But, of course, a government susceptible to a diabolical agenda to depopulate the world will try to stamp out what is good and healthy for people to consume by whatever means available to them – this is part of the reason farmers are being asked to destroy organic crops and use GMO seeds.

Written By Lindokuhle Mabaso