Forum

🚨COVID COVER UP🚨

I'm digging through the declassified gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab documents released by Tulsi Gabbard.

The one thing that quickly stands out is the intelligences community fear over the Wuhan lab leak report.

They seem to be very worried about… pic.twitter.com/0Cqv5Jq4gh

— Breanna Morello (@BreannaMorello) June 19, 2026

🚨Lies. Disinformation. Censorship. That was Fauci's playbook.

On her final day as DNI, @TulsiGabbard is executing POTUS’ priorities and taking on the Deep State, delivering on @HawleyMO’s COVID Origins Act of 2023 and exposing the truth the American people were denied under… https://t.co/347CniOFJW

— Office of the DNI (@ODNIgov) June 19, 2026

There’s another thing I’ve written and spoken about that Dr Fauci didn’t tell the truth about but nobody else flagged.
As he was going on comedy shows and testifying to Congress early on that Covid was “ten times deadlier than flu,” he actually co-published a scientific… https://t.co/bEXT2tWQSd

— Sharyl Attkisson 🕵️‍♂️💼🥋 (@SharylAttkisson) June 19, 2026

Sharyl Attkisson

As he was going on comedy shows and testifying to Congress early on that Covid was “ten times deadlier than flu,” he actually co-published a scientific paper stating the opposite: Covid was about like a bad flu season.
At the time, I called his office for an interview — and although he was never shy, he wouldn’t agree to an interview with me.
I then asked his office to explain which of his statements was correct. One or the other had to be false, by definition.
Fauci’s office declined to answer.

Larry Sanger - IA Claude's Analysis

Tulsi Gabbard just released four PDFs that, she says, show that Fauci funded the very research that created COVID-19.

I fed Claude the four PDFs. 🧵 It uncovered some never-yet-revealed blockbusters.

(The following is all Claude—I am just quoting it.)

1. The IC Inspector General Filed a Classified Whistleblower Complaint Alleging Intelligence Contradicted Fauci's Testimony — and the DNI's Office Effectively Buried It.
DNI General Counsel Chris Fonzone emailed DNI Avril Haines on August 19, 2021, describing a whistleblower complaint alleging that classified intelligence reporting contradicted Fauci's sworn testimony to Congress that NIH never funded gain-of-function research at WIV. Rather than refer it to the HHS Inspector General for independent investigation, Fonzone recommended referring it to HHS Secretary Becerra — Fauci's own boss — noting that Becerra had told Haines it was "something they've considered" and that Fauci had a "point he's repeated." The draft letter was revised to route the complaint to Becerra instead of the HHS IG. This is a previously classified paper trail showing the Biden-era DNI's office treating a formal whistleblower complaint about potential perjury as essentially a bureaucratic matter to be absorbed by the accused's own department.

2. FBI Likely Gave False Information to Congress About a Key COVID-Origins Interview.
In a classified September 2024 readout of an HPSCI briefing, the ODNI lead briefer flagged that when Rep. Wenstrup asked the FBI briefer point-blank whether they had interviewed a specific individual about COVID origins, the FBI rep said yes, and that the information informed FBI's assessment. The ODNI briefer's internal email states bluntly that the IC's own records show this individual was not interviewed by FBI until late June 2021 — three months after FBI made its origins call — and that at the interview the individual "said nothing about COVID origins." The briefer's conclusion: "FBI has either been withholding information from the rest of the IC, or they provided inaccurate information on the record." The FBI briefer did not respond to his follow-up request.

3. Classified Readout of Fauci's CIA Briefing Shows He Steered the IC Toward Natural-Origin Scientists. On June 4, 2021, CIA's Weapons and Counterproliferation Mission Center (WCPMC) briefed Fauci on classified COVID-origins intelligence from the President's Daily Brief. The previously classified readout shows that Fauci directed CIA to connect with specific scientists — described as individuals who "have advocated for features of the virus that they judge to be consistent with a natural origin." He was being briefed on the IC's classified analysis while simultaneously recommending that the IC consult experts who supported his preferred conclusion. The readout also notes he "did not appear to be aware" of certain specifics about WIV's pangolin research that CIA had uncovered.

4. A CIA Senior Official Confirmed He Personally Stopped Analysts from Shifting to a Lab-Leak Finding. In the same September 2024 HPSCI briefing, when Wenstrup asked CIA about reports that their analysts shifted from "lab" to "undecided," a senior WCPMC official jumped in and explained that he personally made the call to stop the shift to a lab-leak assessment because new information had arrived the day before they were ready to publish. This was the IC's own account in response to a whistleblower's claim that CIA paid analysts not to make the lab-leak call. The internal readout treats this as a legitimate analytic management decision, but it confirms the core allegation that CIA analysts were moving toward lab leak and were stopped by a superior.

 

5. Pre-Pandemic DOE Warning to NIAID About WIV — Which IC Officials Didn't Know About. Internal IC emails from November 2023, responding to a Vanity Fair article, show ODNI officials asking DOE whether it was true that in mid-2019, Deputy Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette warned NIAID that the coronavirus research the U.S. was funding at WIV risked being misappropriated for military purposes. The ODNI analyst writing the query notes: "To the best of my knowledge, nobody in the IC was worried about that in mid-2019." A second claim — that Brouillette told Fauci in October 2020 that DOE scientists had found evidence the pandemic originated at WIV — also prompted the analyst to write that it was "inconsistent with everything I've seen from DOE." The significance: senior IC officials whose job was to track COVID origins were apparently unaware of direct warnings that had reportedly been given to Fauci's agency before the pandemic even began.

 

6. DNI Reportedly Told a Congressman That CIA Was Two-Thirds in the Lab-Leak Camp. An internal classified email from an ODNI analyst preparing for a briefing flags that according to a lead majority staffer, the DNI herself had told Rep. Wenstrup that CIA was two-thirds in the "lab leak" camp but that analysts were being "held back" by the remaining third. The CIA briefer and the ODNI analyst both said they had never heard this. This is either a significant claim about the actual internal state of CIA's assessment that was being kept from working-level analysts, or a case of the DNI making representations to Congress that her own staff couldn't verify.

 

7. Early IC Analysts Acknowledged the Furin Cleavage Site Looked Like Gain-of-Function — Then Urged Caution. March 2020 internal IC emails (now declassified) show analysts at the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research and elsewhere candidly writing that the virus's furin cleavage site was "consistent with a GOF modification," while urging caution before making that assessment. One analyst wrote: "I cannot imagine the Chinese NOT doing this type of research, but an escaped P3+/P4 LAI [laboratory-acquired infection] would be extraordinary." These emails show that the IC was privately entertaining the lab-leak hypothesis from the very beginning, even as the public narrative treated it as a conspiracy theory.

 

Finally, I asked Claude to summarize the most important findings. Here is what it said.

--------

The newly declassified documents paint a picture of an intelligence community that was privately taking the lab-leak hypothesis seriously from the earliest days of the pandemic — with analysts noting as early as March 2020 that the virus's furin cleavage site looked consistent with gain-of-function modification — while the public-facing scientific establishment, led by Fauci, treated the idea as a conspiracy theory. When a formal whistleblower complaint alleged that classified intelligence contradicted Fauci's sworn testimony to Congress about NIH funding of gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, the DNI's office routed it not to an independent inspector general but to HHS Secretary Becerra, Fauci's own superior, who had already indicated the matter was "considered." Meanwhile, Fauci himself was being briefed on the CIA's classified COVID-origins analysis, during which he steered the agency toward consulting scientists who had publicly advocated for a natural origin — and IC officials later discovered that a pre-pandemic DOE warning to Fauci's own agency about the risks of the WIV research had apparently never reached the analysts tasked with investigating the virus's origin.

The documents also reveal that two of the IC's most prominent agencies behaved in ways that undercut the investigation's credibility. At CIA, a senior official confirmed that he personally intervened to stop analysts from shifting to a lab-leak finding, lending internal corroboration to a whistleblower's claim that the shift was blocked from above. At FBI, an official appears to have told Congress under oath that the bureau had interviewed a key individual whose information informed its origins assessment — but ODNI's own records indicated that interview occurred months after FBI had already made its call, and the individual said nothing about COVID origins when finally interviewed. Taken together, the picture is not one of a governmenteli carefully following the evidence; it is one of an investigation in which the most sensitive leads were either rerouted to the people they implicated, bottlenecked by management decisions at critical moments, or contradicted by agencies' own records — all while the public was assured that the science was settled.

Finally, I asked Claude to summarize the most important findings. Here is what it said.

--------

The newly declassified documents paint a picture of an intelligence community that was privately taking the lab-leak hypothesis seriously from the earliest days of the pandemic — with analysts noting as early as March 2020 that the virus's furin cleavage site looked consistent with gain-of-function modification — while the public-facing scientific establishment, led by Fauci, treated the idea as a conspiracy theory. When a formal whistleblower complaint alleged that classified intelligence contradicted Fauci's sworn testimony to Congress about NIH funding of gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab, the DNI's office routed it not to an independent inspector general but to HHS Secretary Becerra, Fauci's own superior, who had already indicated the matter was "considered." Meanwhile, Fauci himself was being briefed on the CIA's classified COVID-origins analysis, during which he steered the agency toward consulting scientists who had publicly advocated for a natural origin — and IC officials later discovered that a pre-pandemic DOE warning to Fauci's own agency about the risks of the WIV research had apparently never reached the analysts tasked with investigating the virus's origin.

The documents also reveal that two of the IC's most prominent agencies behaved in ways that undercut the investigation's credibility. At CIA, a senior official confirmed that he personally intervened to stop analysts from shifting to a lab-leak finding, lending internal corroboration to a whistleblower's claim that the shift was blocked from above. At FBI, an official appears to have told Congress under oath that the bureau had interviewed a key individual whose information informed its origins assessment — but ODNI's own records indicated that interview occurred months after FBI had already made its call, and the individual said nothing about COVID origins when finally interviewed. Taken together, the picture is not one of a governmenteli carefully following the evidence; it is one of an investigation in which the most sensitive leads were either rerouted to the people they implicated, bottlenecked by management decisions at critical moments, or contradicted by agencies' own records — all while the public was assured that the science was settled.

The declassified documents show that the intelligence community privately took the lab-leak hypothesis seriously from the very beginning — and that at every critical juncture, someone in authority intervened to smother it. A whistleblower complaint was routed to Fauci's own department. Fauci steered CIA toward natural-origin scientists while being briefed on their classified analysis. A CIA superior blocked analysts from shifting to a lab-leak finding. FBI misrepresented a key interview to Congress. The thread running through all of it is institutional self-protection: whenever the evidence threatened to implicate U.S.-funded research, the investigation was quietly redirected.

 

"What evidence is there in the pdfs that Fauci's org funded the very creation of COVID-19?"

(Wow.)

The documents establish a strong circumstantial chain but do not contain a smoking-gun classified document proving the virus itself was created with Fauci's money. Here's what they do contain:

The funding pipeline is confirmed and undisputed: NIAID (Fauci's agency) granted money to EcoHealth Alliance, which subgranted roughly $600,000 over five years to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research. The documents also include EcoHealth's 2018 DARPA proposal (Project Defuse), which described work to be done at WIV that involved sequencing bat coronavirus spike proteins, reverse-engineering them, inserting them into other coronavirus backbones, and infecting humanized mice to test their capacity to cause SARS-like disease. DARPA rejected this proposal as too dangerous. But NIAID funded EcoHealth for bat coronavirus work that continued at WIV anyway. EcoHealth's own belated progress report — filed two years late, covering the critical 2018–2019 period — showed the NIH-approved experiments made genetically manipulated viruses more lethal in mice.

The strongest direct claim comes from the Murphy memo (a Washington Times article circulated within the IC), in which Marine Corps Maj. Joseph Murphy, working with DARPA, concluded that SARS-CoV-2 was an "American-created recombinant bat vaccine, or its precursor virus" produced through the EcoHealth/WIV program. He described it as a synthetic chimera that leaked before it could be attenuated, likely escaping in August 2019 because it had been aerosolized for delivery to bats in caves. But this is Murphy's analysis, not a confirmed IC finding — and the IC never adopted it.

What the classified material adds is not forensic proof of creation but evidence that the people in a position to investigate that question had every reason not to, and behaved accordingly. The newly declassified IC emails show the investigation was repeatedly redirected away from the implications of Fauci's funding role, which is arguably more damning than a single piece of lab evidence would be — it explains why such evidence was never officially found.