“Fauci Unmasked: The Trial Run”

Film from June 2024

The following twenty minute film appeared in my feed—I don’t know how I missed it until now. Here’s the video, narrated by Michael Knowles of The Daily Wire. (This is not an endorsement of either Knowles or The Daily Wire; I just think this film is worth watching.)

I’ve summarized the key points below, but I highly suggest you watch it yourself if you haven’t seen it already.

The film opens with the now famous clip of Fauci saying “I represent science.” The host then mentions that Fauci claimed his critics during Covid were anti-science but that, in fact, “the antipathy to science came from Fauci himself.”

At 2:50 we begin the discussion of Fauci’s role in AIDS, from the perspective that AIDS was, as I and many others have said, the trial run for the Covid response.

3:30 Bruce Nussbaum’s assessment of Fauci is mentioned. He has several good quotes, including “the best scientists do not become administrators.” He also refers to Fauci as “a lackluster scientist” whose true vocation is “empire building.”

Between 5:25 and 6:00 Larry Kramer’s early criticism of Fauci is mentioned, but nowhere in the film is it mentioned that the two later became involved in a bromance of sorts that lasted until Kramer’s recent death.

6:15 “[At that time] the most dangerous place to be in America was the space between Dr Fauci and a TV camera.”

6:30 We discuss the dual approaches of developing a vaccine or therapeutic drugs, with Fauci preferring the vaccine approach. However, at 7:30 Knowles points out that forty years later we still have no vaccine. (Perhaps the reason the search for a vaccine has been so unsuccessful is because it needs to be redirected at whatever is really causing AIDS. We are barking up the wrong tree with “HIV”—I wonder how much Knowles is aware of this.)

8:15 shows the famous clip of Kary Mullis saying “he doesn’t know anything about anything, and I’d say that to his face.” Memory eternal, Dr. Mullis.

Then, at 8:55, we get into the good stuff—discussion of AZT and its disastrous effects. He mentions that it was approved faster than any drug had been at that time, and at a hefty price tag that would translate to $17,000 annually today. He acknowledges that it “did seem to work at first,” but that that quickly fell apart. Also, despite warnings that due to AZT’s toxicity, it should only be prescribed to patients on the brink of death, Fauci advocated for early treatment, even for asymptomatic patients. He mentions a two year study supporting this, but Spin magazine (this must have been Celia Farber), when they attempted to find the study, were told that it was “still being written.”

At 11:00, Dr. Joseph Sonnabend’s criticism of AZT is mentioned. But the really interesting part to me comes at 11:30, when it is stated that “some activists even proposed prescribing AZT to uninfected people ‘at risk’.” WOW. I had no idea that PrEP had been foreshadowed so long ago.

At 12:00 he mentions the alternative AIDS nonprofit, HEAL, suggesting potential openness on the parts of the documentary makers to alternative explanations of AIDS. Perhaps that is wishful thinking on my part.

Between about 13:00 and 16:00, Knowles discusses Fauci’s flip flops on whether AIDS could be transmitted by “routine household contact.” A colleague informed me that Fauci's concern about household transmission was based on a study by James Oleske. Of course, we all know that that possibility was discarded early on, but it does raise an interesting question. If indeed there is a real AIDS epidemic that includes many, many cases of “HIV” negative AIDS, including CFS patients, ought we perhaps revisit if and how AIDS (not a positive “HIV”) test is truly transmitted—we know that sexual transmission is insufficient to sustain the epidemic. We’ve been barking up the wrong tree a very very long time.

Finally, at 17:20 some time is spent discussing the Guinea Pig Kids and Fauci’s involvement in that scandal. I’d have loved to see Liam Scheff get a little credit, but this segment was overall very well done.

The film concludes with a teaser for Part 2, which I have yet to see, but I assume it addresses the Covid response.

Please let me know what you think of this film in the comments!