Although calls for his criminal prosecution center mainly on his role in funding banned gain-of-function research in Wuhan which, according to Chinese dissident virologist Li-Meng Yan, turned a difficult-to-transmit bat virus into a bio-weapon against the US and the world, Fauci’s culpability for US deaths does not end there.
In an interesting coincidence, now those deaths are used as the bludgeon to frighten the public into accepting inadequately tested injections, of a novel technology, which may already be responsible tens of thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands, even millions, of debilitating “adverse events.”
In India, in May, the Indian Bar Association (IBA) sued WHO Chief Scientist Dr. Soumya Swaminathan, accusing her in a 71-point brief of causing the deaths of Indian citizens by misleading them about Ivermectin. If a trial in India finds Dr. Swaminathan guilty, then the WHO Scientist could be sentenced to death or life in prison. Dr. Swaminathan would have to be charged in a criminal trial and be found guilty on one of the those charges. The legal notice filed by the IBA states: “It is amply clear that your criminal mind is working swiftly to…cause as much possible damage to people and to stop the use of ‘Ivermectin’…” (LEGAL NOTICE) (Ivermectin Studies)
Jurisdiction for conspiracy to commit murder can be established by any state or county prosecutor in which a COVID victim has died, according the legal theory explained by famed former Los Angeles County prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi in his 2008 book “The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder.” The man who put away Charles Manson charged that Bush was responsible for the deaths of US soldiers through lying to them about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
It was not Wuhan lab, but Fauci who led the charge against what we now know are safe and effective remedies. Yale epidemiologist Dr. Harvey Risch, who recently co-authored a Wall Street Journal article highlighting the risks of the novel “vaccines,” said that up to “100,000” lives could have been saved through the judicious use of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ.) This was last July, when alleged US COVID deaths stood at about 150,000. That is a 70% reduction in mortality.
In Mexico, recent widespread giveaways of the anti-parasite drug Ivermectin by the government in Chiapas has resulted in COVID deaths all but disappearing.
[Breaking, of Interest: Global Infrastructure Collapse Drill This Friday, July 9, “Cyber Polygon”]
Put bluntly, Dr. Anthony Fauci can now be charged with premiditated murder on a scale of Crimes Against Humanity, as he knowingly and deliberately implied falsely that Ivermectin and HCQ were dangerous, and that there was no evidence that they reduced COVID mortality.
In a criminal prosecution the presence of three conditions must be shown: motive, means, and opportunity. The case against Fauci meets all three.
In his position as the head of the NIAID and the chief medical advisor to the president, Fauci had both the means and opportunity to suppress the safe and effective use of HCQ and Ivermection. Much of the world was using these with great success. But Fauci, by alluding to faulty science without ever specifically citing it, almost single-handedly squashed these cures.
In May 2020, Fauci said that not only was there no evidence that showed the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was effective at treating COVID-19, at least not that met his “gold standard,” but that it could actually be harmful, causing heart problems.
“There was suspicion of that for a while, but as data comes in, it becomes more clear,”
Fauci never said where he got this idea. But a week later, two of the world’s most prestigious medical journals, The Lancet and New England Journal of Medicine, the latter affiliated with Harvard, were forced to yank two studies which concluded that HCQ during the treatment of COVID could be bad for the heart. Thanks to a letter by 120 doctors and scientists challenging one of the studies, it was found that both were based on faked data.
Then in August 2020, the NIH published a study which seemed aimed at exploring where else Fauci would get such an idea about HCQ and heart arrhythmia. But it came up dry. In fact, not only did the science literature indicate that HCQ was not dangerous to the heart, it seemed to indicate that it was actually protective of it.
There was one study, however, which did come to the “dangerous” conclusion. It was a Brazilian study, which gave subjects up to six times maximum recommended dose of HCQ, in the form of Plaquenil, the popular and common malaria drug with a 60 year safety record.
In the faulty Brazilian trial, as much as 1200 mg a day for 10 days, or 12,000 mg were being administered to COVID patients. The upper-end dose for Plaquenil (HCQ) for the treatment of malaria is 2,000 mg, according to directions which read:
“Adults: 800 mg followed by 400 mg at 6 hours, 24 hours and 48 hours after the initial dose.“
No surprise,then, that heart palpitations would result.
On the other side, over 6,000 doctors around the world, and dozens of studies, were telling Fauci another story, that HCQ, used in the correct manner, saved lives.
Below: HCQ vs. Non-HCQ Countries Source: HCQTrial.com
Addressing the exposed and retracted Lancet and NEJM studies, the respected magazine Science found that the web is still rife with articles, even in respected medical journals, which maintain the conclusion that HCQ is dangerous, based on references to the disgraced articles.
Despite the knowledge, Fauci’s and the WHO/FDA’s warnings against HCQ and stand to this day.
If any drug rivals HCQ in long-term safety, it is Ivermectin. Although the FDA says menacingly that “Taking large doses of this drug is dangerous and can cause serious harm,” even though it is never a good idea to take over recommended dose of anything, even this is contradicted by a scientific study published by the NIH which observes:
“Ivermectin was generally well tolerated, with no indication of associated CNS toxicity for doses up to 10 times the highest FDA-approved dose”
The official NIH position is: “The COVID-19 Treatment Guidelines Panel recommends against the use of Ivermectin for the treatment of COVID-19, except in a clinical trial.”
The most recent studies continue to come out in favor of Ivermectin as a COVID treatment. In Mexico this summer, one state, Chiapas, adopted a policy of general distribution of Ivermectin as part of a “deworming” campaign, to circumvent federal government restrictions. Immediately, COVID cases and COVID deaths dropped to nearly zero.
In South Africa, Ivermectin has been approved for use in COVID treatment on a case-by-case basis.
In May, a peer-reviewed study concluded that Ivermectin would put an end to the pandemic, (if one actually remains and is not the result of false positives and miscatagorized deaths.) MENAFN reported:
“Peer reviewed by medical experts that included three US government senior scientists and published in the American Journal of Therapeutics, the research is the most comprehensive review of the available data taken from clinical, in vitro, animal, and real-world studies.”
The World Health Organization (WHO) also recommends against the use of Ivermectin. But interestingly, Bill Gates, whose major cause, worldwide vaccination, stands the most to lose by cheap and effective remedies being acknowledged, has contributed up to 13% of the entire WHO annual budget, more than the US government contribution.
But it is Fauci who leads the charge.
Many doctors as scientist express outrage at what they say are repeated falsehoods about COVID by governments, the media, and Big Tech, such as Dr. Fauci’s claim that 90% of the population would need to be receive the mRNA injections in order to attain herd immunity. Even according to a mainstream Newsweek report, significant herd immunity begins at 40% of the population infected and recovered, or vaccinated, if a vaccination is effective.
Estimated R0 and HITs (herd immunity threshold) of well-known infectious diseases (Source)
A former Chief Science Officer and Vice President for Pfizer, Dr. Mike Yeadon, argues that it is not true that COVID-19 is completely novel and therefore no prior immunity exists. Dr. Yeadon explains that at least four other types of coronaviruses are in circulation across the planet and most often manifest themselves as a common cold.
Dr. Mike Yeadon
In a scientific paper Yeadon and his colleagues write:
“There are at least four well characterised family members (229E, NL63, OC43 and HKU1) which are endemic and cause some of the common colds we experience, especially in winter. They all have striking sequence similarity to the new coronavirus.”
The scientists say that much of the population already has, if not antibodies to COVID, some level of “T-cell” immunity from exposure to other related coronaviruses, writing:
“It is now established that at least 30% of our population already had immunological recognition of this new virus, before it even arrived…COVID-19 is new, but coronaviruses are not.”
“Other, theoretical epidemiological studies show that, with the extent of prior immunity that we can now reasonably assume to be the case, only 15-25% of the population being infected is sufficient to bring the spread of the virus to a halt (Lourenco, 2020; Gomez et al, 2020)”
Dr. Marty Makary, a professor, author, and surgeon at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, believes America has reached herd immunity because about half of the population have gotten “natural immunity due to prior infection that protects them from COVID-19.” Dr. Makary believes that about 85% of the American population are now immune to COVID-19.
It is anyone’s guess why anyone would help create a pandemic by funding gain-of-function research, then use that pandemic in a relentless drive for universal, eventually biometric ID, ostensibly for health concerns.
But without the crisis atmosphere, even though COVID is a 99.8% survival rate virus, any drive toward a totalitarian society benefiting the ultra wealthy elite, of coerced vaccines, biometric passports, and constant “health surveillance” would be stillborn.
Many connections in a case against Fauci have yet to be widely understood. For example:
- A significant part of that crisis atmosphere was created by a paper by Prof. Neil Ferguson, of Imperial College, who sold the world on “lockdowns” and social distancing, and which now has been thoroughly discredited. That paper was entitled “Report 9 – Impact of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) to reduce COVID-19 mortality and healthcare demand.” In a strange coincidence, none other than Bill Gates, one of the most heavily invested people in the mass vaccination agenda in the world, funded Ferguson and gave his MCR Centre for Global and Infectious Diseases $8 million last March and April.
- Nevertheless, a leaked memo shows Gate will not mandate COVID vaccinations for his own employees at Microsoft.
- The FDA, which declares when vaccines are “safe,” owes half its annual budget to the pharmaceuticals industry.
- In a remarkable conflict of interest, the World Health Organization, which guides pandemic response from policy on remedies such as Ivermectin to COVID testing, receives 10% to 13% of its funding, as much as the entire US donation, from one man, Bill Gates. who has been heavily invested in vaccine companies, including Pfizer and Moderna, for many years. Although Gates carefully cultivates the image of a late-life billionaire generously giving much of his fortune away, Gates’ personal net worth has climbed steadily in line with his giving.
Below source: The Nation, “Bill Gates’s Charity Paradox“
- “Fact-check” websites which relentlessly keep the official COVID narrative on track, such as PolitiFact.com and FactCheck.org, coincidentally receive large funding from Gates through their parent organizations the Poynter Institute, and the Annenberg Foundation. In other words, the “fact checkers” ruthlessly suppressing HCQ and Iverectin are paid for by the same people interested in widespread vaccination being seen as the only solution.
- Last year Fauci said that if everyone in the country wore masks consistently, 130,000 lives could be saved. The number for this statement came out of the University of Washington’s Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, which is heavily funded by Bill Gates.
- A huge, unreported scandal in the US has been that US health authorities have been actively promoting the long-term wearing of masks which are known to cause lung-damage due to containing the nano-material graphene. These have been banned in Canada.
Like Fauci, Gates, who is not a scientist and did not even graduate from college, has an uncanny knack for predicting pandemics. saying in 2018, ” if history has taught us anything, it’s that there will be another deadly global pandemic.” In 2017 Fauci said with great certainty that there was “No doubt” Trump would face a surprise infectious disease outbreak.
Given the near certainty now that the virus was man-made, and that Fauci played no small part in funding the gain-of-function research which makes viruses more transmittable, it might behoove the world to ask Fauci if his prescience was informed by inside knowledge.
Gates for his part keeps making predictions, and in December spoke as if COVID was just a dress rehearsal. Gates said, with an unseemly smirk, that there will soon be another pandemic, which “this time,” “WILL get attention.”
Bill Gates in documentary: The next pandemic “WILL get attention.” (View Clip on Bitchute) (Full documentary on Gates)
Who Would Bring Such a Prosecution?
Of course we know the federal government is corrupt to the core, and would never prosecute Fauci. But under the rules of jurisprudence, if a crime has been committed, and it is not being addressed, any state or county prosecutor may open a prosecution, as District Attorney Jim Garrison did in the only criminal case relating to the JFK assassination.
Biden Threatens to Unleash Vaccine Gestapo
Fox News reported this week:
“The Biden administration is launching a new “door-to-door” effort to vaccinate Americans after falling short of its Fourth of July goal of having 70% of the adult population with at least one shot of the coronavirus vaccine. “
Congressman Thomas Massie (R-KY) warned:
“A lot of people have big government antibodies. Don’t knock on those doors,”
Censored COVID “Vaccine” Adverse Events Facebook Page, Posts (view at Bitchute)
2 thoughts on “The Criminal Case Against Fauci, Indian Court Could Sentence WHO Chief Scientist to Death for Ivermectin Lies”
I have been publishing the scientific evidence that chloroquine and ivermectin efficiently inhibit sars/corona 2 since February 2020 and the possible dangers of mRNA vaccines both on my Facebook page and researchgate.net.
They were negligently if not criminally ignored simply for the purpose of making billions for Gilead pharmaceutical with its inefficient Remdesivir that Fauci actively promoted. And then giving vaccines that elicit a monoclonal antibody for a virus that can easily mutate to neutralize such antibody.
See the discussion I started with other scientists concerning why Fauci did not recommend chloroquine.
I d not see the discussion please link.