In that session they’d repeatedly claimed that efficacy and injury data was unavailable at the level of detail necessary to answer the basic questions they were presented. Yet they repeatedly made claims in that forum predicated on the same information they had denied having access to.

This was the same session in which Walensky claimed not to have any knowledge of mortality estimates arising from adverse events – because she ‘hadn’t brought that with her’ – and then confirmed it was ‘about a hundred’ when an incredulous senator pressed her for a ballpark estimate – ‘well is it a hundred or …?’

Lying of that sort is not simply intended to deceive people, it’s also meant to demoralize and insult them. It’s meant to convey that the questioner has no standing and doesn’t deserve an honest answer. And that has been the evident position of the CDC since the beginning, not simply towards the public but also towards the broader public health community outside of government institutions.

Believe it or not, most of the foreign (esp. European) media is worse….

GB: your view that firing Fauci et al. would have led to impeachment and then conviction strikes me as unlikely. Yes, the Dem House might have impeached him, but the Senate would not have convicted him. I envision a defense along the lines of “yes, I listened to the govt experts, but also sought counter opinions; and then found those alternative views to be more persuasive, both for medical treatments (therapies + vaccine development) and for addressing adverse mental health and economic impacts. Thus, it would have been a high crime for me not to remove the flawed govt actors rather than keep them around.” Such a defense, plus testimony from the non-govt experts, would have convinced enough Republicans (and maybe some Dems) to avoid conviction (and possibly even impeachment).

The criticism against Pence is also interesting, given my understanding of his high standing from his terms as governor of Indiana. If Trump relied on him to be his real controller over the pandemic response, and Pence did not exercise real critical leadership of the team, Trump might be forgiven for not tracking it that closely when his VP was “in charge”. Of course, “the buck [still] stops …” But if Pence did raise personnel or other issues with Trump and was waved off, we aren’t privy to those conversations.

Yes, but as we all know he got attacked for everything anyway and I’m not sure that it was the consensus of the leadership because they were all over the map and blowing with the winds. Plus, again Atlas, Battacharya and the like weren’t saying do nothing they were talking focused protection plus it could have been absolutely drilled home over and over about ‘with’ and ‘from’ deaths and PCR testing and cycle thresholds being way too high. These are things that absolutely could have been done or at least tried but instead they allowed the nonsense to become ingrained in the system.

Initially and on theface of it, that seems lke a reasonable strategy.

But can any President ignore the “scientific consensus” as offered by the directors of the federal government’s foremost medical leadership? Not just ignore but implement policies in direct contradiction to the CDC, NIH and FDA’s assertions? Perhaps he could but could he withstand the political firestorm that would engulf his Presidency? I’m doubtful that any conservative President could do so.

He didn’t have to fire those people just bring on other advisers and start listening to them. Keep on praising Fauci but stop taking his advice.

Let them attack his advisers from Stanford, Harvard etc. because they were going to attack him no matter what and those advisers would not have said do nothing by the way.

“I agree that by fall of 2020, Pence and Trump should have begun to push back but they were probably too involved in the campaign by then. ?”

Trump certainly expected to win and in the aftermath, he might well have planned to further clean house.

The leadership at the NIH, CDC, FDA, Pelosi, etc. in demonizing and blocking alternative treatment protocols using HCQ and Ivermectin are guilty of mass murder and crimes against humanity. They are modern day Himmlers.

Why are bureaucrats so inept, so unable to be open and forehanded? Because bureaucrats are always more interested in the bureaucracy and their fiefdoms than in doing the job they are appointed to do. It’s why government should always be limited to the two things they can do well. (Defense and foreign policy!)

Scott Atlas was brought in by Trump to get another set of eyes on the Covid issues. He has written a scathing book in which he says that he was studying data and came to meetings with sheets of data and recommendations that Fauci and Birx would just ignore. Fauci and Birx apparently set in motion a plan to get him off the task force and succeeded. IMO, Trump was a captive of Fauci and Birx as well as getting weak leadership from Pence. That is, Pence deferred to the “scientists” and was not willing/able to allow true debate and questioning of the policies. It was uncharted territory, and everyone was running scared. I agree that by fall of 2020, Pence and Trump should have begun to push back but they were probably too involved in the campaign by then. 🙁