Catching COVID-19: True Crime Stories (It's Wholly Conceivable. . .)

THE QUESTION NOT ASKED IN THE FAUCI DEPOSITION

National headlines indicate that the once amazing Dr. Fauci, apparently even once gifted with soothsaying abilities to prophesy, may have suffered some signs of long covid, exhibiting an inability to recall some details during his deposition in the “free speech” case brought by the Attorney Generals for the States of Missouri and Louisiana, but what was very apparent was that one question has even been dodged by the plaintiffs in the action, a question raised by an intervenor who was refused leave of court to enter, and denied an opportunity to re-enter the matter after the depositions were announced.

The plaintiffs requested a string of high-level government officials in their motion for depositions, including the NIAID Director, who had officially announced his decision to retire last August, but apparently sped up his timeline before Thanksgiving, indicating that he was giving his last White House update briefing. However, one intervenor, described by the court as a “litigation hobbyist”, and expelled by the Court with a group of investigative journalists who had also sought to intervene, happened to be essentially a former biological warfare planner, who had had a half dozen cases docketed for certiorari at the Supreme Court in less than a year during the pandemic, quite an accomplishment for an unrepresented litigant, while one matter, Webb v. Fauci, filed in the Eastern District of Virginia on July 7, 2021, remains unresolved, hinging on a technicality and procedural question since the new term began on October 1, 2022, when the Supreme Court attempted to quash the matter that had been docketed on June 28, 2022.

The only relevant question, with regard to establishing a claim that Dr. Fauci had lied, for a legal cause of action in fraud, forming the basis of what the court in U.S. v. Elliott had described as a “wheel conspiracy”, with a “hub” personality, with several “spokes”, is whether or not the government owns the causative biological agent for COVID-19, the aim of the FOIA that had been submitted to the White House on March 23, 2021, months before the White House had tasked the Intelligence Committee, and before several news organizations had begun submitting FOIA requests to obtain copies of emails.

The FOIA sought, in Sesame Street Simplicity, the answer to a procedural question about standard epidemiological metrics that, quixotically, remained unknown, i.e., infectious dose and secondary attack rate. Under Executive Order 12,958, these metrics could only be classified if the government owned or controlled the causative biological agent for COVID-19, and, under Molecular Pathology Associates v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., the government could only classify the metrics for a novel coronavirus if it had been cultivated or manipulated in a laboratory.

As of March 7, 2022, in a matter brought for prejudgment decision on the shadow docket, Webb v. Fauci, Record No. 21-6868, a presumptive assertion of executive privilege, reserved under U.S. v. Nixon, for matters of national security, was transformed into a Glomar Statement: the government can neither confirm nor deny that the infectious dose and/or secondary attack rate for COVID-19 are classified information.