Day: June 5, 2024

By Maximilian G. Mooradian

Lifting the Eight-Year Curse and the Opinion of the Taiwanese;

(FPRI) — Since the first democratic elections were held in 1996, no political party has ever won the Taiwanese presidential election more than two consecutive times until now, with the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP’s) new President Lai Ching-te successfully breaking the eight-year curse of Taiwanese politics with 40 percent of the vote. This outcome shows how many in Taiwan feel about China and the DPP’s idea of an independent national identity, with the Pew Research Center reporting that around 67 percent of the population identify as only Taiwanese, 28 percent believe they are Chinese and Taiwanese, and 3 percent believing they are entirely Chinese.

While studying abroad in Taiwan, I learned different perspectives on why Lai won the presidential election and why the DPP lost in the Legislative Yuan. The most common response I recorded when asking why Lai won the presidential election was: “When I was looking at all of the candidates that were running, I chose Lai not only for his stance on China but also that he is much more capable of running the country than his opponents.”

This response aligns with polling conducted by the Taiwan Public Opinion Foundation in June 2023, in which Lai Ching-te received an approval rating of 56 percent, the highest among all 2024 presidential candidates. However, the most common response that I recorded when asking why the DPP lost in the Legislative Yuan was: “It’s good that the DPP cares a lot about our cross-strait relationship with China, but they do not care enough about our daily struggles regarding housing prices, unemployment, and stagnant wages.” This aligns with Taiwan’s election and democratization study polling that asked which issues should be the most important to the next president: 34.2 percent of respondents said economic development should be the top priority over cross-strait relations, which only received 18.1 percent. In this article, I will be taking a closer look at how China tried to interfere in Taiwan’s elections, the opinions of the Taiwanese people, the current political state of Taiwan, and what Taiwan’s future with China will likely be.

China’s Election Interference

China’s interests are in direct opposition to what Lai and the DPP stand for, which is why the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) attempts to convince Taiwanese voters to stand with the Kuomintang (KMT) instead of the DPP through;political, economic, and social pressures. China’s reasoning is straightforward;regarding which side they chose, since the DPP favors independence from China, while the KMT favors bringing Taiwan closer to China. Also, the independent sentence that says China has made it clear that it supports the KMT over the DPP, with the CCP attempting to convince Taiwanese voters to stand with the KMT through;political, economic, and social pressures was not meant to be included in the final draft because it has been rephrased as the first sentence of the second paragraph.

China has made it clear that it supports the KMT over the DPP, with the CCP attempting to convince Taiwanese voters to stand with the KMT through;political, economic, and social pressures.

An example of political pressure was when the Beijing Taiwan Affairs Office called Lai a “stubborn advocate of Taiwan independence, a disruptor of cross-strait peace, and an instigator of potential conflicts in the Taiwan Strait.” An example of economic pressure occurred hours after Lai was announced as the DPP presidential candidate, with China’s Ministry of Commerce announcing an investigation into Taiwan’s trade restrictions on 2,400 items to apply economic pressure on the DPP. This investigation ended on the eve of the election, with China assuring that the investigation would go away if Lai were defeated.

An example of social pressure was when the CCP used social media platforms such as TikTok, a Chinese-owned app with around 1.218 billion active users, to spread misinformation about the Taiwanese national elections. This social media app regularly produces content that portrays KMT and TPP candidates positively while treating DPP candidates negatively, going as far as removing pro-DPP content from the platform. This has already been proven by several sources, with Doublethink Lab stating that during the 2024 election, there were around 10,141 pieces of recorded suspicious information of China spreading disinformation coming not only from TikTok but also from YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, X, Weibo, and many others. Some posts even went as far as to insinuate that the DPP worked alongside the United States to build bioweapons. The amount of disinformation the CCP is spreading is just another example of how it will do anything and everything it can to influence as many people as possible to achieve its geopolitical goals.

Split Election Victory

The DPP’s third-term win was a significant achievement; however, Lai won by only 6.5 percent against “KMT candidate” Hou Yu-ih, compared to the 2020 election in which Tsai Ing-wen defeated her KMT opponent by more than 15 percent. Another area where Lai and the DPP fell short was in the Legislative Yuan, where they lost the majority to the KMT. The last time Taiwan had a government in which the party of the president did not hold a majority in the legislature was in 2008, so despite the presidential victory, the Legislative Yuan elections tell a much different story. 

The Legislative Yuan is the legislative branch of the Taiwanese government, with 113 delegates across all of Taiwan’s provinces. Seventy-three of these seats are regionally based seats where candidates are elected by receiving the most votes; thirty-four seats are allocated by party where a party’s total vote determines the number of seats they are assigned, with half of these seats being reserved for women; and six seats are given to indigenous candidates from different communities across Taiwan. In this election cycle, the DPP lost ten seats, totaling fifty-one; the KMT gained fourteen seats, totaling fifty-two; the TPP gained three seats, totaling eight, and the Independent party in Taiwan gained two seats for a total of two. The best way to summarize the elections in Taiwan this year is that everyone is a winner, and everyone is a loser. This outcome gives the KMT a slight advantage but not the super-majority of fifty-seven that it wanted; however, the two independent candidates will likely support the KMT, which does not come as a surprise since they were both a part of the KMT in the last Legislative Yuan elections.

Another roadblock the DPP and Lai will have to confront is that the TPP holds eight total seats, so if the DPP wishes to pass any legislation, it will need to compromise with this third party, which seems unlikely since it prefers aligning with the KMT. The TPP now has the ability to pass and block legislation, giving the party the most influence it has ever had since its creation in 2019 by TPP presidential candidate Ko Wen-je. This situation provides an enormous challenge for the DPP in passing legislation, especially regarding Taiwan’s national security against China, with the KMT and the TPP already voting against a provisionrequiring officials to seek permission before visiting China, Hong Kong, or Macau.

This legislation was introduced in response to seventeen KMT lawmakers visiting China to meet with CCP officials without notifying any DPP officials, which directly undermined Taiwan’s executive branch’s foreign policy. One of these meetings was with Wan Huning, chairman of the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference—the fourth highest-ranked member in the Politburo Standing Committee—who many say is the voice of Xi Jinping’s political concepts and the Henry Kissinger of China. In the future, all Taiwanese parties should consult each other before making foreign policy decisions if the Taiwanese government hopes to be a less divisive and more cohesive body.

Opinions of the Taiwanese People;

My interactions in Taiwan have revealed a considerable difference in political views, each with its unique rationale for supporting the DPP, KMT, or TPP. This diversity underscores the complexity and depth of Taiwanese politics.

I have had several interactions with an independent scholar who supports the Green Party, which is what the;Democratic Progressive Party;is called in Taiwan, not only because this individual “believes that they are the best party to maintain the status quo, but also because they are the party that aligns the most with the;parameters;being set by the United States.” This independent scholsaid that “the reason Lai Ching-te won the presidential election against KMT candidate Hou Yu-ih was due to his;lack of experience;in cross-strait relations since he was a career police officer who focused on local politics.” Regarding the losses in the Legislative Yuan, this scholar responded that “in several cases, the KMT and TPP candidates;formed alliances;to secure a majority since both party’s ‘common goal’ was to replace the DPP.”

Regarding the Blue Party, better known as the;Kuomintang, I had several interactions with a National Taiwan University economics student who believes “the KMT will prevent war with China and bring stability to the Taiwan Strait.” He also thinks that “a closer relationship with China will provide economic opportunities with China that will bolster Taiwan’s economy.” A specific example was KMT candidate Hou Yu-ih’s;proposal;to build a bridge connecting Taiwan’s Kinmen Island to the Chinese city of Xiamen, which the Chinese government also later proposed. He believes that “the KMT lost the presidential election due to the KMT and the TPP not running together for the presidency.” Indeed, KMT candidate Hou Yu-ih and TPP presidential candidate Ko Wen-je were supposed to run together, but this;alliance shattered;less than one week before the deadline to register over a televised debate of who would be the presidential candidate and vice presidential candidate. He said, “The KMT had such success in the Legislative Yuan because people were tired of the;DPP-run legislature;for the past eight years and felt like their voices were not being heard.”

When it comes to the White Party or;Taiwan People’s Party, I have had several conversations with a National Taiwan University student who has only recently become interested in politics and believes that the TPP is the way forward since it can balance two extremes in the Taiwan Strait. He likes the TPP since it is “a;third option;for Taiwanese voters, and Ko Wen-je is a straightforward politician with innovative ideas that are a voice for the younger generation.” This line of thought aligns with the fact that Ko Wen-je is the most followed Taiwanese politician on social media, with a follower count of;1.2 million;on Instagram. The only other politician coming close is the former president of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, who currently has one million. He believes that “the TPP’s victory in the Legislative Yuan reflects the message that young people are tired of the DPP and the KMT not focusing on issues that matter to them, such as;housing and low wages.”

Taiwan’s Future with China

The DPP’s recent;failure;to pass legislation meant to improve national security due to the KMT-TPP alliance shows how truly divided Taiwan’s government currently is. This lack of cooperation has been very visible domestically and abroad with a viral video of legislators from all three parties;exchanging physical blows;in the Legislative Yuan days before President Lai’s inauguration. This altercation was the direct result of;political reforms;proposed by the KMT and the TPP to grant parliament greater oversight of the executive branch, with the most controversial new power being to criminalize officials who make false statements in parliament. This reform bill, which takes power away from the executive branch and gives it to the legislative branch, recently passed the legislative yuan. It has been met with around 70,000 protesters outside the legislative yuan expressing their contempt for this decision made by the KMT and the TPP.; As it stands, Taiwan’s government is in a state of disarray that will most certainly not go unnoticed by its allies and its adversaries.

On the other hand, China is united in its aims to invade Taiwan, with the recent announcement during its National People’s Congress on March 5, 2024, that defense spending would increase;by 7.2 percent;for 2024 to a total of 1.7 trillion yuan (U.S. $236 billion). This increase in spending is part of Xi Jinping’s plan to have a;modern military force by 2027, which will mark the;centennial of the founding;of the People’s Liberation Army. This timeline would make sense for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, with the head of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, Adm. John Aquilino, saying, “China will be ready for an;invasion of Taiwan by 2027.”

Compared to China’s political unity, Taiwan’s political division does not generate reassurance in the wake of increasing levels of aggression from the CCP. It is understandable when political parties don’t agree on specific issues, but when it comes to national security, bipartisanship at all levels of government is essential to protecting its people from harm and should always come before partisan disagreements. In the future, the DPP, KMT, and TPP must work together to successfully pass legislation to increase Taiwan’s military capabilities, increase cooperation with its Western allies, and continue doing everything possible to protect Taiwan from China’s grasp.

• About the author: Maximilian G. Mooradian is pursuing his B.A. in International Relations and a Minor in Chinese at American University’s School of International Service in the Class of 2025. He is interning with the FPRI Asia Program for the fall of 2023 and the spring of 2024
• Source: This article was published by FPRI

Economies across the Middle East and Central Asia are more affected by conflicts—even a decade after a severe conflict, their income per capita remains about 10 percent lower.

The idea that violent conflict reduces economic output is uncontroversial. However, the repercussions are notably harsher and longer lasting in these regions than in most others, as we show in a chapter of our latest;Regional Economic Outlook;for the Middle East and Central Asia.;

A year after the start of a severe conflict, countries in these regions lose about 2 percent in real GDP per capita compared to before the conflict, with the decline extending to about 10 percent after a decade. Countries elsewhere, by contrast, typically have a similar drop after the first year, of about 2 percent, but then largely recover after the fifth year, as the;Chart of the Week;shows.

The findings underscore the adverse effects on economic performance, as well as higher inflation and lower consumption, investment, exports, and fiscal revenues. Our analysis, based on events from 1989 to 2022 tracked by the;Uppsala Conflict Data Program, includes episodes of lethal violence between groups where at least one party is the government or between two organized groups, neither of which is a government. Some of the region’s most conflict-affected states—Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Sudan, Syria—have endured some form of conflict for most of the sample period.

The worse effects seen in the Middle East and Central Asia, among the world’s most conflict-prone areas, likely reflect sharper effects from higher-intensity conflicts (which are more frequent in these regions) and the prevalence of exacerbating preexisting conditions. For example, our findings suggest that countries with weaker institutions tend to suffer larger losses than other countries. Conflicts not only impact the countries directly involved but can also have knock-on effects on other countries, with the impact varying based on the channel of exposure.;

The effects of conflicts stretch well beyond economics, causing immense human suffering, death, and increased fragility and food insecurity. Strong institutions and economic fundamentals (such as room in government budgets to respond to humanitarian and social needs) can help buffer an economy against the impact.

—This article is based on Chapter 2 of the April 2024 Regional Economic Outlook for the Middle East and Central Asia, “Fragile Foundations: The Lasting Economic Scars of Conflict.” For more, listen to a recent IMF podcast on how the economic impact of conflict in the Middle East and Central Asia is larger and more persistent than in other regions.

About the authors:

• Colombe Ladreit is an economist in the Regional Analytics and Strategy Division of the Middle East and Central Asia Department at the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Prior to joining the IMF, she worked at the European Central Bank, the French Treasury, and the Peterson Institute for International Economics. 
• Borislava Mircheva is a senior economist in the Middle East and Central Asia (MCD) department of the IMF and holds a PhD in Economics from American University. She is currently working in the Regional Studies Division (RSD) where she is leading work on the Regional Economic Outlook. 
• Troy Matheson is a Senior Economist in the Middle East and Central Asia at the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Prior to joining the IMF in 2009, he was an Advisor in the Modelling Division at the Reserve Bank of New Zealand.

Source: This article was published by IMF Blog

By Connor O’Keeffe

Last week, Donald Trump was convicted of falsifying business records with the intent to commit, aid, or conceal another crime. The Manhattan jury found him guilty on all thirty-four counts.

This entire case was always ridiculous. Trump was charged for labeling reimbursement checks to his lawyer as “legal expenses” after the lawyer made a (completely legal) payment to an adult film actress to get her to sign a nondisclosure agreement. Prosecutors;argued;that the reimbursement payments—which were;paid in 2017,;after;Trump had won the election—were actually campaign expenditures because keeping the alleged affair quiet may have helped the Trump campaign.

The idea that hush-money payments made by political candidates are only legitimate if they use campaign funds and publicly report the payments is absurd. And it’s unprecedented too. In fact, federal campaign law is rather strict in the other direction—limiting candidates from spending campaign funds on everything but the most clear-cut campaign expenses like rent for a campaign office or TV commercials.

But still, to turn charges of falsifying business records from misdemeanors into felonies, the New York State prosecutors had to show that Trump mislabeled the records in order to commit, aid, or conceal another crime. Alvin Bragg, the New York State district attorney, argued that this other crime was a violation of federal election law. But, as William Anderson;explained;last week, Trump has never been charged for this alleged violation of federal law. And even if Bragg thinks he should be, that determination cannot be made in a state court.

Bragg later changed the secondary election violation to claim Trump broke an obscure New York;election law;that made it a misdemeanor to engage in an election conspiracy, defined as,;“Conspiracy to promote or prevent election: Any two or more persons who conspire to promote or prevent the election of any person to a public office;by unlawful means .;.;.;shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.” Again, the jury decided that alleged misdemeanors that Trump committed in 2017 were done to unlawfully promote an election he had already won the year before.

Adding to the absurdity, just before deliberations began, the trial judge;told;the jury that they did not need to agree that Trump had violated that specific election law. He listed an additional violation of tax laws and further falsifying business records that could have resulted from the initial mislabeled payments as possible other crimes. According to the judge, the jury did not have to agree on what Trump specifically did. As long as everyone on the jury believed that he had committed any of these three crimes—none of which he has or is being charged with—they should find him guilty. And they did. So much for the presumption of innocence.

So, to review, Trump was convicted for mislabeling reimbursement checks to his lawyer as legal expenses when prosecutors say they should have been tagged as campaign expenditures. To turn the charges into felonies, prosecutors further asserted that by mislabeling these checks, Trump had violated federal election law because the payments may have impacted the 2016 election—even though the payments in question were made after the election was over. And finally, the judge instructed the jury that they did not even need to agree that Trump had violated federal election law but could each pick and choose from a number of possible crimes that Trump has never been charged with, and still reach a unanimous guilty verdict.

It’s important to understand how convoluted and ridiculous this case against Trump was because it reveals what’s really going on here. It’s not as if the almost 230-year norm of not bringing criminal charges against former presidents was shattered because Trump did something so egregious that prosecutors had no choice but to charge him.

Instead, Trump’s opponents spent years searching for;anything;they could charge Trump with in an effort to drive him out of political life. This case was just enough that, when cobbled together and presented to a jury in one of the most anti-Trump areas in the country, it got the political class the conviction they’ve wanted ever since Trump won the presidency.

Those of us who understand the serious political and economic changes required to address our country’s many problems need to learn the lesson of the Trump conviction. The political class will not roll over and let its power slip away just because we elect a few antiestablishment politicians.

As Murray Rothbard laid out in detail toward the end of his life, a widespread, enthusiastic, bottom-up movement is a necessary precondition if we’re ever going to see federal power rolled back. The political class is set on destroying Trump, not because of the policies he enacted while in office but because of the antiestablishment ideas he has helped stoke on the American right. The intensity of their reaction reveals how vulnerable they feel to such ideas. But the conviction of Donald Trump on such trivial and absurd charges also makes it clear that those in power will use whatever they can to stay there.

• About the author: Connor O’Keeffe (@ConnorMOKeeffe) produces media and content at the Mises Institute. He has a master’s in economics and a bachelor’s in geology.
• Source: This article was published by the Mises Institute

Donald Trump is often portrayed as the worst president of all time and now his criminal conviction has made him the butt of many jokes. But his legal troubles may not prevent him from winning again. The worst crimes he and other presidents committed make hush money payments pale in comparison. 

“No one is above the law.” –;Joe Biden

““The ICC prosecutor’s application for arrest warrants against Israeli leaders is outrageous” –;Joe Biden

Apparently some individuals and nations are above international law and are exempt from any requirements that it be obeyed. Joe Biden’s statement about no one being “above the law” was directed at Donald Trump when he was convicted on;34 counts;of falsifying business records. The leaders of the Israeli government, a major U.S. client state, have no such need to follow laws, even those which prohibit the commission of war crimes. Of course Israel’s patron is no different, leaving an ignominious trail of carnage from Haiti to Iraq to Yemen to Libya to Afghanistan and to Somalia, a list of wrongdoing for only the last 20 years.

Cynical political calculus and manipulation of public opinion makes Donald Trump the object of scorn and derision after he was convicted of a 34-count crime of very dubious legitimacy. Trump, in his usual incompetent fashion, used his equally incompetent attorney to pay off an adult film actress with whom he had a tryst. This private peccadillo might have been worthy of finger wagging and smirks, but desperate democrats wanted to keep Trump from running for the presidency again. The case is one in which prosecutorial discretion might have won the day and kept Trump out of court. But Trump is public enemy number one for the simple reason that he refuses to go away and insists on running for president again.

As a former president himself, Trump should have been charged, but as a war criminal. To name but one such offense, his administration’s sanctions imposed against Venezuela deprived that nation’s citizens of access to food and medical care and killed an estimated;40,000 people;in 2017 and 2018 alone. That type of crime is one for which Trump will never be punished, nor will any of his predecessors or his successors. United States presidents have de facto immunity for killing thousands of people with bombs, bullets, proxy wars, and sanctions too.

While Trump is pilloried for being caught in a scandal, Joe Biden has worked with the Israeli government to kill an estimated 40,000 people in Gaza. Along with his bipartisan accessories in congress, he has continued to allocate billions of dollars for genocide and war crimes. Occasionally he may engage in a public relations effort and pretend to be angry with Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel’s leadership or claim that a peace agreement is in the works when it isn’t, but he will always come up with political support and money, some;$12.5 billion;since October 2023. The genocide would end if the U.S. wanted it to, but supporting Israel has been a consistent position for every U.S. president since 1948, from Harry Truman to Joe Biden.

Unlike the mass death he and other presidents have wrought upon the world, Trump’s real crime is considered unforgivable. He was, as some say, “unfit” for the office of the presidency but not in the way that statement is usually made. Trump had no experience in public office, and far from being the super successful businessman of his imagination, he was a self-promoting huckster whose companies filed bankruptcy;six times;.

Trump didn’t come from the right schools or have the right friends in the political class, but he knows how to connect with the masses of white people in this country. That political acumen combined with Democratic Party hubris to give him an electoral college victory in 2016. The ruling class quickly got over any hesitancy they had about him when he delivered on the tax cut they had been wanting for years. His lack of skills and his unwillingness to admit when he should seek out advice has been his undoing and his sore loser tantrum on January 6, 2021, sealed his political fate.

And yet Trump remains a force in U.S. politics, with most republicans still supporting him. In fact he raised;$53 million;after his guilty verdict was announced. Lest anyone forget, in the 2020 election he received more than;74 million votes;, a record for a losing candidate. That loyalty has tied the hands of that party’s leadership and literally cannot get rid of Trump. Democrats are afraid of a 2016 repeat, with Biden being either heartily disliked or resented because he was marketed as the “most progressive president since FDR” who would “cut child poverty in half;.” The advertising was false and the 80-year old doddering president only has support from those who are die hard democrats or who hate Trump so much they feel obliged to vote against him.

Trump has also been indicted in;three more cases;which the establishment hopes will keep him out of office. But a large enough minority of voters believe he has been treated unfairly and may yet vote for him. A weakened Joe Biden might not be able to repeat his 2020 victory.

Late-night talk hosts and social media meme generators are having the proverbial field day with Trump’s conviction. Yet the rule of law that they claim to venerate has been thrown out the window by Biden and congress.;Bipartisan leadership;invited Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address congress for the fourth time in his political career. The man who thumbs his nose at international law on genocide and war crimes will have the red carpet rolled out yet again while jokes are told at Trump’s expense.

In this country the laws of white supremacy and capitalism rule the day. It is disgraceful that Trump is the first president to be convicted of a crime because he should not be alone. There are many criminals among the 46 presidents of the United States but none of them had any reason to fear the long arm of justice. Trump is in fact an outlier. He commits crimes that the system will not protect.

By Graham J Noble

Anthony Fauci, the former chief of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), was better known to most Americans as the federal government’s point man on pandemic response. To hear him recount his version of how the COVID-19 outbreak was dealt with, however, one would think Fauci had little to no influence over any of the decision-making or the improvised science used to justify those decisions. Such was the case when the doctor appeared before the House Oversight Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic on June 3.

It is difficult to forget the protracted fight over the;originsof the virus that caused a virtual shutdown of the global economy. Every American remembers the lengths to which the leaders of the medical community and large swaths of the;media;went to persuade the nation that COVID-19 jumped from animals to humans in a so-called Chinese wet market. Alongside that narrative, an enormous amount of effort was expended trying to silence those who expressed a suspicion that this particular strain of COVID was developed in a Chinese virology lab and then escaped.

This latter theory of the virus’ origin has gained significant ground since the height of the pandemic. But there is still no denying that the powers-that-be wanted it suppressed. At his hearing, Fauci insisted he had nothing to do with the attempts to kill what became known as the “lab leak” theory. Still, the former NIAID director is on record supporting the animal-to-human transmission narrative. It seems unlikely that the doctor was unaware that differing voices were being ridiculed, shouted down, censored, and, in a few cases, even threatened. There is no public record of Fauci urging the so-called experts to keep an open mind about the origins of the virus. One could be forgiven for determining, then, that even if he personally did not direct the efforts to stifle the lab leak theory, his silence was a form of complicity.

Anthony Fauci and the Missing Science

When grilled about the heavy-handed methods used to supposedly slow the spread of the virus – the mask mandates, the social distancing rules, the school closures, and, of course, the vaccine mandates – Fauci again dodged responsibility. He is – or was – supposedly the nation’s leading infectious disease expert. In that capacity, Fauci had a duty to be honest with both the leaders of government he was advising and with the American people about individual precautions that are effective and those that are not.

Claiming, then, that the mass-masking, the vaccine mandates, the six-feet social distancing, and the closures of schools and businesses all originated from guidelines put out by the CDC and had nothing to do with him is feckless, to say the least. Neither back at the height of the pandemic nor today can Fauci point to any scientifically objective peer-reviewed studies that establish the effectiveness of mass-masking. Indeed, during a;60 Minutes;interview in early 2020, he observed that, while wearing masks may well provide people with a false sense of security, it would have no meaningful effect on the spread of the virus. Less than a year later, however, Fauci was appearing in public wearing not just one but two masks. He knew the masks wouldn’t slow the infection rate of COVID-19. Yet, Fauci nevertheless committed himself to disseminating the unscientific notion that strapping a piece of fabric to one’s face would somehow block the passage of the microscopic droplets in which the virus traveled.

Asked by Rep. Michael Cloud (R-TX) if there was any scientific evidence supporting mask mandates for children under the age of five, Fauci responded, “There was no study that did masks on kids before. You couldn’t do that study. You had to respond to an epidemic that was killing four to 5000 Americans a day.” Here is Fauci admitting that there was no scientific basis for forcing young children to wear masks.

The most astounding – some might even say the most outrageous – thing Fauci said during the June 3 hearing was that the unvaccinated are “probably” responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths. “Probably” is a word few credible scientist would want to use during a science-based discussion. Fauci has no evidence to back up his claim – which, of course, is why he used that word. He vaguely referred to “analysis” in an attempt to confer some measure of credibility upon himself:

“[A]nd, you know, some have done studies, [vaccinologist] Peter Hotez has done an analysis of this, and shows that, in people who refuse to get vaccinated for any of a variety of reasons, [they are] probably responsible for an additional two to 300,000 deaths in this country.”

That’s some pretty flimsy evidence. Some people have done studies or analyses and have concluded a probability. Very scientific. Contrary to what the nation was told about the COVID vaccines, it is now widely accepted that the vaccinated were, in large part, as susceptible as the unvaccinated to contracting the virus and spreading it. Fauci’s claim, then, is little more than speculation – and rather tasteless speculation, at that — when one considers that he is virtually accusing the unvaccinated of mass murder with no supporting evidence.

Failed the American People

The American public was bullied into conforming to all kinds of new rules for social interaction – few of which appear to have had any measurable effect on the spread of COVID-19. It is certainly fair to say that Fauci commanded a great deal of respect – among most Americans – when it came to teaching them how to protect against the virus. Thus, he could have, and should have, spoken out against some of the more spurious rules by which people were told to live. Had he done so, people would have listened to him, and they would have believed him. And the country would have been spared a great deal of unnecessary drama. COVID-19, meanwhile, would have spread at just the same rate — no slower but also no quicker.

The closures of schools and businesses were all entirely unnecessary – and we know that now because we all saw how quickly the virus continued to spread even after these measures were put in place. The detrimental effects of those closures are still being felt today. Fauci was in a unique position back in 2020 to prevent all of that – even if it meant going against what the CDC was advising. Nobody cared about what the CDC was saying; as the public face of the government’s response to the pandemic, they wanted to know what Fauci had to say. But he said nothing. He walked around wearing his two masks, and with his silence – if nothing else – he tacitly put his stamp of approval on all of the anti-COVID measures and all the flawed science that was used to justify them.

• About the author: Chief Political Correspondent & Satirist at LibertyNation.com.  Raised and inspired by his father, a World War II veteran, Graham learned early in life how to laugh and be a gentleman. After attending college, he decided to join the British Army, where he served for several years and saw combat on four continents. In addition to being a news and politics junkie, Graham loves laughter, drinking and the outdoors. Combining all three gives him the most pleasure. Individual liberty is one of the few things he takes seriously.
• Source: This article was published by Liberty Nation

Senate Republicans block a bill to protect contraception access. Hunter Biden’s ex-wife and former girlfriend testify at his trial on federal gun charges. And the successful launch of the Boeing Starliner with two astronauts on board.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Senate Republicans block block bill to protect contraception access. Hunter Biden’s ex-wife and former girlfriend testify at his trial on federal gun charges. Successful launch of the Boeing Starliner with two astronauts on board. CBS News Correspondent Jennifer Keiper with tonight’s World News Roundup.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

New gallery showcasing artists impacted by Lahaina fire opens in Makawao  Maui News

Putin warns Germany that use of its weapons by Ukraine to strike Russia will mark ‘dangerous step’  Hartford Courant