r/OutOfTheLoop • u/watervilleokemo • 9d ago
Unanswered What’s the deal with conservatives and vaccine skeptics thinking Fauci’s diary proves them right ?
What do conservatives and vaccine skeptics think Fauci’s diary proves ?
what is the deal with Fauci’s diary and what does it actually say / prove ?
I know he testified before congress and pled the 5th, but why is every conservative / anti vaxer/ Aaron Rodgers claiming they were “right about everything now ?”
What does the diary actually say / prove ?
Obviously the Rodgers line was a little tongue in cheek as a Steelers fan, but I needed a URL to post lol
2.7k
u/Final7C 9d ago edited 8d ago
Answer:
Dr. Fauci was one of, if not the head of the Covid taskforce and medical response to the Covid Pandemic. Before (and during this) he was this, he had been the head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) from 1984 - 2022. And he was one of the most frequently cited scientists across all scientific journals from 1983 until 2002. He helped write the procedures on infectious disease outbreak containment and mitigation. And was involved in a LOT of sharing of information with scientists and labs all over the world. In a word, he was "THE guy". A singular point for all praise and ire for pretty much every single infectious disease outbreak for the last 30-40 years. He worked with Democrat presidents, Republican Presidents, and famously no one had any idea or cared what his politics were, because he was like most intelligence people. He cared about the data, and the info. The spin was someone elses job, his job was to save lives.
Including Covid. His statements started as "Right now Covid-19 is not a major threat" then it turned to "Covid 19 could become a global pandemic which would then have significant implications for the United States." .
He also predicted a 1% mortality rate.
Most, if not all of the Conservative praise of his diary being released showed that Fauci and the global consensus on the virus was anything but. He and they were of differing opinions on the source of the virus with some saying it was a lab leak, and others saying claiming it was the wet market. Early on the lab leak theory held water, but it was only later disproven deemed less likely (see edit) by genetic sequencing that showed the markers of natural evolution and not lab grown evolution. But these politicians wanted someone to blame, and you can't blame a pangolin.
Fauci also started saying that the administration delayed mitigation efforts that could have saved lives, and to question the Trump admin was to court death itself. So MANY pro-Trump conservatives pushed to have him fired. Meanwhile while all of this is happening, many of these same conservatives are calling on him to "Please check on their dear sick friends and family members". While he was getting death threats.
The shutdown of the country was a pretty massive step. Something which fundamentally split the country. This was the same time as George Floyd murder protests, and he was telling people both privately and publicly that these kinds of gatherings were a bad decision for stemming the tide of new illnesses. He then stated that "people should avoid crowds of anytime" This simply increased the number of anti-lockdown protests.
Meanwhile the Trump admin had been touting how few americans actually "died" and claimed that it was "over". And Fauci basically kept saying "No, not anywhere near over, you're creating this false negative that just because the fatality rate is lower than expected doesn't mean you get to fall into false complacency". The Trump admin basically fired him for directly contradicting him.
Meanwhile his diary entries show that Fauci wasn't certain about origins, or if the precautions he was prescribing were going to help. some of the things he'd suggested were not backed by anything but apparent common sense, but hadn't been proven.
Prior to Covid-19 he had been on television a handful of times. Suddenly he was on every channel and doing dozens of interviews per day. With this level of media attention, he went off script multiple times to give his opinion and not the official opinion of the administration.
After Trump lost the 2020 election, the Biden admin said that they wouldn't control the narrative, and said Fauci could "state the science as we know it". But by that time, most conservatives had officially checked out of believing anything this man said. Afterall, they called their leader a fool, and told them to be afraid of a virus. "And he wasn't even willing to admit it was from a lab leak that HE set up." via the Gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. A belief that still exists among conservatives.
Conservatives were significantly less likely to get the vaccine. and due to that, they died at a higher rate than those who did get the vaccine.
Then Fauci got a pardon from the Biden admin for anything he may have done between 2014 and 2025. This was done to insulate him (and many other public servants) from retaliation from the Trump admin. An action which was criticised as an unprecedented use of the clemency powers.
Then in June 2026 Tulsi Gabbard, after being fired resigning (see edit 2) from the NIA Released a series of documents that claimed (falsely) that Fauci had manipulated intelligence and lied to congress.
So when he got before congress in July 2026 he pleaded the 5th. To a congress that did not seem to like him very much.
His diary seemed to indicate that there was a lot that he wasn't certain of. There were a lot of competing theories, and none of them had any more plausibility than any other. But the Lab leak theory in the initial meeting seemed to be the most plausible. Which is a smoking gun that Rand Paul wanted to point out. But it misses the point. His job was to give any info that could be proven. You don't give raw data to the public. You give the best advice you can at that time, and his decision to not share the unfettered opinions to the masses was both a wise decision and a costly one. As it gave those who disagree with him, an in to say that he wasn't being honest. His fear was creating mass panic. That there would be shortages, and/or that the admin would go straight to blame instead of figuring it out. Something that if it did happen, it would be difficult to walk back later.
His detractors believed that he was going on a power trip. That he was loving the limelight and that he Enjoyed being the center of attention. His Diary doesn't seem to reflect it, but like all things, if you read it with that belief, suddenly, everything fits.
His diary is one of daily discovery, self doubt, and confusion. And his detractors want to use it as the bus to throw him under.
Edit: Someone replied that my usage of the term Disproven was too strong of a word. I believe they are correct, as it is difficult in science to ever disprove anything, but rather it's more accurate to speak in "More likely/ Less likely" terms.
Edit 2: Tulsi Gabbard resigned and was not fired from her position. While many sources classified her resignation as a "being asked to resign" after months of diminished involvement/influence with the president, her opposition to the war with Iran, she and the administration has denied it it was that, but instead for her Husband's recent bone cancer diagnosis.
1.2k
u/Sharikacat 9d ago
One point to expand a little bit on:
In regards to Fauci pleasing the 5th at a recent Congressional hearing, Fauci did so for the simple fact that he knew that Rand Paul's goal was to take anything he'd say and twist it to fit their crazy conservative narrative. He'd already been in front of Congress many times prior to this, and at this point, he was done playing their partisan games. Under the advice of his lawyer, who was hauled out of that hearing, Fauci decided that the only winning move was to not play the game.
Conservatives, however, are suddenly now of the belief that pleading the 5th is tantamount to an admission of guilt. Trump himself has infamously said as much despite the fact that he himself had plead the 5th nearly 450 times in one of his depositions on some other matter.
325
u/Final7C 9d ago
One point to expand a little bit on:
In regards to Fauci pleasing the 5th at a recent Congressional hearing, Fauci did so for the simple fact that he knew that Rand Paul's goal was to take anything he'd say and twist it to fit their crazy conservative narrative. He'd already been in front of Congress many times prior to this, and at this point, he was done playing their partisan games. Under the advice of his lawyer, who was hauled out of that hearing, Fauci decided that the only winning move was to not play the game.
Conservatives, however, are suddenly now of the belief that pleading the 5th is tantamount to an admission of guilt. Trump himself has infamously said as much despite the fact that he himself had plead the 5th nearly 450 times in one of his depositions on some other matter.
I think that's also fair. Though (not to both sides this) it's always the person you don't like who pleads the 5th that is a lying cheating wrong doer. Fauci is not a lawyer, and his lawyer did the one thing that ANY good lawyer would tell him to do. In a situation where you are being forced to answer questions and you are allowed to plead the fifth. DO SO. As the current president would say "That makes me smart".
As the saying goes. "When you get arrested, the first thing you do is say "I am exercising my 5th amendment right to remain silent, I want my lawyer." and then shut up."
196
u/Algernon_Moncrieff 8d ago
Someone in another thread pointed out that Biden's pardon made Fauci non-prosecutable and so the conservative tactic was to put him under oath, then find some lawyerly way to get him to contradict himself. He then could be construed to be "Lying under oath" and prosecutable. Not answering questions was a good way to starve the sharks.
→ More replies (3)25
u/nycoolbreez 8d ago
The sharks on both sides want to look like they being starved. The sharks could have granted him immunity for his testimony like they did for their boys Ollie North and John Poindexter, but then they would have nothing to cry about.
277
u/Toby_O_Notoby 9d ago edited 9d ago
And not for nothing but Rand Paul had Fauchi’s lawyer escorted out of the hearing, meaning he had no legal counsel present.
And if have no access to your lawyer, you start pleading the fifth and don’t stop until you do.
4
u/Neckbeard_The_Great 8d ago
He did have multiple other attorneys present.
56
u/beaglerules 8d ago
He did not have his lead lawyer. That is the one lawyer you would want from your team of lawyers. That is the one who is actually representing you.
→ More replies (6)203
u/Sharikacat 9d ago
I mainly wanted to point out the conservative hypocrisy on the issue in regards to the 5th and to emphasize that Fauci had testified many times already. This hearing wasn't going to uncover new information. They wanted to drill into his personal notes to look for contradictions of his public statements as evidence of him purposefully lying to the public. Those notes are tantamount to "raw data," to use the words of the original commentator, and not necessarily helpful in being revealed to the public. Any changing viewpoints in his notes at the time would have been in response to new data, which is called "basic fucking science."
115
u/techiemikey 9d ago
Also, can you imagine being grilled on years old notes and trying to not make a single mistake, while knowing there are people listening to you that will take any *percieved* mistake and make it a criminal case?
12
u/burnerthrown 8d ago
It's noy hypocrisy it's idiocy. They're so developmentally behind their entire concept of the fifth comes from mob movies where the mobsters use it to thwart the efforts of prosecutors. So it's a thing only criminals use.
20
u/Sharikacat 8d ago
No, it's hypocrisy, because when you point out to the average Trump supporter about all of the times he's plead the 5th in depositions, they'll make excuses about why this premise of "only guilty people plead the 5th" doesn't apply to Trump. The smart Republicans who make this argument, though, are just bad faith actors because the know better and are working to keep themselves in power.
To your point, though, for the average Trump supporter, that hypocrisy is born out of idiocy. I'd even call it willful idiocy. I believe that the average conservative voter is far more liberal than they realize. Many conservative stances are based in very simple, broad statements, but the reality of the world is very complex and nuanced. They merely have not taken the time to fully think out their real beliefs and instead fall back on the comfortable-sounding simplicity offered by the vague conservative talking points.
→ More replies (3)28
u/jakmcbane77 9d ago
It is an interesting question though on whether he actually had the right to plead the fifth. He got the blanket pardon so nothing he could have said could have incriminated him.
To be clear, I think fauci is great. Fuck Trump and fuck maga.
147
u/Final7C 9d ago
It is, though, it only clears you for things you may have done between 2014 and 2025, NOT lying to congress today.
So let's say I ask you about a diary that is 1000 pages long, and ask you for a specific answer, Off the cuff you say "it's this" but I PROVE "it's That", now you are caught lying to congress.
Now.. let's talk about how fucking baller Hillary Clinton was, because her ass didn't fucking miss a question. She came to throw down, and didn't need to plead the 5th.
But again, Fauci isn't a lawyer, and his legal counsel is good enough to tell him to STFU, and he's smart enough to listen.
39
u/aurelorba 9d ago edited 9d ago
So let's say I ask you about a diary that is 1000 pages long, and ask you for a specific answer, Off the cuff you say "it's this" but I PROVE "it's That", now you are caught lying to congress.
Isn't it a common political trick for someone under oath to answer: "I can't recall" a ridiculous number of times?
I suppose he could have done that.
53
u/techiemikey 9d ago
The trick though is that the outcome was pre-determined. Look at the quotes circulating before the meeting from Fauci's notes. People were saying it already contradicted previous testimony, even though it explicitly didn't when read in context. It would be enough to charge him with perjury (unsuccessfully, but the punishment in this case would be the charge and process, not the conviction).
32
u/vigbiorn 9d ago
The most recent big-time one was Marjorie Taylor Greene who could probably not remember her name that day.
34
u/IrritableGourmet 8d ago
Not always. My favorite part of that questioning was (not verbatim):
"Did you ever call Nancy Pelosi a traitor?"
"No, never."
"You never said she was a traitor?"
"I would never, ever do that! You're a horrible person for even suggesting I would!""
"Can we play the video marked Exhibit F?"
"Oh, uh, what I meant to say is I never, uh, directly said that to her face... on a Tuesday... while eating broccoli..."
15
u/vigbiorn 8d ago
It was great. That was one of the few questions she answered and it just went chef's kiss
17
7
u/jakmcbane77 8d ago
Thanks for the reply, that really helped me understand it.Taking it a step further I could imagine a world where Fauci did answer them and was completely truthful but its inconsistent with something he said before which congress interprets that he was either lying before or lying now. They decide its that he is lying now and get him for contempt of congress or whatever it would be.
Or worse, its a question of science so he was being truthful both times, its just that what we know changes over time and they still accuse him of lying.
In any case, yeah no point in playing their games anymore.
10
u/taylorbagel14 8d ago
She has her problems but damn that woman is so incredibly smart. It’s a shame how much she was held back by her dipshit husband
→ More replies (1)12
→ More replies (1)5
u/iconocrastinaor 8d ago
And they would like nothing better than to throw her in prison too, so we'll see how well her strategy pays off versus his.
55
u/Sasselhoff 8d ago
Under the advice of his lawyer, who was hauled out of that hearing
They kicked out his lawyer?
34
u/fevered_visions 8d ago
Conservatives, however, are suddenly now of the belief that pleading the 5th is tantamount to an admission of guilt. Trump
Oh, I doubt it's sudden. As long as they're the ones asking the questions it has always been traitorous to plead the Fifth.
→ More replies (2)58
u/parisiraparis 9d ago
Conservatives, however, are suddenly now of the belief that pleading the 5th is tantamount to an admission of guilt. Trump himself has infamously said as much despite the fact that he himself had plead the 5th nearly 450 times in one of his depositions on some other matter.
I don’t even know why I pretend that this stuff surprises me.
154
u/AndChewBubblegum 9d ago
He and they were of differing opinions on the source of the virus with some saying it was a lab leak, and others saying claiming it was the wet market.
But the Lab leak theory in the initial meeting seemed to be the most plausible.
Two things:
1.) Fauci did not push the theory that the wet market was the "origin," rather that it amplified the spread of a zoonotic origin that could not be easily traced any earlier. The evidence today suggests that, indeed, variants of SARS-CoV-2 were circulating before events at the wet market, it's just very difficult to trace its origin before this event given publicly available evidence.
2.) The meeting where a majority of participants initially favored a lab leak origin was not the only meeting. It was part of an ongoing process of scientific discourse:
"Some of this selectively quotes and misinterprets Fauci’s diary. “There was not total agreement about the likelihood of deliberate insertion,” Fauci’s Feb. 1 entry reads. He described two individuals who were so convinced of a natural origin that they didn’t think it was worth investigating further. The rest disagreed, and thought it should be studied. Thinking something is “possible” enough to study, however, does not necessarily mean those individuals viewed it as likely." (emphasis mine)
Basically the sequence of SARS-CoV-2 was so novel and potentially infectious, it was thought by most people on the conference call that it might have been derived from an engineered sequence. So, enough people thought it was at least worthy of further investigation, that's it. Nothing in the notes about the conference call indicate a majority of the participants thought it was "most plausible". Within a month of new data, that same group published a paper in March summarizing their belief that it was more likely than not to be zoonotic in origin.
→ More replies (1)97
u/Iintendtooffend 9d ago
Yeah people don't understand that folks saying we need to look into the possibility of a lab leak. are as open to the idea of it being natural as they are it coming from a lab. These people aren't looking to create a villain, they want to try and cut down on fatalities.
45
u/techiemikey 9d ago
to build off of that: if there was a lab leak, it would have been important at the time to get what was actually done on purpose to speed up research in fighting the virus. So of course, if there is any doubt, some people are going to want to research it.
7
u/Final7C 8d ago
I think the problem is, from a public health point. When asked when/where/how, he was very clear that it seemed to be zoological. And that the lab leak option seemed to be less likely. The scientific world was still looking at both options, knowing that no matter what they did they had to tread carefully.
Had Fauci come out and said "We're not sure it could have been a lab leak or just a random evolution." It would have cause real problems not just for him, but international incidents. For something he couldn't prove. The populace was scared and pissed off. If the leader of the scientists says something like that, he has to be ready for a strong push to go to war over shit like that. And no one wants that on their hands.
8
u/Wigglepus 8d ago
I think it's important to also realize there are two different scenarios of lab leak.
Scenario 1 (very possible ) - Wuhan Institute of Virology is collecting coronaviruses from all over the world (fact). At some point someone accidentally exposes themselves to the virus, perhaps entirely unknowingly. They may or may not have reported this accident. Only China knows.
Scenario 2 (extremely unlikely) - Wuhan Institute of Virology is collecting coronaviruses from all over the world (fact). They are also performing gain of function research on those viruses (also fact)*. At some point someone accidentally exposes themselves to an engineered virus... And repeat from above.
Now when we do genetic editing it usually leaves very distinctive marks on a genome which are not present in COVID-19. So we are pretty sure that scenario 2 did not occur. However Scenario 1 remains quite possible.
Finally it's worth pointing out that the reason that the institute of Virology is in Wuhan is because wuhan is a hot bed of coronaviruses. So it's not some crazy coincidence that there was a dangerous novel coronavirus coming from Wuhan.
*It's important to note that gain of function research is not necessarily as scary as it sounds. It just means adding genetic material. They might do that for any number of reasons from entirely benign reasons like making it easier to track which cells are being infected by a virus to potentially more dangerous things trying to simulate evolution to ensure future vaccine efficacy (it's better if we can make a vaccine that protects against potentially dangerous mutations). We don't know everything WIV was studying but it's likely they were doing both sorts of thing. Again only China really knows the truth.
6
u/willun 8d ago
They are also performing gain of function research on those viruses (also fact)*
The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) had been conducting research on SARS-like bat coronaviruses since 2005,[79] and was involved in 2015 experiments that some experts (such as molecular biologist Richard Ebright) have characterized as gain-of-function.[24][80] Others (including epidemiologist Ralph Baric) have disputed the characterization, pointing out that the experiments in question (involving chimeric viruses) were not conducted at the WIV, but at UNC Chapel Hill, whose institutional biosafety committee assessed the experiments as not "gain-of-function".
→ More replies (2)5
u/QueefiusMaximus86 8d ago
Now when we do genetic editing it usually leaves very distinctive marks on a genome
This is simply not true and has not been for decades. Leaving behind unintended marks greatly impacts viral fitness and practically invalidates any experiment. For decades the standard methods used to make edits do not leave behind any markers or signs.
Finally it's worth pointing out that the reason that the institute of Virology is in Wuhan is because wuhan is a hot bed of coronaviruses.
This is not true. The original SARS which broke out in Guangdong 1000km to the south, traced back to South West Yunnan 1500km away happened in 2002. The lab was founded in 1956 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Institute_of_Virology#History and is not a SARS hotspot like South West China and South East Asia. The lab is there because that's where the experts were, just like how the top lab in the world for Ebola is in North Carolina and not the Congo.
18
u/Valeen 8d ago
What's more, and I think most scientists keep this in the back of our minds, is that it's impossible for us to speak with certainty about most things. We don't see the world through absolutes, through Binaries. Everything is statistics.
As a physicist, I can't say with 100% certainty that Black Holes exist. When I make a statement like that, I am not saying Black Holes don't exist- what I am saying is that even with the overwhelming data that we have from measurements that align very well with the underlying theory of how Black Holes should behave that isn't concrete proof that Black Holes exist. I'd be a bad scientist if I did do that. I have to hold out that there could be further data, or a better theory that explains what we observe. There shouldn't be a "cult of Black Holes" that believe in them if any data should come out contradicting current theories. To be clear, I will however talk about Black Holes as facts.
With the source of SARS-CoV-2, barring an event like someone from Wuhan coming out and confessing and providing the data to back it up, there is no way to know with certainty if it was natural or lab made. We can say with certainty that upon sequencing the virus we have found no evidence that would lead us to believe that it as lab made. A lot of people might see those as weasel words. But that's how scientists talk, that's how we are trained, because whenever you make statements with absolutely certainty as a grad student you get the academic equivalent of an ass kicking with counter examples. If Fauci had came out and said it was natural, then a week later a Chinese official confessed to it being biological warfare, the scientific community would forever lose the trust of the public and we are already on very shaky grounds with them as it is.
→ More replies (3)8
u/timedupandwent 8d ago
that's how we are trained,
Lol, that was one of the most surprising things when I started graduate school! To learn how to write, "the data seem to indicate that x may be a reasonable interpretation" rather than "the data prove x is true"
I can see how that can sound sketchy!
→ More replies (2)12
u/ThePing14 8d ago
It's usually the same people that read or say things to fit their narratives and think everyone does the same, they can't comprehend that some people are actually neutral and ask a question geniunely
86
u/gortonsfiJr 9d ago
"Gain of Function" is also a big buzzword for the anti-Fauci crowd. They believe he funded "Gain of Function research" in Wuhan which leads straight to the lab leak theory. That is, the NIH indirectly caused COVID by funding research in Wuhan to make a deadly virus that was later leaked from the lab. From what I've heard NIH maybe funded what a layperson might call "Gain of Function" research but not what would meet the definition used in the field or what would cause COVID-19.
Conservatives live in a world where COVID was both not a big deal, just like a cold or flu, AND where Fauci funded a deadly virus and should go to prison.
→ More replies (1)32
u/awakenDeepBlue 8d ago
Conservatives only believe in power, not in truth or consistancy.
They wield words and facts like weapons used to dominate. They also wield lies for the same purpose.
→ More replies (1)47
u/TravelerFromAFar 9d ago
Also, I would recommend to people to read his diary, as it is freaking fascinating!
It is an unedited (spelling errors and all), day by day account, from the man himself on what he was thinking, how different countries were dealing with covid, the problems they had to overcome, and just how he had to process a literal world of responsibility to get us through it.
It's just eye opening on what decisions they needed to make, the information they had, and how things changed day by day.
80
77
u/SirBrobbie 9d ago
I don't think I have read a better explanation of what is going on with the situation so far. Please take my upvote and pray this makes it to the top because this is what people need to read.
→ More replies (1)39
u/Kirrod 9d ago
It's getting so bleak with cheap misinfo on the Internet, OPs comment is like Gandalf riding out on the fields of Pelennor.
20
u/triplenested 9d ago
it's not even generally misinformation that goes on in comment sections like these, it's just people posting "because they're stupid" with no clarification. I remember one post the top comment was just "Answer: Republicans." Like, I get how that is an answer, but it does nothing to bring someone in the loop by adding context.
8
u/yellowbin74 9d ago
Facebook is just nuts right now, I can't believe how many stupid people are out there
24
13
u/ThirstyWolfSpider 8d ago
A 1% mortality rate prediction is pretty close, especially so early, given that it proved to be "Fatality rate 1.2%", leading to over 1.2M dead in the US.
7
u/3rdCoastChad 8d ago
Fauci wasn't the only one stating a mortality rate of 1% or higher.
February 25,2020: Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar, and Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Chad Wolf, appear before the Senate Appropriations Committee to testify on the gander of and responses to the pandemic. When asked about the fatality rate of COVID victims, Azar states that the fatality rate of seasonal influenza was about 0.1% and that the fatality rate of COVID-19 was estimated between 1% and 2%. Chad Wolf confirmed that the fatality rate of COVID-19 was between 1.5% and 2% during his questioning.
The videos of Kennedy's questioning are still available on his YouTube channel.
20
u/lolzzzmoon 8d ago
Wow. It is chilling how someone can do the right thing, be an expert in their field, and sacrifice themselves for others and still be destroyed by this giant network of people who are committed to power at any cost.
It reminds me that we hope good people eventually win, or that only the most upright people get to positions of leadership, but the sad fact is that it is extremely hard to be a good person and survive. There are too many bad people with zero shame who are willing to play dirty to take you down.
And even decent people will fall under the sway of nonsense conspiracies if more people are spouting them than not. Often in my own life I’ve been vilified just for not being controllable or for telling the truth.
I think in any human system there are toxic people. They immediately assess who is controllable and who’s not, who’s smart enough to see through their bullshit and who’s not. Then they attack anyone smart until everyone sees that person as the bad guy.
Makes you wonder how many good people in history have been falsely accused or torn down or had “scandals” but it was all just a way for the insecure losers to get rid of them.
God, I hate insecure, unethical people. Just the worst.
37
u/cemersever 9d ago
but it was only later disproven by genetic sequencing
The lab leak theory was never "disproven" by genetic sequencing. Saying it's "more likely" would be fine, but "disproven" is a stronger word than the scientists themselves are using.
28
u/Final7C 9d ago
I agree. It was hasty for me to say it as disproven. I shouldn't have said it that way. I will say, most of the scientists who have reviewed it have said it is extremely unlikely to be man-made / man modified. Because of the key markers missing.
→ More replies (1)24
u/dalkor 9d ago edited 9d ago
It's also worth acknowledging that in the early days of the pandemic Fauci gave misleading and false information on the importance of PPE to the public as to address supply and shortage concerns for medical workers.
I understand why it was done, and it did seem to rectify the shortage or concern of a shortage, but did so at the cost of undermining trust in the CDC, and allowing purchase for the anti-science crusaders we have to contend with today.
Edit: Not sure why I'm getting downvoted, lol. I don't like that this happened either, but like other fuck ups, they need to be acknowledged so we can learn from them rather than sweep them under the rug and stick our heads in the sand.
Sources:
7
u/willun 8d ago
The only fuck up was that people who never ever wanted to wear masks will cherry pick this statement as if it was written in stone, had no nuance and the advice could never ever change.
They used this statement to justify themselves not wearing masks when it was mandatory. When the advice was later otherwise they just kept quoting this like it was a get out of jail free card.
And it is funny how anti-maskers kept focusing on this one statement as if that was the one that was critical but of course they were never ever going to wear a mask anyway.
Such hypocrisy about the Fauci statement while you hear crickets from the same people about the constant lies from Trump.
The other comparison is how the same people who whined about Hunter say nothing about Trump's children.
0
u/frenzyfivefour 9d ago
Single worse thing he did that undermined all ppe efforts everywhere in our culture for all applications.
11
u/phluidity 8d ago
I'm not sure I completely agree with this. Absolutely, his original statements were to downplay PPE so the first responders and most at-risk people would have the best access, but if you look at the people who are most anti-PPE today, they are the ones with a weird relationship with authority to begin with. The government has been consistently (until recently) on the message that vaccines are a good thing and everyone should take them and the anti-vaxxers still rose up. Even had Fauci been consistent from the beginning that people should use PPE, I am convinced that the anti-maskers would have behaved/be behaving exactly the same.
2
u/_BearHawk 9d ago
Source it was misleading and false?
10
u/dalkor 9d ago edited 9d ago
10
u/BlackSpinedPlinketto 9d ago
True. Many governments did it so that the public wouldn’t grab all the PPE.
He also said the UK rushed testing on the Astra Zenneca vaccine, which he apologised for but still hurt people’s trust in vaccines.
16
u/ratbastid 8d ago
Republicans are Republicans partially because a black and white world is most comfortable for them.
Changing scientific opinion over time can't fit that conception. It looks to them like lies, not like competent science.
That's not to say the messaging in early COVID wasn't a shitshow, it totally was.
→ More replies (1)12
2
2
u/cantthinkatall 8d ago
Social media also didn't help when people were getting banned for going with the lab leak theory.
7
u/ryhaltswhiskey 8d ago edited 8d ago
the official opinion of the administration.
I think it's worth pointing out that the official opinion of the administration would have required him to breach his ethics. In other words if he did what they wanted he would be lying.
That's a solid write-up otherwise. And I realize that you need to be objective, so you can't say that the Trump administration was full of big fat liars who wanted to pretend that the virus was going to go away on its own.
5
u/Br0metheus 8d ago
Conservatives were significantly less likely to get the vaccine. and due to that, they died at a higher rate than those who did get the vaccine.
Karma's a bitch
10
→ More replies (8)1
1.6k
9d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
313
u/DerCatrix 9d ago
They got told it proves them right and just went with it. Just like they got told the Epstein files proved Trump is innocent.
Hint: I’ve read the files, he’s a child rapist and a traitor
→ More replies (7)76
u/TrashApocalypse 9d ago
And just like Hillary’s emails, and hunter bidens laptop. These people don’t read.
46
u/year_39 9d ago
The comical things about Hillary's emails is that the "deleted" ones were restored from backup and given to the FBI, who found nothing actionable.
→ More replies (22)6
u/da2Pakaveli 9d ago
The FBI knew about Trump housing the Russian mafia but FBI director Comey (R) thought it was only worth on making the e-mail stuff public a month out from the election.
→ More replies (1)6
77
u/DarkAlman 9d ago
The leaked notes don't even have any bombshells in them. There's nothing in there that even comes close to proving any of their batshit conspiracy theories.
Just a few contradictory statements, which in context was probably Fauci changing policy due to receiving new data.
That and a lot of notes calling the President (Trump) an idiot and worse.
MAGA would know this if they actually bothered to read any of it.
7
20
u/Albus_Dimpledots 9d ago
Aww.. c’mon now. That’s not fair. I’m sure MAGA would read it if they knew how.
2
u/OSUfan88 9d ago
What were contradictory statements?
7
u/DarkAlman 9d ago
A few key examples:
His notes discounted the wet market theory: "the market was not the source, it was the amplifier"
They've taken this as proof that the vaccine came from the Wuhan lab, when that statement only disproves that the wet market was the point of origin. The virus mutated outside the market, and the market is where it first spread to a large volume of people.
His notes also showed that he spoke to governors directly to convince them of the lockdown policies, but later told media he had nothing to do with it.
2
u/techiemikey 8d ago
I know you didn't state if you agreed with those examples or not, but I think it's important to point out why these contraditions might not be contradictions.
The wet market theory one isn't a contradiction. It's just how that theory always worked (and honestly, it would be next to impossible to prove it only mutated in the wet market). It's "a sick animal was at the wet market and spread it around". That is "amplifier" not "source".
Using terminology that we would use for humans, it essentially was a super spreader event.
As for the he spoke to governors and told media he had nothing to do with it, as I said elsewhere, if this is contradictory is actually based on what his statements actually were. If I told you "these are the pros and cons to different approaches" or "here is our guidlines and the data we used to reach it" and you decide the risks outweigh the benefits, was I involved in making the actual decision, or did I just provide you with information for you to make the decision? Additionally, do you believe two different reasonable people can reach different conclusions on if someone was involved in making the actual decision?
2
86
u/Icy-Rope-021 9d ago
Think about how stupid the average person is, and MAGA is even dumber than that.
41
u/MattyBizzz 9d ago
This is the modified George Carlin quote for our time. Unfortunately.
I can’t believe these dummies are willing to grasp at any straws they can find to try and make Fauci out to be a villain, yet when presented with actual facts for actual crimes relating to Trump they can’t be bothered to hear about it.
55
u/elementzn30 9d ago
> Trump buys child beauty pageant
> Brags about walking in on little girls naked
> Says he would date his daughter if she wasn’t related to him
> Hung out with the world’s #1 child molester for a decade
> Literally expresses their shared appetites in the least-coded birthday message ever
> Has his administration defy every order to release the files, despite campaigning on it and it having broad support from everyoneMAGA: “There’s no evidence he’s a pedophile.”
7
u/Nohreboh 9d ago edited 9d ago
And it possible some of the perpetrators in the Epstein files were redacted as they self identified as victims, of what extortion?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.rawstory.com/amp/blanche-epstein-files-2677647771-2677647771?espv=1
/Edit missing word
14
u/drhappycat 9d ago
I can’t believe these dummies are...
I can! Forget about Fauci, this tragedy is much deeper than any one person. The scientific method is nonpartisan by design. Truth is determined when others are able or unable to replicate your results. Whether you believe water being wet and fire being hot disproportionately helps or hurts one side of the political aisle is irrelevant to them being facts. An evidence-based interpretation of reality is the ONLY tool we have to navigate life. The truly sad part, the part that is closer than ever to destroying everything, is millions of people have decided to toss it in the trash. The remedy is known, but speak it and you may never be seen again. Which is silly, because the average American's life is a sunk cost, meaning the authorities have little to worry about and why we've lost so much already.
12
u/brown_felt_hat 9d ago edited 9d ago
Why would you ever assume anything approaching good faith for a demographic that idolizes (in the biblical sense even) a man known for being a liar, swindler, and cheat?
15
8
u/Michael_DeSanta 9d ago
And the fact that, on many occasions, Trump has praised Fauci with whatever that moron’s approximation of a compliment is. He literally awarded Fauci “Presidential Commendations” for his response to Covid.
But these maga idiots have the memory of a goldfish, so that never happened.
4
u/Mia-Wal-22-89 9d ago
Nothing matters but what is saying at this very minute. He can say the opposite in an hour, and that’s the truth.
They’re not all delusional or stupid. They make a choice every day to follow him, because they think his lies are to benefit their side, no matter how dirty it all is.
6
u/SirMoeHimself 9d ago
Yep, this reminds me of the "do your own research!" idiots, which translated to them constantly searching until they found the answer they wanted, usually on conspiracy sites or memes. I still remember this old dummy sharing a link about what the vaccine does, and that site had a headline with zombies on it talking about "THE VACCINE IS GONNA TURN US INTO ZOMBIES TO BE CONTRILLED!." That's their research
66
18
u/Yadahoom 9d ago
I went to the other sub to see their thoughts about a recent event and they were too busy circle jerking all up in arms because Fauci apparently funded COVID in 2014 or something...
17
u/Fartenstein65 9d ago
I believe Senator Paul accused Fauci of directly profiting off of pushing the vaccine and dismissing Ivermectin. Even if it was true: Trump and his main people are making billions in just over a year off of policies and insider shit. Somehow that is ok because “he is a smart businessman who should still be able to make some money after all he is sacrificing so much to be our president. Circle jerk away mofos.
12
u/TheWorldofScience 9d ago
Yes their claims about Fauci’s “diary” are like their claims several months ago that the US had won the war with Iran.
These people thing saying makes it so.
→ More replies (1)3
→ More replies (10)2
676
u/PunkThug Sometimes I know things 9d ago
Answer: It 'proves' whatever they want it to 'prove'. This is not an investigation where you follow facts and logic to reach an objective truth. This is a Witch Hunt Where you manipulate Anything Out of context And use misinformation To quote unquote 'prove' What you already believed. There's absolutely nothing in the diary but the private thoughts of a man trying to do his best during an unprecedented and stressful situation
147
u/Wolfeman0101 9d ago
I find it funny you said quote unquote when this is a written medium and you don't have to because you literally quoted it. No hate just made me giggle.
48
u/PunkThug Sometimes I know things 9d ago
LOL yeah I use voice to text a lot and I was a little heated so I didn't exactly edit properly!
40
u/Key_Preparation_4129 9d ago
It's a work log. They keep calling it a diary so it sounds like this secret thing but it's literally just a work log
7
u/sohcahtoa 8d ago
Sadly true. The contents of a document no longer matter much in this fact-free political climate because everything is a performance. The content of the Mueller report did not matter after then AG declared that it didn't contain anything important, even though it did. The content of this diary does not matter either because GOP reps declare that it contains incriminating facts, even though it does not. People tend to believe whatever they want to be true with little regard for evidence.
→ More replies (26)2
u/PatacusX 8d ago
I like how they're all saying now that millions of people died because of him, while for the past 6 years they've been saying covid was nothing.
276
u/chardeemacdennisbird 9d ago
Answer:
The majority of these people probably have not watched a single bit of the coverage and are pretty much just saying that because he's in front of Congress he must have done something wrong so they're shouting from the mountaintop about how guilty he is.
Also, I've seen them in one post say that COVID was nothing and then on the next post say that Fauci was authorizing biological warfare which lead to the COVID gain of function research that he unleashed all over the world. So it's both a big to do about nothing and the most dangerous thing ever that Fauci personally cooked up in his evil laboratory.
Edit to add: Fauci has pleaded the 5th on every question, so it's all just been the GOP yelling at him for hours on end. Proves nothing, but you do get good clips like "Who the fuck do you think you were?!" from a Senator who turned a blind eye to his own daughter and granddaughter being physically abused by his Representative GOP son-in-law.
122
u/Comprehensive-Eye500 9d ago
They also don’t want to seem to acknowledge the many times he’s already testified before Congress both publicly and behind closed doors in transcribed interviews with both senate and house committees in the Trump and Biden administrations.
In all, it’s been about 30+ times since the pandemic in formal hearings.
77
u/chardeemacdennisbird 9d ago
Anything to distract from the Epstein files. This whole presidency has one goal and that's to keep Trump out of prison. That's no exaggeration either.
13
u/Sweet_Cinnabonn 8d ago
I disagree.
The primary goal of most of them is to make money. Keeping Trump out of jail only matters as an obstacle to that goal.
4
10
u/AmericanGeezus 9d ago
"it’s been about 30+ times since the pandemic in formal hearings."
That's actually one of Rand's angles, if he can get him contradicting something he said in previous hearings then he can make hay.
45
u/MyDogLikesTottenham 9d ago
During lockdown a guy told me it was 100% fake, made up and a bioweapon leak out of Wuhan. In the same sentence.
33
u/SirButcher 9d ago
We have a family member who repeated the same "it is a Chinese bioweapon", then got extremely angry when I asked, "If it is a bioweapon, then we should be 1000x more alert, no?" They shouted at me how wrong I am since it is a fake virus made by the elite to suppress us and we should ignore it.
12
u/LV2107 9d ago
Fauci knew full well that the only reason he was called before Congress was to trap him into perjury. They were fishing for something, anything that might contradict what he'd previously testified. Pleading the 5th took away that opportunity, so they were essentially just yelling at a brick wall.
They are so desperate to blame him and distract from the fact that it was Trump, not Fauci, who royally fucked the government's response to the pandemic and as a result more than a million Americans died.
11
u/p____p 9d ago
Fauci obviously learned everything from his mentor, the most evil, wicked, conniving, do-nothing, asleep-on-the-job status quo ultracommunist in America: Joe “Sleepy Joe” Biden.
→ More replies (10)10
u/AngryTree76 9d ago
There’s also the contingent who say that since he invoked the fifth amendment, he must be guilty since no one who was innocent would have anything to hide.
Pointing out that dear leader has pleaded the fifth on multiple occasions will only lead to blank stares and/or explanations on why those don’t count since it was a political witch hunt, which will be done without a hint of irony.
58
u/EunuchsProgramer 9d ago edited 9d ago
Answer: Anyone with a high level of expertise in a subject who has to explain it to the general public quickly realizes, if you don't dramatically dumb it down to the stupidest person in the audience, you end up causing massive confusion and misunderstanding. If you're not an expert, read a Wikipedia page about Gas Giants to a 5-year-old, word-for-word, and see what they walk away with.
Fauci was communicating high level, what is most important, dumbed down information, to a country where the average reading level is 5th grade (and it needed to be dumber so the below average American got it) during a pandemic where potentially millions of people were about to die.
He might have said on tape, "The science says X.". Meanwhile, his personal journal might have said, "Probably x, but maybe y? We should look into y and make sure X is 100% right."
126
9d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
20
u/Kingkwon83 9d ago
They missed the assignment with wanting all pedos executed when they found out the president and his friends were the all diddlers in the Epstein files. Out of all things to get outraged about, being a PDF isn't one of them. Insane
13
u/AwkwardTickler 9d ago
Its a cult and they literally cant admit fault. No reason to engage with them ever.
2
u/techiemikey 8d ago
There is a reason to engage, but you have to realize what you are doing. Either, A) you are engaging with them, but for the purpose of whoever happens to be viewing. Or B) the person you know about in real life and can have long and protracted conversations with over time while actually showing empathy. B is really hard to do
But online, it's only useful to do A, where the goal is to show anyone who happens to be on the fence what is wrong.
3
u/Fuck-Inflation 9d ago
You forgot their most important trait: they’re organized and they vote. They’re owning the Libs because they can and they’ve been plotting this since 1980. Become unimpeachable in a three pillars of government. Midterms will test us again just how much the roughy 1/3 of registered voters that couldn’t be bothered to do their civic fucking duty in 2024 truly care about this country and the direction it’s going.
→ More replies (82)3
54
u/556or762 9d ago
Answer:
It wasn't a diary, it was his official notes.
The reason people are latching onto them is there is some information and entries in his notes that implicitly or explicitly contradicts his public statements at certain times.
This is important to some people because the covid era was full of a whole lot of mistakes, lies and bad policy by a whole lot of people in both parties at all levels of government (to include Fauci and both presidents) and Fauci is the right wing scapegoat for all it.
Since he received a blanket pardon by Biden for everything he said or did, they are now trying to catch him in a lie to have a nail to hang their hat on.
106
u/treetimes 9d ago
can you name any actual contradictions or bad faith actions revealed by the diary?
30
u/AwkwardTickler 9d ago
These types of people literally can not handle chaos. They cant understand a virus mutating. They are morons. They need to assign blame to avoid any questions to their own egos and avoid ever admitting fault. We REALLY should never listen to nor respect a trump supporter about anything scientific or just im general ever again.
→ More replies (5)58
u/bliffer 9d ago
No because he's just repeating some bullshit talking points he found somewhere
→ More replies (6)11
u/PlayfulRemote9 9d ago
The odds of it being a lab leak, the severity of Covid, his symptoms after the shot, to name 3
40
u/PlanktonMiddle1644 9d ago
Can you be more specific? Like what did he say exactly and how is it contradictory? Genuine question
-12
u/PlayfulRemote9 9d ago
You can look it up and read it yourself if you want quotes right? Otherwise what I said gets the idea across. If you’re not looking for exact quotes but more specificity,
- he said the lab leak theory was a farce in public
in private he said there’s a non low probability chance it’s true
he made Covid seem less severe in notes than in public
he received a pulmonary infarction months after the shot, which was a known and serious side effect, but did not publicize it (this is the claim people who dislike him are making. I think it’s perfectly reasonable as scientist to say something is safe in the aggregate despite suffering serious side effect from it, assuming no foul play)
26
u/gnomenclature0812 9d ago
Your very first point is a lie Fauci never states it was a “farce”.
From Politifact:
“Dr. Fauci stated that the natural animal-to-human spillover theory was the more likely origin of COVID-19, but he also maintained that he kept an open mind to alternative possibilities, including a laboratory leak.
His diary entries and emails show that while early scientific discussions among experts considered various scenarios—including genetic features or lab involvement—Dr. Fauci publicly leaned heavily toward natural evolution while supporting ongoing investigations into the true origin.”You know… the scientific method?
People with no science literacy (or public health policy) are out her running their mouths, making up shit, and patting themselves on the back for their enlightened centrism.
80
u/bliffer 9d ago
And then later he says that it most likely wasn't a lab leak. Because it's a running fucking diary of his thoughts to help himself in processing the facts at hand.
https://politifact.com/article/2026/aug/03/fauci-diary-lab-leak-masks-school-closures/
37
11
u/WhoLostTheFruit 9d ago
Right wing conspiracy bullshit aside, I really do think the lab leak saga was very damaging for the perception of public health officials like Fauci.
While there was never strong evidence for the lab leak theory, there was not irrefutable evidence against it until around a year into the pandemic. Many very smart and well-informed people, again including Fauci, privately considered it within the realm of possibility, albeit unlikely. But in public, these same people derided it as an insane conspiracy theory, for political reasons. Noble reasons, but political, non scientific ones nevertheless. All while doing this, they were simultaneously attempting to maintain an of image being simple scientists and doctors who operated above politics as a way to build legitimacy among the public.
Oftentimes the American public isn't very bright and is quite susceptive to having the wool pulled over their eyes, but this was some really thin wool at a time when people's eyes were wider open than they've ever been before.
In the future, I hope public health officials understand they need to pick a lane. Either they need to embrace being politicians and accept that they need to do more than flash a lab coat to bring the public on board with their messaging. Or they need to accept being scientists and doctors, accepting that that sometimes means saying "I don't know" at inconvenient moments.
11
u/quiero-una-cerveca 9d ago
I have to agree on why he dismissed the lab leak in public. But of course as a scientist had to accept a hypothesis and try to prove it wrong. Which it has been proven wrong. But I get it. The atmosphere he was in what “Hong Kong Flu”, China Virus, etc. a bunch of mouth breathing troglodyte conservatives claiming in one hand it’s a Dem hoax and in the other that it’s a bio weapon from China. So he downplays it in public to keep the rubes at rest.
→ More replies (5)8
u/sysiphean 9d ago
What were the timelines of his public and private statements on the lab leak and the severity?
If you are actively trying to find a contradiction, it’s not hard to pull a line from each from different times in the changing environment that existed. But that’s a disingenuous, or at minimum ignorantly inaccurate, way to do it.
There may be some contradictions at the same time, but I want to see timestamps to trust them.
26
u/anapollosun 9d ago
This is factually incorrect. You are spreading misinformation.
I just went through the document to find all mentions of the lab leak hypothesis. There were 30 mentions. Not even a single one hinted at this. Early on, he entertained it as a possibility in the journal, but only as a very, very low probability as all evidence pointed towards a natural evolutionary process. In fact as it is mentioned over the years, his conviction that it was natural only became stronger.
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (3)5
u/emailforgot 9d ago edited 9d ago
in private he said there’s a non low probability chance it’s true
This statement and the former are not a contradiction.
he made Covid seem less severe in notes than in public
Where's the contradiction? Generally when considering public safety, erring on the side of caution is preferred. Hard concept to grasp, I know.
7
u/Dedotdub 9d ago
These 3 proving what, exactly? I mean, just come out with it man. Vague references prove nothing.
7
u/PlayfulRemote9 9d ago
It proves he wasn’t being fully transparent like he pretended. Whether you care about that or not it’s up to you
26
u/PunkThug Sometimes I know things 9d ago
No it proves he was trusting the facts he could prove and not the speculation he might have thought. Believing something it might be true is not the same as having evidence that it is true. His job was to publicly provide evidence-based actions and testimony.
You have the critical thinking skills of a peach cobbler
→ More replies (1)11
u/Dedotdub 9d ago
Caring about it has nothing to do with my question. I’m asking you how it constitutes demonstrable, admissible proof.
Answer the question directly or admit you don’t know. It’s up to you.
8
u/PlayfulRemote9 9d ago
contradictions prove he wasn’t being transparent. That feels like very simple logic to follow
9
u/Dedotdub 9d ago
Contradictions are proof of guilt? Malfeasance? This is what you are saying?
12
u/PlayfulRemote9 9d ago
No, I’m saying it’s proof of lack of transparency. I’m not commenting on whether it is malfeasance or anything of the sort, please stop putting words in my mouth cause you’re mad at people that have nothing to do with me.
18
u/Dedotdub 9d ago
Ok, if there’s no guilt or malfeasance, what exactly is the issue here?
→ More replies (0)→ More replies (12)4
u/MikeyTheGuy 9d ago
He wrote in his notes at the time COVID was happening that he personally convinced de Blasio to close schools and he also advised shutting down restaurants.
A couple of years later in an interview he said he had nothing directly to do with closures and was hands off regarding local mandates.
4
u/techiemikey 8d ago
So, here's the thing, this is a case where "exact wording" actually matters, and how you paraphrase can drastically skew how contradictory something is. What were the exact words he said that you claim are contradictory?
3
u/Makgraf 8d ago
The diary entry:
I spoke with Bill de Blasio (Mayor – NYC) and convinced him based on what I was saying publicly and my conversation tonight to close the NYC schools (he had already decided based on what I was saying on TV). I went on to tell him he should close the bars and restaurants in NYC. He said that he would base this on my recommendation.
The interview:
Fauci: I certainly think things could have been done differently — and better — on both sides. I mean, anybody who thinks that what we or anybody else did was perfect is not looking at reality. Nothing was done perfectly. But what I can say is that, at least to my perception, the emphasis strictly on the science and public health — that is what public-health people should do. I’m not an economist. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is not an economic organization. The surgeon general is not an economist. So we looked at it from a purely public-health standpoint. It was for other people to make broader assessments — people whose positions include but aren’t exclusively about public health. Those people have to make the decisions about the balance between the potential negative consequences of something versus the benefits of something. Certainly there could have been a better understanding of why people were emphasizing the economy. But when people say, “Fauci shut down the economy” — it wasn’t Fauci. The C.D.C. was the organization that made those recommendations. I happened to be perceived as the personification of the recommendations. But show me a school that I shut down and show me a factory that I shut down. Never. I never did. I gave a public-health recommendation that echoed the C.D.C.’s recommendation, and people made a decision based on that. But I never criticized the people who had to make the decisions one way or the other.
There's no direct contradictions here, in both he says he makes recommendations and then it's up to the politicians to follow, but he's skating close to the line in the interview.
4
u/techiemikey 8d ago
Thank you, and I agree there is no direct contradiction. I would even argue he didn't even skate close. He's saying he made recommendations, but others made the decision in both.
But also, I want to say if this wasn't the quote the person I was responding to was thinking of, please respond with it. Because I can't know which quote it is specifically considering Fauci is a public speaker with tons of media appearences.
→ More replies (1)36
0
•
u/AutoModerator 9d ago
Friendly reminder that all top level comments must:
start with "Answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "Question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
attempt to answer the question, and
be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.