This Fauci is such a lying crook, all you need to do now is jail the 3 foot lilliputian, jail him! Now he is running to the hills blaming you, you just did not understand his message; that the elderly
by Paul Alexander
were the 'real' vulnerable ones, not the rest of the population and this beast, this little vapid beast is saying he told you that, when we know and can show all he did was lie and deceive for 3 years
This guy and his buddy scarf lady Birx were so duplicitous to Trump and the nation, we must investigate and if shown in legal settings what we know, we jail these bastards for the deaths they caused. And still the bastard is lying!
At one point in the questioning, the interviewer, David Wallace-Wells, asked Fauci how effectively the age skew of COVID was conveyed to the public.
As Wallace-Wells wrote three years ago for New York magazine: “As we’ve known nearly from the start of this pandemic, but have chosen to downplay in our public messaging and public policy, COVID-19 is brutally lethal for the elderly, considerably less so for the middle-aged, and still less so for the young. The disease discriminates by age.”
In his interview, Wallace-Wells took the opportunity to ask Fauci about that directly.
“Did we do enough to communicate the age skew of the disease?” he asked. “I still think, honestly to this day, that almost no one appreciates just how wide that age skew really is, given that the risk to someone in their 80s or 90s is perhaps hundreds of times as high as it is to someone in their 20s or 30s.”
“You are hitting on some terrific points,” Fauci replied. “Did we say that the elderly were much more vulnerable? Yes. Did we say it over and over and over again? Yes, yes, yes. But somehow or other, the general public didn’t get that feeling that the vulnerable are really, really heavily weighted toward the elderly. Like 85 percent of the hospitalizations are there. But if you ask the person in the street, they may say, ‘Oh, yeah, elderly are more vulnerable, but everybody’s really vulnerable’—which is true, but to a much lesser extent.”’