Breaking news about Anthony Fauci, Beaglegate, Rand Paul, and much more! AmericaFest is happening December 18th-21st, and tickets are going fast! Get your tickets to AmericaFest now!
00:03:48.700Listen to this clip, and I apologize because this is a very disturbing clip, but of course, this is what's going on, and we're exposing it.
00:04:06.400Well, the NIH, the National Institute of Health, has come out and said, oh, yeah, we kind of did fund that, despite the earlier claims that that wasn't happening.
00:04:17.340And also a new story today, the Hill reports that bipartisan legislators are demanding answers from Fauci on these cruel puppy experiments.
00:04:28.200If I can read from this piece, it says, our investigators show that Fauci's NIH division shipped part of a $375,000 grant to a lab in Tunisia to drug beagles and lock their heads in mesh cages filled with hungry sand flies so the insects could eat them alive.
00:04:48.960I mean, this sort of research sounds utterly disgusting and cruel.
00:04:53.960And it would not surprise me if Fauci gets into more strife over this than the appalling conduct with the gain of function and the connection with the Wuhan lab.
00:05:06.020Well, he's utterly repulsive, and we apologize to viewers for that, but it's a true story.
00:05:11.460And this guy, Fauci, has always been on the know.
00:05:15.700Well, recent attention has been focused on Anthony Fauci's National Institute of Health funding the genetic manipulation of bat viruses in the exact same town as the bat coronavirus pandemic emerged.
00:05:26.440A bipartisan group of lawmakers has demanded answers over sick experiments on drugged puppies, according to the Hill.
00:05:34.100Well, our investigators show that Fauci's NIH shipped part of a $375,800 grant, that's a taxpayer grant, to a lab in Tunisia, North Africa, to drug beagles and lock their heads in mesh cages filled with hungry sand flies so that the insects could eat them alive, writes Nonprofit Organization of White Coats Waste Project.
00:05:56.140They also locked beagles alone in cages in the desert overnight for nine consecutive nights to use them as bait to attract the infectious sand flies.
00:06:06.340They infected dozens of beagles with disease-causing parasites to test an experimental drug, probably an antiparasitic drug.
00:06:13.120According to the White Coats Waste Project, the Food and Drug Administration does not require drugs to be tested on dogs.
00:06:22.300So these groups and many people are asking, why did you need to do this?
00:06:26.900Oh, by the way, and just so you know, people will say, wait a minute, wouldn't the dogs complain?
00:06:31.920Wouldn't they be upset even if they were sedated?
00:06:33.780Obviously, this is a disgusting, horrific practice.
00:06:37.56044 of the beagle puppies in Tunisia and some of the other dogs had their vocal cords removed, allegedly, so scientists could work without excessive barking.
00:06:52.540Look, I understand that there are some people who think Anthony Fauci is one of the good guys.
00:06:57.540I also understand there's people that worship Anthony Fauci, like some sort of progressive, secular idol.
00:07:03.180But at the end of the day, this is a guy who has left basic morality a long time ago in search of progress and in search of what he believes is science without any moral underpinning whatsoever.
00:07:22.100That's what's going on with BeagleGate.
00:09:12.960Now, today, of course, CNN and everybody else are saying, oh, by the way, Alec Baldwin drew the gun.
00:09:18.740Yeah, we know, because we reported it first on Turning Point USA Live, because Human Events Daily gets the stories days, weeks, sometimes months ahead.
00:10:03.080When it comes down to this situation, Alec Baldwin is in a world of trouble.
00:10:09.920And I want to go in now and listen to some analysis that was done by Andrew Branca, who is a fantastic, fantastic lawyer when it comes to this.
00:10:22.720Listen to his legal breakdown of what's going on in this case.
00:10:26.720So Alec Baldwin was both the actor handling the firearm when it discharged, and an actor might argue that he's kind of at the bottom of the safety responsibility ladder for something like a movie set.
00:10:38.520But he was also, Alec Baldwin was also a co-producer for the film, which would arguably place him at the top of the safety responsibility ladder.
00:10:48.080Now, in theory, an actor at the bottom and the producer at the top might each point their finger at each other when it comes to liability over an event like this.
00:10:58.640That is, the actor might argue that the producer ought to have had better safety protocols in place.
00:11:05.820And the producer might argue that the actor had the ultimate responsibility for safe handling of the firearm.
00:11:11.660In this case, however, Alec Baldwin occupies both seats, so he can point his finger in this manner if he wishes, but ultimately he'll be pointing it at himself.
00:11:23.900And this implication could well apply not merely in the civil law context, within the scope of negligence, but also within the criminal law context, within the scope of recklessness and involuntary manslaughter.
00:11:36.740So here's the situation, right? He was handed a gun. And we know now that the person who handed him that gun, or I should say the person who actually prepared that gun, who was the armorer, which is what it's called for the set, was a 24-year-old girl by the name of Hannah Gutierrez-Reed, who many people are now saying was inexperienced.
00:11:54.800There's also reports of other gun misfires that had occurred on this set. It looked like they were over budget, stressed out, a lot of pressure.
00:12:01.780But the issue here is that Alec Baldwin, not only did he break every rule of firearm safety, not checking the gun, you do a brass check, takes two seconds, right?
00:12:12.500Didn't check that. Had his finger in the trigger. Pointed the gun at somebody. All of those things breaking the main rules, Cooper's rules of gun safety.
00:12:21.620Next, you have to understand the situation that he was also the producer of this.
00:12:28.260So was it negligent? Was it merely negligent, in which case it's only a civil liability, or was it reckless?
00:12:35.900If it was reckless, and you can point to all that, then legally he would have criminal liability for this.