Home
Creators
Search Recent Missing Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Episode 180 - Lab Leak Theory: New Evidence? (w/ Jeffrey Sachs) (Patreon)

Published:
2022-05-30 10:14:03
Imported:
2026-06
haven't archived this post yet. have a subscription? use the importer!

Downloads

  • Episode 180.mp3

Missing 1 file, as this post has not yet been imported.

Content

This week, Briahna speaks to Jeffrey Sachs, chair of the Lancet COVID-19 commission. He once believed expert consensus that lab leak theory was a nothingburger. But as he conducted the investigation and got unsatisfactory answers about what research was happening in US labs, he became determined to prove or disprove lab leak theory — one way or another. Learn more about his muck raking investigation, new clues that indicate a zoonotic origin for COVID is less likely than a lab origin, and how he's upsetting the scientific establishment on this week’s premium Bad Faith.

Subscribe to Bad Faith on YouTube to access our full video library. Find Bad Faith on Twitter (@badfaithpod) and Instagram (@badfaithpod).

Produced by Armand Aviram.

Theme by Nick Thorburn (@nickfromislands)

Comments

Merfy Mac

In the end, the honest people can keep giving the benefit of the doubt to the credentialed criminals - just as the people keep giving the benefit of the doubt to the Democratic Party - and by the time we get to the bottom of today’s crimes, all the perpetrators will be dead and their progeny will be part of the wealthy elite crushing your children.

Anonymous

Just listened to latest in Brook Jackson’s trial on behalf of all citizens against Pfizer. Major uproar cuz Pfizer stated if they were guilty it’s not their fault cuz the government knew. Blows case wise open.

Anonymous

Will wait for video for body language tho knew bout Sachs change of mind. Be interesting to see if he connects 2015 Moderna patent with same genetic sequence found in initial strain thus speeding up MRNA vax. Evidence clear now that vaccine is neither safe of effective

Anonymous

Bad Faith is bringing back "nothingburger". :)

Anonymous
>>84831195

Oops typo. Vax neither safe or effective. Besides mountains of data/evidence in existing databases; overall mortality increased in the vaccinated vs those whom declined. Believe those are stats what can understand.

Anonymous

Great episode, Brie. Sachs is one of the few highly-placed policy experts who speaks honestly and without a personal agenda. He's so good at breaking down his points. Brie's stellar interviewing skills, combined with her knowledge of science, make her the perfect person to talk with Sachs about the lab leak theory. Btw, I know we're not at the "smoking causes cancer" level of certainty on this, but based on what I know and what Sachs lays out, I'd bet money that Covid 19 was the product of a lab leak. I don't think the lab leak was intentional, but the cover up sure is. And this is outrageous. Plus, why is it that on Ukraine, censorship, lab leak, etc. it's a handful of Republicans that are on the progressive side and the squad and "progressive" Dems are nowhere to be found?

Anonymous
>>84831195

It's interesting to see the veil being lifted, and how people respond. Generally it's 2 reactions. 1 ~ "The US Govt/Politicians/MSM/Capitalist Scientists are even MORE corrupt/inept/greedy sociopaths than I thought!" or 2~ "If you believe ANY of this, you're a Putin Puppet, Right-wing/Left-wing extremist who's a Commie/Fascist who hates Freedom & the American Dream. We need a Govt agency to correct this Bad Information." It may take time, but it's another Force the Vote reveal. Either you have more questions & are concerned or you want to silence the Truth-seekers.

Anonymous
>>84837052

I think the only reason many Repub politicians are on the "Correct" side on this is because Dems are in power. If a Republican beats Biden and the House is swept, they will have the power, and covering up facts will be Back in Fashion for Repubs! Afterall, it's about protecting the Corporate Oligarchs for BOTH sides of the One Party. Look at MTG crying about baby formula shortages, while Biden's Caregivers waste $40B in Ukraine. But then voting AGAINST the Baby Formula bill, to help low-income parents get baby formula. Both sides a massive hypocrites!

Anonymous
>>84837052

Chetzmom, I tend to agree with you. There is a faction on the libertarian right that will even oppose other Republicans on personal autonomy and foreign intervention (e.g., Ron Paul, Rand’s father)but there are many problems with them. Mostly the opposition is hypocritical as you say. But we no longer have any Dems in Congress willing to buck the corporate agenda. That’s my main point.

Anonymous

OMG Bri. Forgot. Yesterday I listened to recent Callin so pls let your family know, that a huge wave of love sent to your family in Cleveland from Florida for supporting/enduring your journey :)

Anonymous

For those who have questions about the track record of jeff sachs (it's mixed, for sure). There was another time he was prepared to drop hard truths that go against the establishment narrative....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_O2TRzA2ezk

Anonymous
>>84844996

That video is prob my fav jimmy dore video of all time, still...never gets old...

Anonymous

So whatever Sachs has to say about the origins of the SARS COVID 2 outbreak is vaguely interesting. But let’s be honest he spent all the time talking about the origin committee findings. What else is the commission working on? If the point is to make sure a lab leak isn’t possible in the future then what are the necessary steps? He rides a sensationalist line that borders on blame rather than focusing on next steps. It just seems counterintuitive to a scientific approach. One would think the more valuable exercise would be to work from the supposition that it was a lab leak and build hypothesis from there…

Anonymous

As far as his 1980’s mentality analysis of the war in Ukraine goes… well he’s trapped in the past. He talks about “another cold war” this phrase has no meaning because the only reference is an historical event that “ended” in 1990 (and really 10 years earlier). He argues that the current war is due to American exceptionalism not taking into account Russia’s geo-political interests and expanding NATO. Then he argues that the US calls the shots in NATO, a very American exceptionalism like statement which doesn’t match up with the current facts. Since the “Cold War” there has been thirty years of political change globally and in Europe. The Europeans are being very clear that Putin will be stopped in Ukraine. Appeasement of Russia is no different to appeasement of Hitler. The Europeans perhaps have learned that lesson better than Mr. Sachs. The investments in military funding by Europe nations would point to a different NATO than what exists in Mr. Sachs 1980’s minds eye. His analysis is strangely lacking in complexity with respect for Nord Stream 2 and the mistake Germany made in giving Putin that blackmail energy card. The German’s and Europe clearly need to get out of that deal because Putin is an autocrat and any amount of trade won’t change that (the same goes for the US and China btw) despite Europe’s previous policy hopes to the contrary. The europeans have admitted that this is the case, they made a mistake. Germany just had elections… green party leader and new german foreign minister Annalena Baerbock has been very clear on this. Yet this is not part of Sach’s analysis. Finally just look at Finland and Sweden ending decades of neutrality to join NATO. There are a great many complexities the Ukraine war and Sach’s doesn’t even touch on one of them. He simply regurgitates decades old rhetoric in the name of some fantasy peace when the reality is Putin must be confronted by Europe.

sawsanh
>>84860336

Repeating the MSM line; I heard no regurgitating of anything.

Anonymous
>>84860336

Sawsanh… you don’t think his cold war us centric analysis is regurgitation? He puked up that shit like he was living in 1984.

Bob K Ross
>>84860336

write it all down on your ghost page dude. dont link it! My mom says hi!

Anonymous
>>84860336

Bob… again you chime in without a coherent thought you are 2 for 2 nice! Tell your mom to stop bothering me.

Jenni
>>84860336

He doesn’t actually argue that American exceptionalism has anything to do with it. American exceptionalism is the idea that America is an inherently unique country, based on the ideas of freedom, liberty, rule of law etc etc and that no other country is comparable to the US, and that therefore the US is “exceptional.” Exceptionalism does *not* mean “the US controls everything.” So his analysis is pretty sound to say that the US calls the shots in NATO. Also comparing Hitler and Putin - very weird. No one here is going to defend Putin but calling a negotiated settlement “appeasement” is hyperbolic at best and dishonest at worst. I don’t think Sachs defended Putins position at all. If anything Putin has strengthened the idea of NATO, and that *may just have been the point of the entire US strategy all along.” You know who else is an autocrat? Erdogan. And Turkey is in NATO. I find it really bizarre that we’re incapable of talking about the causes of things without it being labelled apologia. In the UK at least, where I’m from, when we study WWII at school the very first thing we look at is WWI - the scramble for Africa, the Arms Race, the treaty of Versailles, and how that all contributed to the failure of the Weimar Republic and the rise of Hitler. None of that is letting Hitler off the hook, it’s a warning from history that imperialism and militarism can have consequences far beyond their own borders.

Anonymous
>>84860336

Jenni… American exceptionalism does believe that the U.S. is unique in human history with the implication that the country is “destined and entitled to play a distinct and positive role on the world stage”. Sachs points to this hubris as the reason the negotiations “avoided every off-ramp to avoid conflict”. Then he states that the US calls the shots in NATO. These arguments are not only conflicting but a fantasy created to explain what is going on. As a German and an American I appreciate being lectured to about Hitler, especially by a Brit. Your analysis of the consequences of appeasement is what is lacking here, not my understanding of history or the current geo-political situation. Furthermore to call a “negotiated settlement” not “appeasement” is what is very weird. (The Erdogan statement is also bizarre. Erdogan is an autocrat and part of NATO. Which has nothing to do with the scale of a Russian invasion of a sovereign European democratic country. If anything there are other complexities involved currently in NATO with respect to Turkey, Finland and Sweden. But this is a separate conversation). We are talking about the causes of things. You believe that Europe is still in a cold war mentality, that is clearly the case for Putin who has many times referenced the loss of the soviet union as the greatest tragedy of his lifetime, and Mr. Sachs also believes that somehow the world is frozen in time and the US wields as much power in Europe as before the European Union was formed. That recent elections of the largest European state has no bearing on current actions and that somehow autocrats can be negotiated with.

Jenni
>>84860336

First off. I’m Scottish. So don’t particularly appreciate being called a “Brit” even if that may be what my passport says. Secondly - if Sachs is saying that the US basically runs itself as an empire (ie it has control over the NATO “alliance” and uses it for its own political ends which are not moral ends) that’s a direct challenge to the idea of exceptionalism. America, like every other empire in history, is doing what empires do - it’s not special. If the US doesn’t call the shots in NATO, who does? As a Scot, who lives less than 100 miles from the UKs nuclear arsenal (really the US nuclear arsenal) I know all too well to what extent the US has outsized influence in European defence politics as well demonstrated by Obamas interventions in my own countries affairs during the 2014 referendum. (When an American President basically said it’s fine for his own country to have its own independence, but not for mine. Go figure.) Thirdly - If you seriously believe that Putin under Russia is tantamount to Germany under Hitler, then you should be calling for a full scale war against Russia, which I haven’t seen basically anyone other than neo-cons calling for. If you’re determined to stick to the comparison and you’re not calling for a full scale war, then you’re capitulating to fascism. You’re still completely dodging the point about WWII. WWII started well before Hitler, and the lesson every kid at school learns is that had the European powers of the 18th, 19th and 20th century not been so hell bent on imperial ambitions, arms races and extremely delicate alliance systems that were always bound to cause conflict, then we may not have had the rise of Hitler - we may not have caused the conditions in Europe under which a Hitler could rise to power. In the same way, we can look at the end of the Soviet Union, shock therapy, and the west (particularly the US) role in encircling Russia with NATO as reasons *why things happens.* that doesn’t excuse Putin, it explains him. It’s basic history. In terms of Putin mourning the loss of the Soviet Union, this is a red scare. He has explicitly blamed Lenin for the idea of Ukrainian independence - his harkening back is much more akin to Russian imperialism in pre-Soviet days. If Europe is still in a Cold War mentality maybe that’s something to do with the fact that we’re expanding an anti-Soviet military “alliance” well after the Soviet Union has collapsed (I mean, ask Kissinger…!) Finally - on to European elections. As a socialist I think I’m still entitled to criticise what I see as bad politics. I may live in the UK but I still don’t support the Conservatives, just because a large chunk of (mostly English) voters still vote for them. France may have elected Macron but his politics are garbage. Germany may be rearming but I don’t agree with it - that’s called having politics. These elections don’t happen in vaccuums

Jenni
>>84860336

Also, let’s be clear about appeasement in WWII. Chamberlain wasn’t some anti-war dove as portrayed by many. Appeasement was literally an attempt to save the British empire and was largely motivated by a sympathy for fascism as was rife in British politics at the time. So let’s not get it twisted

Jenni
>>84860336

Yeah Ian I know the empire is over. It’s Americas empire now.