Science can fool you, so can the anointed science experts. Last year, media outlets ridiculed anyone who suggested the COVID-19 pandemic started with a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). Daniel Funke at PoliFact asserted, “Research shows that the virus’ genetic makeup precludes it from being man-made,” and “Scientists believe bats are the source of the novel coronavirus and that it jumped to an intermediate host before spreading to humans….” The New York Times published many pieces dismissive of the lab-leak theory, including one headlined, “Senator Tom Cotton Repeats Fringe Theory of Coronavirus Origins.” Jack Brewster at Forbes wrote the lab-origin theory was, “an explosive claim pitting scientists, who remain skeptical of the claim, against Trump administration officials …” None of the authors appeared to have any special training or professional focus on epidemiology or virology that would justify the certainty with which they dismissed the WIV as the source of the virus. Instead, the journalists’ certainty came from the authority of others. The Lancet, published a letter signed by 27 scientists affirming that studies “overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.” The review of the then month-old literature on the SARS-CoV-2 virus by 27 scientists may have ended the discussion for a year, but now it is back. A bombshell article by Nicholas Wade in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists restarted the lab-origin discussion. The once dismissive press is back-pedaling at warp speed.

The COVID-19 pandemic has killed more than 3.5 million individuals worldwide. Attention is shifting from solely saving lives to retracing the trail of death to its source. Avoiding future calamity means responsible parties must be held to account. China, where the coronavirus inarguably originated, has made it clear that an apology is not forthcoming. As if the lack of Chinese contrition isn’t maddening enough, Beijing has stated that it will no longer cooperate with any investigation into the virus’ origin. However, China cannot force the world to unlearn what it already knows. U.S. intelligence agencies have identified a virus strain studied in the Wuhan Institute of Virology as a possible “backbone for the creation of a pathogenic chimeric virus,” pointing to an experimental rather than a natural cause. No amount of silencing will alter the truth. As facts come into focus, China is meeting criticism with belligerence. The Chinese Communist Party’s semi-official Global Times recently declared the nation must be prepared for an “intense showdown” with the U.S.: “The number of China’s nuclear warheads must reach the quantity that makes U.S. elites shiver should they entertain the idea of engaging in a military confrontation with China.” In other words, Americans angered by China’s affronts must be frightened into silence. With characteristic bluntness, former President Trump has issued a statement calling for financial compensation: “China should pay $10 trillion to America, and the World, for the death and destruction they have caused!” If this pandemic proves to be the result of a leaky lab, China must open its checkbook.

The failures here may be on par with those that missed the threat posed by al-Qaeda in the run up to 9/11 and that many of us trusted regarding the “slam dunk” case on Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction program. So how did this massive failure occur? Some say it is the pressure China exerts in international organizations and the research centers it is funding and taking money from in the United States. The WHO seems unquestionably in the pockets of China. Some say, “The Swamp,” as Washington, D.C. is often called, would do anything and everything to damage President Trump. The Intelligence Community and the FBI already have been clearly implicated in these types of behavior. Why would Dr. Fauci, the CDC, or NIH be any different? We need to fully explore who authorized the U.S. taxpayer-backed grant funding for the Wuhan Institute of Virology. We also need to know exactly how much taxpayer money was sent there and to other Chinese research organizations. We know as a fact the EcoHealth Alliance awarded grants to the Wuhan lab from 2014 to 2019 that were financed by the NIH. As Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, I sometimes tasked “Red Teams” to explore outside-of-the-box scenarios and to explore unconventional thinking. It is time for a “Red Team” to be designated to explore alternative theories?were any organizations and individuals in the West, blinded by pressure from the Chinese, politics, or frightened by the possibility that U.S. taxpayer money funded the coronavirus research that ultimately led to the deadly COVID-19 leak from the Wuhan lab.

President Biden tasked the U.S. Intelligence Community to “redouble” its efforts to identify the origin of the COVID-19 virus. The community already has been focused on this for eighteen months. Its conclusions so far: It is either manmade and escaped from a lab or it developed naturally and jumped from an animal species to humans. Significant and very legitimate questions have been raised about the Intelligence Community, the Centers for Disease Control, the National Institutes for Health, and the World Health Organization and whether they shaded their research and analysis for political reasons. In 2020, these organizations strongly discounted the theory that this could have been manmade and escaped from a lab. They ridiculed President Trump and Senator Tom Cotton for even raising this possibility. Shame on them as they, and their enablers in the media, now rapidly backtrack as the lab leak theory becomes more likely. The change in assessments is not because of some new information being discovered, it is primarily the reevaluation of information that was already available and dropping of the political pretense. Dr. Anthony Fauci, who was thanked by the head of an organization that took U.S. taxpayer money and funded Chinese coronavirus research, is now backing away from his pushback on the lab leak theory. Our “trusted” federal scientific and intelligence organizations that are tasked with keeping us safe and providing professional analysis are also hedging their initial takes, which may have been influenced by politics and anti-Trump bias.

The challenges facing what we used to call, with pride and confidence, the Free World are daunting. Illiberal authoritarians of various stripes are increasingly assertive and audacious. In response, Americans and Europeans should be working more closely and cooperatively than ever. They’re not. The explanation commonly given: Relations between President Trump and his counterparts across the pond have been strained. He hasn’t shown them the respect they deserve. They’ve not concealed their disdain for him. Still, it is surely in the European Union’s interest to defend its members from the machinations of illiberal authoritarians. And it is surely not in the EU’s interest to undermine Mr. Trump’s successor. Yet the EU is not doing the former and is doing the latter. The world’s most powerful and ambitious illiberal authoritarians are in Beijing. They are brutally oppressing dozens of ethnic and religious minorities within the borders of the People’s Republic of China. The free nations of Europe should ― at a minimum ― be expressing outrage and rethinking their relations with Beijing. Instead, the PRC has just been awarded a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council. Perhaps worse, the European Union recently agreed in principle on a new investment accord that, if ratified, promises to further bind Europe’s economy with China’s. European deal defenders insist it’s a win because President Xi Jinping committed to environmental protections, ending forced technology transfers. But after what Mr. Xi has done in Hong Kong with impunity, why would anyone believe that he will honor new commitments or that there will be consequences if he does not?

The United Nations has called for these goals to be fulfilled by 2030. Enter the coronavirus. Enter opportunity. “In April 2020, the United Nations released a framework for the immediate socio-economic response to COVID-19 as a roadmap to support countries’ path to social and economic recovery,” the United Nations wrote. “It calls for an extraordinary scale-up of international support and political commitment to ensure that people everywhere have access to essential services and social protection.” That’s under Goal Number Eight, the promotion of “inclusive and sustainable economic growth, employment and decent work for all.” “The UN Secretary-General has proposed six climate-positive actions for governments to take once they go about building back their economies and societies: green transition … green jobs … green economy … invest in sustainable solutions … confront all climate risks - no country can succeed alone.” That means the United Nations is calling for far leftists of the world to unite and use the coronavirus to shove through every radical environmental agenda that’s been stalled through the years. The globalists are counting on fear to be their ultimate friend in this campaign; they’re using this coronavirus crisis to best advantage. Never let a crisis go to waste, as the saying goes. In America, we have a document called the Constitution that guarantees a limited form of government, that already sets the stage for the equal opportunities for all. The United Nations ought to take an example from America; not the other way around. The United Nations is using COVID-19 to advance its sustainable development goals and bring them to fruition by 2030. The United Nations is using COVID-19 to take over the world.

The United Nations has a campaign called “sustainable development” that includes 17 goals to make the planet a better place for all - namely, by placing the governing of the planet into the hands of a few bureaucrats at the top of the global chain. And they’re using the coronavirus to speed up the take-over of the world. It’s all on the U.N.‘s own sustainable development website. The Sustainable Development Goals, SDGs, are 17 separate action campaigns designed to eradicate poverty, protect the environment and basically “improve the lives and prospects of everyone, everywhere.” Admirable goals? Yes. But it’s the implementation that’s the devil. These calls to action intrude on about every facet of human living imaginable. It’s the ultimate Big Government gateway. Goal Number One: No Poverty. Goal Number Two: Zero Hunger. Goal Number Three: Good Health and Well-Being. Those are followed by campaigns for quality education, gender equality, clean water and sanitation, affordable and clean energy, decent work and economic growth for all, solid industrial and infrastructure development for all, the reduction of all inequalities, construction of sustainable cities and communities, the implementation of policies for responsible consumption and production, climate action, policies that protect ocean life, policies that protect all forms of life on land, the implementation of policies protecting peace and justice, and finally, the creation of partnerships that uphold all these goals - forever. How admirable - working toward a planet that provides both basic necessities and opportunities for growth and success for all people, all around the world. But this is a nightmare for American sovereignty. It’s the ultimate top-down governing structure. It’s an absolute and chilling collectivist dream.

That happens when an alliance becomes so large and so diverse that not all of its members still share similar traditions, values, agendas or national security threats? With the inclusion of West Germany in 1955, NATO’s original mission was altered somewhat. It was no longer tasked just with keeping the United States in and the Soviet Union out, but also with raising Germany up rather than keeping it down. NATO collective defense was designed to offer breathing space against the superior forces of the Soviet Red Army - until the United States could bring in reinforcements. The alliance worked because the United States accepted that Europe needed American help to deter enemies in order to avoid repeats of the disasters of 1914 and 1939. With the exception of Turkey, the older members of NATO were generally seen as sharing the geographical space of Western Europe. That is no longer quite true. Many of NATO’s newer members are not integrated into Western Europe. They are now spread all over the continent. Many of the newer members are small, vulnerable and in crises would need far more help than they could provide others. The idea of NATO has changed as well. Instead of deterring a Soviet invasion of Europe while rehabilitating Germany, NATO has become less a defensive military alliance and more a de facto cultural institution to homogenize Europe along Western lines. The more diverse NATO has become, the less unified it has become, especially with the demise of the original threat of the Soviet Union. As post-Cold War Europe grew calmer and more affluent, NATO members became less likely to believe that they would ever need to sacrifice to invest in their mutual defense. What are the lessons of NATO expansion? One, vastly increasing its membership can only make NATO weaker, not stronger.

Fact-checkers at PolitiFact and The Washington Post were fast to claim the Wuhan lab theory was repeatedly debunked by experts, claiming the theory was false and/or highly doubtful. The reporting and fact checks lead to social media companies banning lab leak content from spreading online, for it was deemed “misinformation.” Now, with more scientists questioning the origins of coronavirus, indicating it could have been leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, many of these reporters and news outlets are doing an about-face, pretending they didn’t work overtime to smear, dismiss and ostracize those with some common sense last year. Recently, Politico wrote an entire newsletter concluding the lab leak was indeed “possible.” “Theories of accidental release from a lab and zoonotic spillover both remain viable,” the letter stated. In addition, this month former New York Times science reporters Nicholas Wade and Donald G. McNeil Jr. both wrote long pieces on Medium explaining how a lab leak was plausible. It’s about time the theory makes it into the mainstream media and becomes scrutinized. Yet it may be too late. Americans’ faith in the media continues to plummet ― mainly because of reasons like this one. Instead of being curious about the origins of the leak, the press was quick to dismiss it because Republicans were promoting it. They uncritically trusted dishonest sources in an effort to promote a narrative that they thought would hurt former President Trump.

The idea that the COVID-19 outbreak may have originated at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology was never far-fetched. After all, Shi Zhengli was conducting experiments with horseshoe bats, that of which the coronavirus most closely resembles, at the Wuhan Lab. She even expressed concerns last year the virus may have originated in her lab before she was silenced by the Chinese Communist Party. Then there were also documented concerns of the lab’s safety. As Peter Navarro wrote in our pages: “With a biosafety rating of ‘P4,’ the Wuhan Virology Lab houses the most dangerous pathogens on Earth, including the deadly Ebola.” “However, no P4 lab is ever 100% secure as there are numerous examples of pathogens escaping. An accidental release of SARS-CoV-2 from the Wuhan Lab is therefore well within reason. This is particularly plausible given a U.S. State Department 2018 warning of sloppy safety precautions at the Wuhan Lab and the possibility of a ‘new SARS-like pandemic.’” Yet, the mainstream media and Big Tech worked overtime last year, dubbing the common-sense lab leak theory a “conspiracy” and banning any mention of it from social media feeds. CNN was also quick to defend Chinese Communist Party and place blame on former President Donald J. Trump for spreading the “almost certainly not true” theory. CNN’s Jake Tapper was quick to point out how Republican’s claims of a potential lab leak was something his viewers should “put in the conspiracy theory bucket.” MSNBC’s Chris Hayes said, “The Trump administration is so desperately grasping at straws, trying to find someone to blame, they don’t even seem to understand what they themselves are saying.”