RADIOFebruary 14, 2025

Did Fauci Orchestrate the Pandemic? New Documentary EXPOSES ALL

A few years ago, Glenn reviewed all the evidence that Dr. Fauci’s gain-of-function research may have contributed to the creation of the COVID-19 pandemic. Now, fellow BlazeTV host Matt Kibbe says we have found the “smoking gun.” Kibbe joins Glenn to discuss Episode 4 of his docuseries, “The Coverup,” which exposes how Fauci’s sketchy research has weaponized viruses, supposedly in the name of “biosecurity.” Plus, Kibbe explains why Biden gave Fauci a blanket pardon going all the way back to 2014, why Fauci was so obsessed with gain-of-function research and “The Science,” and how former NIH director Francis Collins is also involved in this scandal.

Watch “The Coverup” NOW at http://FauciCoverUp.com/GLENN and get $30 off a subscription with the promo code: SMOKINGGUN

Watch the TRAILER HERE: • The Coverup: Wuhan, Fauci, and The Sm...

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: We welcome, Mr. Matt Kibbe. Hello, Matt.

MATT: Hey, Glenn.

GLENN: So you -- I can't even imagine what this documentary costs. It's really, really good. And we're up to episode number four, the Cover-up.

MATT: Yes.

GLENN: And this is the one where it all is laid out, crystal clear. With all of the evidence. And it was so satisfying for me to watch. Because we had some of this evidence when I did a special four years ago. And you could connect the dots. You could see it. But a lot of it wasn't there. You had to take a leap of faith that, yes. That dot and that dot, they're only missing the connecting dot that I can't prove right now. You have all of the connecting dots.

My wife, who doesn't really get into these things usually, we were watching it last night.

And she watched it. And I can't tell you how many times she went, oh, my gosh.

Oh, you've got -- what?

I mean, Fauci, I believe thinks he's God.

It is astounding, how long he's been involved in this.

And how much power he has.

Take us from the beginning of this episode.

MATT: It's almost unbelievable, right? When you watch this.

If we didn't have the receipts, you would think, you're just going all Alex Jones here.

GLENN: Yeah. Which, by the way, Alex Jones is starting to make more and more sense.

MATT: Right. Right. I say that as a compliment at this point. Because he warned us about so much of this. And this starts with my very first conversation with Jay Bhattacharya. And he casually mentioned to me on my show, the first time I interviewed him, that this explosion of funding for gain-of-function research happened after 9/11.

And my -- and that -- that stuck with me ever since.

And what Richard Ebright documents in this series is the origins of Fauci's power. Origins of the money. The origins of this mad science experiment that we were going to sort of weaponize viruses. Supposedly in the name of bio security.

And it starts with Dick Cheney who has an obsession about the -- the limits to -- to the government's ability to develop bioweapons agents. Again, ostensibly to keep us safe.

GLENN: Okay. Go ahead.

So it's frustrating to watch this twisted logic. There is no reason to do this gain-of-function research over and over and over again.

Fauci had been asked, and he never answered the question. And all scientists agree, it -- it cannot be you. You do not have to do this to find an antidote to do this.

And that's the one thing I was left thinking. I mean, is this almost an Operation Paper Clip Nazi kind of, we have the power to create this evil stuff, that could wipe out all of humanity? Let's do it.

MATT: Yeah. It reminds me of a more evil version of nation building. This arrogance that says, we could airdrop into another country and teach them Western values and teach them about our Constitution, and suddenly there's property rights and there's rule of law. And it works! And it doesn't work.

It's a form of central planning, right? It's a form of hubris. And this takes it one step forward because you're trying to reimagine nature itself. You're trying to reengineer nature.

It starts with Cheney. You can go back with Nixon, who signed a bioweapons treaty that said we weren't going to do it.

And this is what Dick Cheney was chasing against. And DOD. And these other defense agencies had an office, in their agencies, that said -- that made sure that they didn't violate that treaty. But USAID, NIAID, NIH do not have compliance offices.

So it's a money-laundering scheme, to do these mad science experiments, that they couldn't do legally otherwise. And now, you know, Elon is revealing all of this. You've been talking about this for years.

It's a really, really evil, arrogant thing that happened.

GLENN: Oh, evil. Evil.

You know, when you see Fauci doubling down, and doubling down

Because he's been called on it for years. And most people don't remember it.

It was from the New York Times. And the Washington Post. For years. The things that he was responsible for.

I mean, the bird flu. How many chickens did we have to kill, Pat? What was that?

PAT: 145 million. It was 2022.

GLENN: 145 million chickens. You want to know why the price of eggs is up? That's why!

MATT: Panicide.

GLENN: Yeah. So we're killing them all. Why are we? What happened?

If I'm not mistaken, I learned last night, in watching the cover-up, that that's Fauci too!

MATT: Right. There's more experiments that we know about.

But the ones that Ben, start with -- so Cheney and Fauci. And Fauci gets this huge pay raise to be the czar of gain-of-function research.

And one of his first projects was to re-create the Spanish flu. Which did not exist on the planet earth.

They actually dug up a body and re-created it from scratch. And then they published how to do it in a science journal. And Congress rightfully said, are you insane?

Fauci gets called in. And this is the first of many times, he says, it's worth the risk.

I've decided. It's worth the risk.

And the firestorm goes away.

And then there's various wild experiments with -- with the bird flu. That come very close to catastrophic leaks. Out of labs.

Because every time that Fauci gets called before Congress, he says, we're going to up security.

We're going to develop protocols. We're going to really focus on safety. But they never really do it.

GLENN: No. In fact, it seems to get worse every time.

MATT: Yeah. It gets worse because the program expands and expands. It's like -- it's like this crazy quilt of countries and universities now that are doing this kind of research.

GLENN: And doing it in Ukraine! Ukraine!

MATT: Yeah. It's -- I mean, it will be the end of us, if we don't stop it.

And that's -- that's why I'm obsessed, and that's why Ebright is obsessed. That's why Rand Paul is obsessed.

And you mentioned this, but it's fascinating to point out. Everyone is like, why did Biden give Fauci a blank check going back to 2014?

GLENN: Uh-huh. Why?

MATT: And this is well-documented in this episode. Because starting in 2015 is when Fauci and Francis Collins, the head of the NIH, started willfully ignoring the law against gain-of-function research, explicitly on coronaviruses.

GLENN: So here is my -- here is my only question, and I think I have the answer. Why would Fauci do this?

There was like literally almost every scientist saying, don't do this. There's no reason for this.

And he just keeps going into the most dangerous things we possibly can.

Why?

MATT: He's. If you know his history. He's the consummate apparatchik.

And when Dick Cheney goes to him. And says, I have this idea.

And Fauci's answer, I wasn't there.

But Fauci surely said, hold my beer. I'll do that. If you're going to give me all that and money power, I will do it.

If I have a chance to reimagine nature, I'm up for that task. And he's written about it.

I keep quoting this article that he and his now probably going to jail partner David Morin wrote a piece himself, in 2020, talking about bending modernity and reimagining how we live our lives from where we live, to how we travel, to how we gather.
So he has this God complex.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

MATT: And I don't know if he had it when he said yes. He may have been a good bureaucrat. Lots of money. I can grow my power.

You can pay me a lot more.

But in that echo chamber over the next 20 years, where every scientist -- I mean, you went from the scientific community blowing the whistle and saying, this is crazy.

It gets a little quieter every time that Fauci is caught doing something. Because at some point, they're all on the payroll. And if you want to stick your neck out, like Richard Ebright did, you might lose all of your NIH grants.

You might lose your university position because your university is addicted to all of this gain of function funding.

So they -- they have bought and paid for science itself. And corrupted the process to the point where, we shouldn't trust the science.

Because it is not science. It is this mad science, arrogant project.

GLENN: When Fauci said disagreeing with me, is disagreeing with science.

Was that a God complex?

Or was that a, I fund all the science.

Go ahead, disagree all you want, but I control the science.

MATT: And I think it's both. And I do think that when Rand Paul started questioning him, he had never, ever faced someone that was both skeptical and informed. And so he's been able to BS is his way past senators and congressmen.

Because you can sort of throw a bunch of words and science-y stuff at them.

And you can change the definition of gain of function research.

And virtually no one except for a few people that have either done their research or have been following him, have any idea that he's just lying to you.

So I think -- I think it was both. At that point. He was in his own mind, the God of science.

But he also wasn't used to people questioning his authority.

GLENN: Like I said, when I first started talking about this, today, my wife and I watched it last night.

And she gasped several times. So did I.

And you won't believe it. I mean, just talking about it here, does not do this justice.

In seeing what Fauci has done and what we're dealing with now, all over the world, and how it is still growing, it -- it -- you will -- you will be saying to president Trump and RFK and Bhattacharya and everybody else, arrest this man. Stop this, right now.

Because like you said, you know how I feel about AI.

That is -- that is -- we're just -- that's nitroglycerin in a paint shaker. Hey, let's give that a whirl.

This is probably closer to killing us right now. Because all it takes is one mistake.

And any of these crazy labs. And nobody is talking about it.

Nobody is admitting it.

It's got to be -- it has to be completely exposed. Every name needs to come out. There needs to be punishments for it. And all of it, burnt in an incinerator.

MATT: Yeah.

And it will be a lot like the nuclear weapons arsenal. And this is something that Dr. Ebright talks about as well. The risk grows exponentially as you expand the program.

Because if you have a couple of universities. If you have a couple of labs doing this, you know where it is.

GLENN: Right.

MATT: But now, it's all over the place.

GLENN: Right. And you've got all these people. Somebody mad. Somebody disgruntled. Somebody just stupid.

Somebody, you know, makes a mistake. Every time this program grows.

MATT: Yeah. By the way. And this is something we also talk about. The anthrax attacks.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

MATT: Which conveniently happened one month after 9/11.

Well, we eventually learned, or at least are told that it was, in fact, a government-financed lab, that had access to anthrax.

GLENN: Yeah.

MATT: That allegedly caused this, which paved the way for all of this funding that we're talking about.

It wasn't just the Patriot Act. It was additional legislation that massively expanded the money that Fauci would get control of.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist. But oddly enough, the guy that was accused of doing that, committed suicide before he could be prosecuted.

GLENN: Yeah. I know.

That stood out to me yesterday too.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Whitney Webb: How You Can BREAK FREE of the Chains of the Elites

Are you truly free, or is your life quietly controlled by systems most Americans never question? In this eye-opening conversation, Glenn Beck speaks with investigative journalist Whitney Webb about how the Elites, banks, and global systems have created modern forms of enslavement, all while the public remains largely unaware. They discuss the urgent need for local self-reliance, alternative financial systems, and taking personal responsibility to protect yourself and your family. This is a wake-up call for anyone who believes freedom is guaranteed, and it’s time to see the truth and act before it’s too late.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Whitney Webb HERE

Claire's warning: The dark side of gender care EXPOSED

Claire Abernathy was just 14-years-old when doctors told her parents she’d take her own life without hormones and surgery. They promised “gender care” would save her life. Instead, it left Claire with irreversible scars, broken trust, and a lifetime of regret. Her mom was told she was required to comply. No one ever addressed the bullying, or trauma Claire endured before being rushed into medical transition. Now, years later, both Claire and her mother are speaking out and exposing how families are misled, how doctors hide risks, and how children are left to pay the price. With federal investigations now underway, their story is a warning every parent needs to hear.

Deep State NGO CAUGHT trying to restart opium trade in Taliban-run Afghanistan

Was an NGO with deep government ties trying to RESTART the opium trade in Taliban-run Afghanistan while former Taliban members were on its payroll...only to be caught DESTROYING the evidence?! The State Department's Under Secretary for Public Diplomacy Darren Beattie joins Glenn Beck to expose what he found when he was made Acting President of the United States Institute of Peace. Plus, he debunks ProPublica’s claim that DOGE “targeted” an “Afghan scholar who fled the Taliban.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Darren, welcome to the program. How are you? Darren, are you there? Is he there?

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: Okay. Check if he's there. Is he? Dick Cheney. Dick Cheney.

STU: Trying to shut him down. They don't want peace. They don't want peace.

GLENN: They don't. They don't.

He is -- he is a big-time anti-globalist. I've got to tell you, what we're doing with the State Department. I absolutely love. The State Department has been a big problem for this country for a very long time. It's what's gotten us into these global wars. These endless wars, and everything he is.

And, I mean, I don't know what happened to Marco rube, but he is tremendous.

And the way president Trump is appointing different people like Darren, it's fantastic. Darren, are you there? Darren.

STU: Something must be wrong with the lines. Because we are talking to him offline on the phone here. And it does seem to be working, but not coming through our broadcast board here for whatever reason.

GLENN: Well, let's see if we can get that fixed, and maybe let me just talk here for five, six minutes on something else. Then we'll take a break and come back and see if we can get him.

There's something else that I really want to talk about. And that is this flag-burning thing. Now, it's not an amendment.

This is something that the president is putting up in an executive order and has very little teeth to it.

But I -- I -- look, I understand. As a guy putting an enormous flagpole up at my house today.

I mean, an enormous flagpole.

I love the flag. I love it!

And there are a few things that make me more angry than see somebody you set our flag on fire.

For a lot of people, that's a punch in the gut, especially our military people. And it has been planted on distant battlefields. It's raced after victory. Saluted in the morning, or should be in our schools and folded and given to the hands of grieving families. It feels like spitting on every sacrifice, that ever made this nation possible. And the argument against flag burning is really simple: It dishonors the idea of all of that. Okay?

And it defends millions of people, including me. It disrespects, I think the veterans that bled. The families who mourned. The dream that binds us together.

However, here's the hard truth: Symbols only mean something, in a land where freedom is alive.

If you outlaw the burning of a flag, the you have placed the cloth above the Constitution that it represents. You have made the flag an idol.

We don't worship idols. If you can only praise the flag and never protest it, it just stops being a symbol of freedom. And starts being an idol of obedience.

Now, that's the argument for allowing it. At least to me.

Because the real strength of a free nation is -- is to -- it's -- it's how we protect, not the speech we love, but how we endure the speech we hate!

And the Supreme Court has already ruled on this. And, you know, they -- the line they drew wasn't an easy one. Freedom of speech, stops where it directly -- directly insights violence. And that's it same thing, kind of, in this executive order.

You can burn the flag. But if I'm not mistaken, but if it incites violence, then you're in trouble.

And that's true. But the bar of inciting violence is so incredibly high. And it's -- it doesn't have anything to do with speech that offends. It's not speech that stirs anger. Not speech that wants you to punch the speaker in the mouth. It's speech only, that provokes imminent and specific violence.

And unless it's that be with the government doesn't have any right to -- to get into the business of silencing speech. Ever. Ever. Ever.

It is a hard line. And that standard is really hard. It's painfully hard.

Because what our citizenship requires, this is civics. What our citizenships require, is that we defend -- oh, I hate this.

We defend the right of your opponent to mock everything that we hold sacred.

Now, I want you to think of this. You can burn a Bible. You can burn the Word of God. But some want to make it illegal to burn a flag. Where are our priorities? You can burn the Constitution. The words that actually are the ones that stir us into action. But you can't burn a flag.

You can't burn a Koran. Can't burn them. Can't. Can't.

You will -- you will quickly come to a quick end, not legally. But you will come to a quick end. I don't ever want to be like that. Ever!

You burn a Bible. I think you're a monster. What is wrong with you? What is wrong with you?

But you have a right to do it. Why are we drawing a line around the flag? It -- the reason is -- is because we feel things so passionately. And that is really a good thing, to feel love of country so passionately. But then we have to temper that. My father used to tell me, that I think this country needs to hear over and over again, every day. My father -- we would talk to somebody. And we would walk away. And he would go, I so disagree with everything that man just said. But, Glenn, son, he would say. I will fight to the death for his right to say it. He used to say that to me all the time. Which now lees me to believe, I know where I've got my strong opinions from. Because dad apparently would disagree with a lot of people all the time.

But that was the essence of freedom. That is the essence of what sets us apart. Standing for universal, eternal rights like free speech. It's not easy. It means you have to take the size of those people that offend you. It means -- it doesn't mean you have to disagree with it. You can fight against it. You can argue back and forth.

But you -- can you tolerate the insults to the things that you love most. That is so hard, and that is why most of the world does not have freedom of speech. It's too hard! But our Founders believed people are better than that. Our citizens can rule themselves!

And the only way you can rule yourself is if you don't have limits on freedom of speech. So the question is, do we want to remain free? Or do we want to just feel good? It really is that simple. It's why no one else has freedom of speech. It's too hard! I think we're up to the task. Okay. Give me 60 seconds. And then we will try again.

The -- there's certain moments in history, that test not just entire nations, but the hearts of those who live in the nations. And right now, the people of Israel are living in one of those moments. Sirens in the night. Families huddled together.

Elderly men and women. Who remember a time when help never came. All of them wonder. Is anybody going to stand with us, this time?

The International Fellowship of Christians and Jews exists to answer that question. They provide food, shelter, security, and hope. Real hope and help in the middle of a crisis! And every act of generosity from people like you sends a clear message. You are not alone. When you support the fellowship, you are joining hands with believers all around the world to lift up God's people, when they need it most. And it is a promise in action. It's a testimony that our faith isn't just words. It's love delivered right on time. And this is your chance to be part of something that really, truly matters. Something that is eternal. To stand shoulder to shoulder with Israel. And say, we're with you. We're not going to fight your wars. Not going to fund your wars. But we're with you. You have a right to live and exist in peace. To learn how you can help. Visit IFCJ.org. IFCJ.org. Go there now. IFCJ.org. Ten seconds. Back to the program.
(music)
All right. Let me -- let me bring Darren in. Darren, are you there now?

DARREN: Yes!
GLENN: Oh, God. Thank goodness.
Thank you for putting up with us. I don't know what happened with the phone system. But, first of all, tell me what the US Institute of Peace is. I've never even heard of it.

DARREN: That is a fantastic question. And I'll try to give the abbreviated answer, because I know we don't have several hours.

GLENN: Good. I know.

DARREN: But US Institute of Peace is one of lesser known, but quite important member of the NGO archipelago, that was created in the '80s. It belongs to the same cohorts as national endowments for democracy.

GLENN: Oh.

DARREN: And some other -- some other better known NGOs that really in the broad context of things. In kind of the sweep of things, was created as a kind of reorganization of the government structure in the aftermath of the church type committee hearings that expose a lot of the dirty dealings of government agencies such as the CIA, and so sort of a broader response to that government lie was to create this NGO layer of governance, with an armed distant plausible deniability, a kind of chameleon character of not exactly being government, not exactly being private, in order to fulfill some of those more sensitive functions that had been exposed in the course of the church hearings.

And so US Institute of Peace is one of those NGOs that had particular focus on conflict regions. But, of course, as I think you -- you suggested earlier, peace requires at the very least, an asterisk. Because there involves a lot of things, that conventional, most American citizens would not think should belong as part of the portfolio of something calling itself an institute of peace.

GLENN: So what was the thing with the -- with this Taliban member that was getting money from us?

DARREN: Right. So this is an interesting case. So there's a whole saga of a takeover of the US institute of peace under -- under DOGE.

And that's really a fascinating story unto itself. Just to give you a sense of what these characters were like. They barricaded themselves in the offices.

They sabotaged the physical infrastructure of the building. There were reports of there being loaded guns within the offices.

GLENN: Wow!

DARREN: There was one, like, hostage situation where they held a security guard under basically kind of a false imprisonment type situation. It was extremely intense.

Far more so than the better known story of USAID. And in the course of all of that, they tried to delete a terabyte of data, of accounting information that would indicate what kind of stuff they were up to.

What kind of people they were paying. And in the course of that, DOGE found that one of the people on their payroll. Was this curious figure, who had a prominent role in the Taliban government. And then seemed to kind of play a bunch of angles across each other.

Sort of one of these sixer types in the middle of Afghanistan.

The question is, what the heck is an organization like this, having an individual, who is a former Taliban member on their payroll.

It underscores how incredibly bizarre the whole arrangement is. And to just reinforce that. I think even more bizarre than having this former Taliban guy on the payroll is the kind of schizophrenic posture exhibited by the chief -- one truly bizarre thing is that one of the US Institute of Peace's main kind of policy agendas was basically lamenting the fact that the opium trade had dissipated under Taliban leadership. They had multiple reports coming out, basically saying, this is horrible, that the opium trade is diminished under the Taliban. Meaning, finding some way to restore it. How bizarre is that!

GLENN: What was their thinking?

DARREN: Well, it's -- it's very strange, and it depends on what kind of rabbit holes you want to go down. But the whole story of opium and Afghanistan and its connection to, you know, government entities, is a -- is a very intricate and delicate and fascinating one. But it seems very clear that the US Institute of Peace was involved in that story to some degree because their public reports. They had a full-the time guy of basically lamenting the fact that the opium trade dissipated under the Taliban. And, meanwhile, they're funding this former Taliban guy.

GLENN: Unbelievable. Now, ProPublica got this. And you have released the statement on it. And ProPublica just completely white-washed this -- said this guy was a victim, and his family was taken hostage. Was his family ever taken hostage because he was exposed?

And correct the ProPublica story, would you?

DARREN: Yeah, I mean, the ProPublica thing, as usual and as expected was a total joke.

GLENN: Yes.

DARREN: I mean, this guy, I'm not an expert on this particular person's history. But what's very clear is he was a former Taliban guy, and he was probably one of these people, who was playing all sides, made a lot of enemies. I know that there were several kind of attempts on his life by the Taliban, in the course of various -- various decades.

This has nothing to do with -- with DOGE.

I mean, he's a known quantity in the region.

And somebody who has made a lot of enemies.

And he was not -- he was on the payroll of the US institute of peace.

And nobody is expecting something like that. So then, and, again, there's this sort of hostile takeover situation.

Where the people are barricading he themselves in. Trying to delete all this data.

And sure enough, what's in the data, is stuff like this.

These random former Taliban guy, making his contract with $130,000.

GLENN: You know, this is the -- this is the real Deep State stuff, that I think bothers people so much.

Look, we expect our CIA to do stuff, we don't necessarily want to do it. We expect it.

When it's in the State Department.

When every department is pushing out money to NGOs to overthrow governments and everything else.

It's out of control!

It's just completely out of control.

And who is overseeing all of that.

DARREN: That's a great question.

I think part of the NGO -- UCEF was almost a cutout of a cutout.

A fourth of its money came from USAID.

In many ways, it was a cutout of USAID. Which itself was a cutout.

So there are many layers of distance. Plausible deniability.

And UCEF, I think institutionally really perfected this chameleon structure of being able to plausibly present itself as government. When that was convenient for what they were doing.

And also to present itself as a private organization, when that was convenient.

It's a very intricate setup that they had, that was truly optimized for this chameleon character of plausible denial operations. In conflict zones. Doing God knows what, with American taxpayer money.

And it's just an absolute hornet's nest.

We have recovered that terabyte that they tried to delete. And once we get things settled in the building itself, I intend to do a kind of transparency effort, whereby we release all of this material to the public.

GLENN: Good. Good.

DARREN: Just like I'm doing at the State Department. I'm currently acting as secretary at the State Department. And doing a transparency effort here. After I eliminated the global engagement center, which was sort of the internal censorship office within the State Department, decided, we've got to -- we've got to air this out to the public.

So within the next couple of weeks.

We'll have our next tranche of helps you of thousands of emails, documenting what this were doing.

GLENN: I would love you to go back on, through those emails.

I think you guys in the State Department are doing an amazing job. Thanks for being on.