Listen To Story Above

As scrutiny intensifies around the U.S. Agency for International Development’s spending practices under President Donald Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency initiative, revelations about the agency’s involvement in progressive causes have emerged. Beyond questionable expenditures like allocating $32,000 for a transgender comic book in Peru, evidence suggests USAID’s actions may have inadvertently influenced the 2020 election through its connection to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The CIA’s recent announcement on January 25th marks a significant shift in perspective, indicating their belief that COVID-19 likely originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, albeit with “low confidence.” While most U.S. intelligence agencies previously favored natural origins, the CIA now considers a research-related origin more probable based on available evidence.

This assessment aligns with several crucial facts: no closely related virus was found naturally near Wuhan, no original host animal was identified, and no bats were documented being sold at the supposedly responsible wet market. Instead, the outbreak occurred near a virology institute with documented safety concerns and reported incidents from October 2019.

The institute conducted controversial “gain of function” research on bat coronaviruses, despite Anthony Fauci’s denials. This research received funding through EcoHealth Alliance, a U.S. organization supported by USAID’s Emerging Pandemic Threats program.

From EcoHealth’s website: “In an effort to identify and respond to new zoonotic diseases before they spread to humans, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) established its Emerging Pandemic Threats (EPT) program. The EPT program consists of four projects: PREDICT, RESPOND, IDENTIFY, and PREVENT. The PREDICT project seeks to identify new emerging infectious diseases that could become a threat to human health. PREDICT partners locate their research in geographic ‘hotspots’ and focus on wildlife that are most likely to carry zoonotic diseases – animals such as bats, rodents, and nonhuman primates.”

Documentation reveals that Fauci’s National Institute for Allergies and Infectious Diseases was aware of both the research and safety concerns, yet funding continued without public warnings about the facility’s risks.

The pandemic’s timing and impact significantly affected the 2020 election landscape. Trump’s strong pre-pandemic economic position deteriorated as he faced criticism over his pandemic response. Discussion of the virus’s origins became politically charged, while widespread changes to election procedures, including expanded mail-in voting, altered the electoral process.

Biden’s subsequent victory occurred amid unprecedented circumstances, with media coverage heavily influencing public perception of both candidates’ pandemic responses. While no direct ballot manipulation occurred, the confluence of USAID’s funding decisions, the pandemic’s origins, and the resulting political fallout raises questions about the agency’s role in shaping electoral outcomes.

This situation exemplifies how USAID has evolved from its original mission into an organization channeling taxpayer money to NGOs, with consequences extending far beyond its intended scope. The agency’s involvement in funding research at WIV, however indirect, contributed to a chain of events that ultimately impacted American democracy in unprecedented ways.