Josh Hawley Confronts Scientist for Engaging in ‘Propaganda Effort’ to Cast Doubt on Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

HAWLEY: “Dr. Garry, you were part of this propaganda effort. I mean, you are right at the center of it. It’s astounding. You wrote this piece, this ‘Nature’ magazine piece or whatever it was that we’ve heard testimony here today. ‘Nature Medicine,’ March 17th, 2020. We’ve heard testimony here today from other scientists on the panel that it’s basically an opinion piece. You said at the time, that definitively SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct, is not a laboratory construct. Of course, our own government key agencies have concluded otherwise. And on the basis of this, Dr. Fauci and others cited this — this piece and went out to use it to mobilize our own government to censor people who asked questions about it. People lost their jobs because of this. They lost their jobs, they lost their standing, they were kicked off Facebook, they were kicked off Twitter. Do you regret being part of this effort, this propaganda effort?”
GARRY: “Sir, I — I was — I was simply just writing a paper about our scientific opinions about where this virus came from.”
HAWLEY: “Oh, no, you weren’t. You said in an email that we now have, that you tried to withhold that the we have, February 2nd 2020, you wrote, ‘I really can’t think of a plausible, natural scenario where you can get from the bat virus, or one very similar to it, to this.’ I’m quoting you, ‘I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature. It’s stunning.’ Of course, in the lab, it would be easy.”“
GARRY: “Of course. And I actually figured it out. That’s the whole point of that.”
HAWLEY: “You figured it out. You — you wrote this while you were writing your propaganda piece, while you were writing the paper.”
GARRY: “I wrote that somewhere around February 2nd.”
HAWLEY: “Yeah, it was exactly February 2nd, and you’ve testified that you were writing your proximal origin paper in early February. So you’re saying that what? Did it come to you overnight?”
GARRY: “There was new data that came —”
HAWLEY: “Like a — a revelation from God.”
GARRY: “No. [crosstalk]”
HAWLEY: “Overnight, you concluded, I got it. I got it. I figured it out. I’ve figured it out. And now I can definitively rule out. It’s amazing. Is that what happened?”
GARRY: “It’s just the scientific method —”
HAWLEY: “Oh it’s just — oh it’s the scientific method that happened at lightning speed, and then was used to propagandize and lie to and shut down. As a scientist who’s supposed to follow facts, do you regret the fact that your work was used to censor your fellow scientists? It was used to censor ordinary Americans who ask questions about the virus. Do you — do you regret that?”
GARRY: “Yeah. When — when you write a paper, I mean, you get it in the journal. We can’t control what happens after — [crosstalk]”
HAWLEY: “Oh, I see. So you’re not responsible at all. This is — it’s amazing. Nobody who was involved in any of this is responsible. Never. They’re not responsible. People have lost their jobs.”
GARRY: “Yeah.”
HAWLEY: “People have lost probably their healthcare associated with their jobs. People have been run out of public, available and polite society. You can’t show your face because my gosh, you question —”
GARRY: “Yeah.”
HAWLEY: “— but you, you don’t have anything to do with it. Why have so many of your papers, your other papers been retracted or subjected to formal expressions of concern?”
GARRY: “Yeah. Well —”
HAWLEY: “Why is that?”
GARRY: “— there — there’s a long story behind that. Those — those —”
HAWLEY: “Four of them, right. I mean, you’ve — you’ve had in — in July 26th 2021, Virology retracted a paper of yours. Also in 2021, the Journal of General Virology retracted another of your papers. In March of 2022 an expression of concern was added by an editor of yet another journal to another of your papers. In April 4th of 2024 a third scientific paper of yours was retracted from the Journal of Medical Virology.”
GARRY: “Yeah.”
HAWLEY: “Is this normal?”
GARRY: “Those papers didn’t come from my lab. But you know, I’m certainly helping —”
HAWLEY: “They’re not yours?”
GARRY: “They’re not mine. Yeah.”
HAWLEY: “So — so your — your work is —”
GARRY: “I’m on the paper but they did not come from my lab.”
HAWLEY: “The work that — that God gave you and a flash of inspiration remains absolutely unimpeachable. Unimpeached.”
GARRY: “We stand by that.”
HAWLEY: “Do you stand by your — your assertion in your nature piece that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct? Could not be. [crosstalk]”
GARRY: “We do. And that’s exactly the same —”
HAWLEY: “Couldn’t possibly be.”
GARRY: “— conclusion that the intelligence community came to.”
HAWLEY: “Oh, no, that is a lie. Let’s stop right there. That is a lie. I have read the intelligence — the intelligence community did not come to that conclusion. Multiple intelligence community agents and components have concluded it was likely a lab leak. And they concluded that at the same time that you and your people were propagandizing the American public and using the channels and influence of the American government to censor ordinary Americans. That is the truth. I’m not going to sit here and allow you to lie any further.”
GARRY: “I’m not —”
HAWLEY: “Dr. Garry —”
GARRY: “— I’m not lying, sir.”
HAWLEY: “— you have disgracefully participated in shameful propaganda that has been one of the worst chapters in this country’s history with the government propagandizing its own people. And you know what? You may be right about the lab — I’m not a scientist, I don’t know. But what I do know is — what I do know is, it is wrong, it is wrong to censor and lie to the American public. It is wrong to withhold critical information from them. And it is wrong to countenance that and to say, ‘Oh, I just had nothing to do with it. Gee, I wish we could have done better.’ You should have done better, sir. You should have done better. And because you didn’t people have suffered. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.”