Rand Paul Dismantles Ex-CDC Chief in Brutal Senate Showdown
The goal of today’s hearing was to build momentum to force RFK Jr. to resign. But things did not go according to plan.
Ex-CDC Director Dr. Susan Monarez testified today before the Senate HELP Committee in a desperate attempt to smear RFK Jr.’s name and build pressure for him to resign.
But things didn’t go according to plan. Senator Rand Paul wasn’t about to let that happen. After Monarez got a few softball questions from Bernie Sanders and others, Paul stepped in with the tough ones.
He started with the basics—asking if the COVID vaccines actually stop transmission.
PAUL: “Does the COVID vaccine prevent transmission?”
MONAREZ: “The COVID vaccine can reduce viral load in individuals who are—”
PAUL: “Does it prevent transmission?”
MONAREZ: “When you have reduced viral load… you will have reduced transmission.”
PAUL: “But in other words, it DOESN’T prevent transmission. You can still transmit the virus if you’ve had the vaccine.”
Paul then turned to children. He asked Monarez if the COVID vaccine was indicated for kids.
She repeated the same line—that “it can” reduce hospitalization and death. But Paul wasn’t letting it slide.
PAUL: “Does the COVID vaccine reduce hospitalization for children under 18?”
MONAREZ: “It can.”
Paul fired back. “It doesn’t. The statistics are inconclusive. And the reason you can’t prove that it does is there’s so few people under 18 that go to the hospital. The numbers are extraordinarily small.”
When he pressed further about whether the vaccines reduce death in children, Monarez again answered, “It can.”
That’s when Paul shut it down. He pointed to the real risk children face—not COVID, but myocarditis.
“You find that there is a risk of myocarditis, a significant event [in young men and boys]. It’s somewhere between 6 and 8 in 10,000. But that’s much greater than the risk of hospitalization or death, which are not even measurable because they’re so small.”
From there, Paul moved on to the hepatitis B vaccine. Monarez tried to pivot, but Paul wasn’t letting her off the hook. She couldn’t come up with a single argument in favor of giving Hep B on the first day of life, looking like a deer in headlights when Paul asked her the question.
Paul also exposed the real reason she was fired. Monarez claimed she resisted firing what she called “respected scientists.” But as Paul pointed out, those same scientists were still pushing COVID shots for 6-month-old babies.
PAUL: “So you resisted firing people who have this idea that the COVID vaccine should be at six months. That’s what this is about. You didn’t resist firing the beautiful scientists that are career people and un-objective and unbiased.
“You wouldn’t fire the people who are saying that we have to vaccinate our kids at six months of age. That’s who you refuse to fire.”
MONAREZ: “So that assertion, is not commensurate with the experience that I had with the individuals who are identified to be fired.”
PAUL: “Did any of the people you refused to fire believe that we should change the vaccine schedule and no longer force six-month-old kids to take it?
“Everyone of them was adamant we should keep it at six months.”
CNN regrettably aired the entire exchange for their audience, but they quickly ran cover, explaining to viewers what Monarez MIGHT have said after she froze under Paul’s questioning. The spin was obvious.
“[Paul] was being testy.”
“[Monarez] was very calm and trying to answer his questions.”
“He [Paul] was asking, for example, about hepatitis B. And I think where she started to answer but kept getting cut off was that there is this risk of babies getting hepatitis B, usually maternal-to-child transmission. Mothers can be screened for hepatitis B ahead of time, but, you know, sometimes those screens, about 10% of the time, you’ll get false negatives…”
And that’s why people call them fake news.
Thanks for reading. VigilantFox.com is an independent news outlet that puts truth above narrative. No donations from Big Pharma or corporate giants—simply news for the people, by the people.
If you value this work, please consider subscribing to help keep the mission alive. Your financial support makes all the difference.
All the CDC employees that make decisions about yes or no on vaccines should be tested for statistical analysis understanding, and if they don’t know how it works they don’t belong in the job! In fact, all the employees should be vetted for understanding their work goals, and whether or not they have the educational background to achieve them.
I don't think it reduces viral load either.