The Data Free Twilight Zone...Was Pregnancy

A plain-language walk-through of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s official text messages. Released August 10, 2026 by Senators Ron Johnson and Rand Paul. Everything is referenced, explained simply, and linked to the original sources. The rest is up to you.

August 10, 2026 — Washington, DC

Yesterday, Senators Ron Johnson (R-WI), chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, and Rand Paul (R-KY), chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, released the first batch of text messages recovered from Dr. Anthony Fauci’s government-issued iPhone.

Yep.

Holy shit is right.

HHS handed the phone’s contents over to them on August 5, 2026, in response to Johnson’s request. (Read: Bobby is kicking major ass right now). According to the senators’ office, the phone holds more than 34,000 text messages and 522 voicemails; only three contacts are saved by name, everything else is a bare phone number, and staff say it’s too early to know whether anything has been deleted.

Source: Senators Johnson, Paul Release Initial Texts from Dr. Fauci’s Government iPhone — Ron Johnson’s official Senate website, August 10, 2026.

The first document they released is a single text chain between three people: Dr. Anthony Fauci (then director of NIAID, the government’s top infectious disease agency), Dr. Rochelle Walensky (then director of the CDC), and Dr. Vivek Murthy (who would go on to become U.S. Surgeon General). The conversation took place over two days, January 25–26, 2021 — about six weeks after the first COVID shots started going into arms in the United States. The topic: whether the shot was safe for pregnant women.

Below is the full conversation, quoted exactly as released, with a plain-language explanation after each message. Nothing has been cut.

Dr. Anthony Fauci has been under escalating congressional pressure for most of 2026. In May, under subpoena from Senator Rand Paul, James Erdman III, revealed Fauci’s role micro-managing the intelligence community and White House COVID origins story. Fauci was then himself subpoenaed in June to testify before the same Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee (HSGAC), chaired by Senator Rand Paul, after withdrawing an earlier voluntary agreement to appear (Epoch Times).

Then last week, on August 6, 2026, HSGAC voted 8–7 along party lines to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress.

For the first time it seems, things are starting to move fast.

Even before the referral had been voted and issued, State attorneys general in Florida, Louisiana, and West Virginia issued a joint investigative subpoena on August 5. All of a sudden, something which had seemed to take forever was rolling down a snowy mountain on a wet spring day, and it roaring.

The advocate community was exhausted from attending hearing after hearing since the Kennedy confirmation, and there were only a few of us in the room, but the press was absolutely everywhere.

The hearings and votes were epic, all of them.

They are The End of the Beginning and the Beginning of the End.

I was in the room for the first one and I was in the room for the last one. Fauci’s non-testimony I had to watch from out of the country, but I have now watched it…from beginning to end. And I recommend you do too. There is nothing like watching the originals for yourself. The vote is called “Business Meeting.” Don’t let the boring title fool you. It was fireworks.

It is important to acknowledge that for reasons ranging in severity from temporary political calculation to compromise to pure deep state evil, Bobby has been blocked from implementing many of our key health quality and accountability objectives. The ongoing Republican Congressional destruction of pesticide liability, the mRNA mFLUSIVA flu vaccine approval and the new Navy flu shot mandates are just the most recent crises inside the Republican Admin. I’ll leave out the eye-rolling Democrats altogether. They continue to dig their own graves, literally, except on food and farm policy where they are legitimately competitive for the consideration of the American people and common sensing human beings.

But the man was clearly working diligently behind the scenes on the things that he could do. On Fox News he revealed that his department spent roughly eight months locating Fauci’s diary files, which had been spread across 11 separate government servers, before handing them to Senators Paul and Johnson: “It took us about eight months to dig these out of 11 separate servers, where they had been sequestered and secreted” (Epoch Times, July 2026). It’s against this backdrop: an active contempt referral, multiple state investigations, and a months-long hunt through federal servers, that HHS handed the contents of Fauci’s government phone to Congress on August 5, 2026..

Now, take a look for yourself:

January 25, 2021, 4:31 PM — Dr. Murthy opens the conversation:

“Hi Tony and Rochelle, hope you’re both well. For pregnant women considering getting the vaccine, are you aware of any data or theoretical reason why vaccinating early vs late in pregnancy would be preferred? And any sense of when there will be more robust data on vaccine risk in pregnant women? I’ve been telling pregnant women that there hasn’t been evidence of concerning adverse outcomes in the trials though the number of pregnant subjects was likely have been limited. I figure we have many who are the healthcare workforce who are getting vaccinated so presume we’ll be tracking outcomes. Thanks! Vivek”

In plain language: Murthy says he has already been telling pregnant women there’s nothing to worry about — while privately asking his colleagues whether that’s actually true. He also notes, in the same message, that pregnant women were barely represented in the original vaccine trials. The dude in the back there looking lost…

4:48 PM — Dr. Walensky replies:

“Hi Vivek, my understanding is that this is all a data free. CDC has implemented a pregnancy registry for f/l of pregnant women. Women who report they are pregnant in Vsafe have the opportunity to enroll with f/l 1 yr after vax doses thru their pregnancy. For live births infants will have f/u at 3m. To date >15,000 preg women are enrolled in vsafe. R”

In plain language: “f/l” and “f/u” mean “follow-up.” “Vsafe” (also written V-safe) is the CDC’s post-vaccination text-message check-in program that people could voluntarily sign up for. Walensky is saying: we don’t have real safety data yet — we have a tracking system that’s just starting to collect it. Fifteen thousand pregnant women had signed up, but none of them had been followed long enough to produce results yet.

4:56 PM — Dr. Fauci:

“Agree with Rochelle. There are no data or theoretical reason to believe that vaccinating early versus later in pregnancy would be preferred. Yet, some people (even female health care professionals) feel concerned about injecting a ‘genetic’ vaccine very early in pregnancy. There is this misperception out there that we need to deal with that mRNA somehow can ‘get into your genes’, the anxiety heightens”

In plain language: Fauci confirms there’s no real data yet, then pivots straight into messaging strategy — treating public worry about the vaccine as something to be managed and corrected, rather than as an open question still being investigated.

6:45 PM, same day — Fauci sends a second message:

“I asked around a bit more and another issue came up that you need to be aware of. Since many people have significant cytokines storm and fever after the 2nd dose, this theoretically could be associated with miscarriage in the 1st trimester”

In plain language: A “cytokine storm” is a strong, sometimes severe immune-system reaction — a flood of signaling proteins (cytokines) released by the body, sometimes causing high fever. It’s a known reaction some people had after the second vaccine dose. Fauci is telling Walensky and Murthy that this reaction, if it happened to someone in their first trimester of pregnancy, could plausibly cause a miscarriage — and that this is something they need to know about. Two hours after calling pregnancy fears a “misperception,” Fauci raises a concern he considers real enough to flag to the senior officials responsible.

6:47 PM — Walensky:

“Definitely a good point, esp after dose two.”

7:27 PM — Murthy:

“This is really helpful, thanks. I’ve been hearing the concern about the mRNA causing mutations in the developing fetus as well. That’s a really good point re the cytokine storm post second dose.”

In plain language: Both officials agree the miscarriage concern is legitimate. Murthy adds that he’s separately been hearing worries about the vaccine causing genetic mutations in the fetus — meaning multiple concerns were circulating among officials, not just the one Fauci raised.

January 26, 2021, 4:34 PM — Murthy:

“Tony, Rochelle, did you see this announcement today from WHO saying they advise against pregnant women taking the Moderna vaccine bc of lack of data? It has led to a flurry of questions. What is your take? I imagine we will all get asked about this.”

He then sends a link to the World Health Organization’s own public guidance page: https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/the-moderna-covid-19-mrna-1273-vaccine-what-you-need-to-know

In plain language: The World Health Organization published its own official position telling pregnant women not to get the Moderna vaccine, specifically because there wasn’t enough data yet, at almost exactly the same time as this private conversation.

4:55 PM — Fauci:

“I would say that in any vaccine in which data are lacking in pregnant women one must weigh the potential risks against the benefits. COVID-19 can be a serious disease especially in pregnancy. In the vaccine trials, pregnant women were not allowed but following the EUA, a large number (more than 10,000) pregnant women have been vaccinated. No issues have arisen. The FDA and the ACIP and the ACOG are all permissive for pregnant women to have a choice. Animal tox studies did not raise any red flags.”

In plain language, term by term: - “EUA” = Emergency Use Authorization. This is the legal mechanism the FDA used to allow COVID vaccines onto the market without the years of testing normally required for full approval. Under an EUA, the standard informed-consent rules that normally apply to medical products are “relaxed” — people are given a “fact sheet” instead of the fuller consent process required for a fully approved drug. - “ACIP” = the CDC’s Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, the panel that recommends who should get which vaccines. - “ACOG” = the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the main professional body for OB-GYNs in the U.S. Fauci is telling his colleagues: pregnant women were excluded from the original safety trials, but more than 10,000 have since been vaccinated anyway under the emergency authorization, and “no issues have arisen” — meaning no one has formally reported a problem yet, not that anyone had specifically checked and ruled the miscarriage concern out. “Nothing has been reported” and “we checked and it’s fine” are not the same, and less than 24 hours earlier Fauci himself had described a real biological reason a problem could occur, and then admitted those problems were known and serious.

4:57 PM — Murthy:

“That’s what my sense was as well Tony which is why I was surprised to see WHO put out a strong like saying they do not recommend moderna in pregnant women. That’s a strong statement to make and potentially quite damaging to public confidence among pregnant women.”

In plain language: Murthy’s reaction to WHO’s caution is concern about public confidence, not about whether WHO might be right. (What is up with that dude? Only thing…everyone was doing it. It’s like they think it’s the cool slang on their patsy playground.)

6:00 PM — Walensky:

“Agreed. Sorry was driving and missed this. ACIP meeting tomorrow. Shall I flag it for them?”

In plain language: The conversation ends with a scheduling question and the messaging problem WHO’s statement created — not a resolution of the medical question underneath it.

On January 25, 2021, Fauci privately identified a real, physiologically plausible reason the vaccine’s second dose could cause first-trimester miscarriage, and told his colleagues they needed to know about it. Walensky and Murthy agreed it was a legitimate concern, and Fauci further confirmed it was real and dangerous. The next day, the World Health Organization — independently, publicly — advised against the Moderna vaccine in pregnancy for lack of data. None of this — the cytokine-storm mechanism, or WHO’s caution — appears in these officials’ subsequent public statements. Fauci told the public in February 2021 there were “no red flags,” and in August 2021 that there was “no indication whatsoever of any increase of any adverse issues” for pregnant women.

Are you OK with this?

And then there’s the “82%” number — Anonymous

Around the same period, a different and separate document had become a flashpoint: a peer-reviewed study published in the New England Journal of Medicine in April 2021 by CDC and FDA scientists led by Tom Shimabukuro, had used the CDC’s V-safe pregnancy registry data.

Study: Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons — Shimabukuro et al., New England Journal of Medicine, April 21, 2021.

The study reported that among 827 women who had completed pregnancies after getting vaccinated, 104 (12.6%) had a miscarriage — and stated this rate was similar to what’s normally expected in the general population.

The problem: 700 of those 827 women didn’t get vaccinated until their third trimester — well past the point (20 weeks) where a loss is even medically classified as a “miscarriage” rather than a stillbirth. Including them in the denominator makes the miscarriage rate look artificially low, because most of them were mathematically incapable of having a “miscarriage” as defined by the study’s own protocol — they were already past that window when they were vaccinated.

The study’s own authors admitted the mistake in an official correction published later that year:

Correction: On Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons — NEJM, September 8, 2021. The original authors wrote: “We agree that the denominator used in that proportion — 827 completed pregnancies — is not an appropriate denominator for the calculation of a risk estimate or rate.”

If you remove the 700 third-trimester women from the denominator, the math becomes 104 miscarriages out of 127 women who were actually still in the window where a miscarriage was possible — a rate of roughly 82%, not 12.6%.

This is a disputed figure, but the evidence is leaning so hard it’s about to capsize:

Critics of the 82% figure point out that V-safe was a voluntary, self-selected reporting system (not a randomized study), which can also distort numbers in various directions, and that the population who got vaccinated very early in pregnancy may not be representative of pregnant women generally. I’ll admit both things can be true: the original 12.6% figure was calculated in a way its own authors now admit was wrong, and the corrected 82% figure has limitations as a real-world risk estimate. The reality is that the true first-trimester miscarriage risk from the vaccine has never been cleanly established by this data.

Either way, it is definitely not zero.

And for pregnancy, it is long-established medical tradition that you NEVER do ANYTHING that has ANY risk AT ALL or is even just UNKNOWN.

Just ask any obstetrician or OB-GYN.

The 82% figure is not from the Fauci text chain above but it’s the same underlying subject that Senator Johnson and the American health freedom movement have been focused on for years: vaccines have higher risks than the government claims, and the scientific community regularly makes mistakes reporting them.

And right here is where I have to keep asking the now glaringly obvious even if dangerous question:

The regularity of these “mistakes” is too regular. It is so monotonously regular as to be suspiciously similar to intentional and planned, especially when the deadly injection somehow ends up mandated against all established medical precedent, both epidemiological and obstetric, and in violation of perhaps the single most important moral principle emerging from the 20th century: informed consent.

The biggest problem we have is that the eugenics-based history of the funding mechanisms for all the underlying public health and pandemic preparedness infrastructure is right there in plain sight.

If you missed my preliminary reports on those subjects, you can find them here:

Actually, They Wrote It Down Twice

·

Aug 10

In previous research reports, I traced the eugenics lineage from the nineteenth century to 1960. I demonstrated conclusive proof of its deliberate decision to go underground. The brand they chose themselves was “crypto-eugenics.”

And here:

In the Long Shadow of Eugenics

·

Jun 10

Mary Mallon (“Typhoid Mary”) at Riverside Hospital on North Brother Island in the Hudson River, a facility specifically used by New York City health authorities to forcibly quarantine individuals. She remained here for 26 years and died there in 1938.

The woman in that photograph there? Typhoid Mary? Bet you don’t know her story very well. But you should. Carrie Buck ring a bell? Buck vs. Bell? Read the full story. You won’t regret it, and when you come back and finish this one, everything will look a whole lot different. It will take some getting used to, but as The Who said, you won’t get fooled again.

These newly released texts have gotten so much attention because they show that months before this NEJM paper was even published, the government’s own top health officials had privately flagged the exact mechanism (post-second-dose immune reaction) that the corrected math later suggested might be a real signal.

Senator Johnson has separately alleged, based on OB-GYN Dr. James Thorp’s Senate testimony, that CDC vaccine safety official Tom Shimabukuro’s internal communications about this issue “remain lost” — raising a records-preservation question that is currently unresolved.

And??? So???

According to the press release, “The text chain released today could have an immediate impact on public health and the principle of informed consent.”

You think?

Senator, there is no need to hedge about that one. Let me quote a friend of mine:

— Ito da Truth

As you know, ever since the Nuremberg Trials, under international law and normal FDA drug approval, a person has to be told about known and potential risks before agreeing to take a medical product. That’s what “informed consent” means in practice.

Although the last century’s outrageous international eugenics and sterilization programs resulted in a US Supreme Court case called Buck vs Bell that actually allows forcible sterilization (see above articles), since World War II, the U.S. Supreme Court and the rest of the world have formally recognized the right to refuse unwanted medical treatment as a fundamental liberty interest in Treaties like the Declaration of Geneva and cases like Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health (1990) and Washington v. Harper (1990).

“[FDA] have found thus far and we have to be careful but thus far no red flags about that, about pregnant women.” Source: television interview, Feb. 3, 2021

Reentry point: Nine days after Fauci privately called the miscarriage mechanism something colleagues “need to be aware of,” and one week after WHO’s public caution. Neither appears here.

Editor-in-Chief Dr. Eric Rubin and Managing Editor Dr. Stephen Morrissey interview CDC Director Walensky on vaccine safety in pregnancy — five days before NEJM publishes the study below.

Tom Shimabukuro and 20 co-authors (all federal employees, CDC/FDA — where are these people now?) publish “Preliminary Findings of mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine Safety in Pregnant Persons” (nejm.org):

“Among 827 participants who had a completed pregnancy, the pregnancy resulted in a live birth in 712 (86.1%), in a spontaneous abortion in 104 (12.6%)... 700 of 712 pregnancies that resulted in a live birth (98.3%) were among persons who received their first eligible vaccine dose in the third trimester.”

Plain language — slow down here, we’re going to go over this again: 700 of the 827 women weren’t vaccinated until the third trimester, past the point where a loss even counts medically as a “miscarriage.” Including those 700 in the denominator makes the miscarriage rate look far lower than it should.

“We are not seeing a signal of safety concerns of the vaccine in pregnancy … This vaccine can prevent Covid-19, and so that’s the primary benefit.” Source: CNN

“10s and 10s and 10s of thousands of women who have been followed by the CDC... there’s no indication whatsoever that there’s any increase of any adverse issues... it’s pretty clear that pregnant women should get vaccinated.” Source: What to Expect

And then…an OB-GYN named Dr. H. Sun wrote to NEJM raising the denominator problem. NEJM published his letter with a reply from the original authors, who admitted:

“We agree that the denominator used in that proportion — 827 completed pregnancies — is not an appropriate denominator for the calculation of a risk estimate or rate.” Source: nejm.org

By this date, it was public record, in the study’s own journal, that the 12.6% figure used the wrong denominator. Every public reassurance made after this date, about this specific study, was made after its own flaw was already in print.

Correcting the denominator (removing the 700 third-trimester women) gives 104 miscarriages out of 127 women actually in the risk window: roughly 82%, not 12.6%.

Ladies and Gentlemen, we have a problem.

“CDC strongly recommends COVID-19 vaccination either before or during pregnancy because the benefits of vaccination outweigh known or potential risks.” Source: CNN

Reentry point: Made three weeks after NEJM’s own authors admitted the headline number used the wrong math.

Where the hell was everyone?

“The data points show that the vaccines are safe during these various stages before and during pregnancy … anytime during your pregnancy is actually fine [to get the vaccine].” Source: What to Expect

Reentry point: The same Murthy who, thirteen months earlier, privately called the cytokine-storm mechanism “a really good point,” now tells the public the data shows safety “anytime” in pregnancy — four months after NEJM’s correction.

Space cadet rides again.

1. Three of the country’s top health officials had a private conversation in which they admitted to each other that real safety data on pregnant women didn’t exist yet, that one of them had identified a real biological reason the vaccine’s second dose could cause a first-trimester miscarriage, and that this was a legitimate concern — not a myth.

2. The World Health Organization independently reached a public conclusion cautious enough to advise against the vaccine in pregnancy the very next day.

3. Over the next months and now years, these same and other U.S. officials have been telling the public there was nothing to worry about, without incorporating the specific concern they privately agreed was real.

4. They continued to tell the public there was nothing to worry about even after the CDC and FDA’s own study was proven flawed, a study that showed that somewhere between 12.6 and 82% of babies miscarried or otherwise failed during the trial.

OK? Got it?

So.

As Ito da Truth would say, what I want to know is:

“What the F$#@! are you going to do about it?”