The Monarez Hearing Was a Big, Fat Nothing Burger

By Louis Conte and Adam Garrie, The MAHA Report

Senator Rand Paul asked former CDC Director Susan Monarez, “Does the Covid vaccine reduce hospitalization for children under age eighteen?”

Monarez answered, smiling pleasantly, “It can.”

Senator Paul responded, “It doesn’t. The statistics are inconclusive and the reason is because there are so few people under age eighteen who go to the hospital [for Covid]. The numbers are extraordinarily small.”

A few moments later, Senator Paul asked Monarez, “Does the Covid vaccine reduce the rate of death for children under age eighteen?”

Monarez answered, again smiling pleasantly, “It can.”

Senator Paul responded with astonishment, “It can?! That’s a ridiculous answer…”

And so it went for Monarez during Wednesday’s Senate hearing, ‘Restoring Trust Through Radical Transparency: Reviewing Recent Events at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Implications for Children’s Health.’

The senators, mostly Democratic fueled by Big Pharma dollars, swung for the fences and struck out. If there was some atrocity that Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had committed, this event did not reveal it.

This wasn’t really a Senate hearing. It was more like a Soviet show trial.

But it backfired. Instead of casting doubt on Kennedy’s leadership, the hearing placed Monarez squarely in the spotlight. Her integrity was on the line, particularly when she evaded direct questions, as she was want to do.

We did learn, more or less, how Monarez had been fired and, as Senator Mullin pointed out, the President of the United States has the right to do that to people who are not aligned with his policies.

Monarez exuded all the energy of a cabbage patch doll during her four hours of ‘testimony.’ Interestingly, she was never sworn in.

Monarez will soon land on her feet somewhere under the protection of the Democratic Party. I can say that with confidence because Monarez has retained the services of Mark Zaid, an expensive, high-powered attorney who is a known opponent of President Trump. She also retained attorney Abbe Lowell, a slick attorney who has represented high-profile clients on both sides of the aisle. Both big guns whispered in her ear and passed her notes as she sat, smiling pleasantly.

However, in one of the oddest moments I’ve ever seen in a congressional hearing, Monarez refused to utter either of their names out loud and could not recall exactly when she retained him.

Florida Senator Moody, a former attorney general, was flabbergasted and scored copious points when Monarez could not and would not explain why she refused to state her attorney’s names – something even her ‘co-defendant,’ Debra Houry, was willing to do.

Senator Banks questioned Monarez on how she came to retain Zaid. Banks noted that Zaid has been adamantly anti-Trump, a man who clearly needs anger management classes, still bitter about the president rescinding his security clearance in March.

Maybe the reason Monarez was so resistant to utter Zaid’s name is that she would show her hand: she had hired a couple of bulldogs itching to take on the likes of Trump and Kennedy to task.

Lost in all of this is the fact that Monarez’s staff refused to give Secretary Kennedy access to the Vaccine Safety Datalink, slow-walking every request that Kennedy and his researcher made.

Why does the CDC always conceal or obfuscate access to vaccine safety data?

That is a hearing that should take place but it’s not the hearing we sat through on Wednesday.

To help me get through this, my MAHA Report partner (and occasional co-conspirator) Adam Garrie took notes. I took beta blockers.

Monarez objected to Kennedy allegedly seeking CDC pre-approval for decisions made by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). However, we could not find any instance where the CDC diverged from ACIP under previous administrations. Whatever the former industry-influenced ACIP members voted for, the CDC approved.

Suddenly, we had a CDC Director who wanted the authority to over-ride ACIP recommendations.

Monarez claimed she was fired for not agreeing to pre-approve ACIP decisions without seeing the science. But during the proceedings Monarez did not impress as having a woman with a good grasp of basic vaccine science; her testimony indicated that she lacked knowledge of basic data on Covid vaccines for children and could not explain to Senator Paul why the Hepatitis B vaccine is given to children whose mothers do not have Hep B.

Kennedy decided to retire previous ACIP members a few months ago because he was concerned that those individuals were captured by corporate interests. Monarez claimed that she did not consult with Kennedy about ACIP replacements. CDC is subordinate to HHS and Kennedy’s decisions on ACIP members occurred before Monarez was approved by the senate.

Monarez claimed she is “worried” about forthcoming ACIP decisions that could reverse previous recommendations for a plethora of vaccines – and put Americans at grave risk. Yet Monarez did not express an understanding of the limitations of vaccines; rather she woodenly believes in what “they can” do. Given that mind set, Monarez seemed convinced that previous iterations of the ACIP were more ‘honest.’ What evidence does she possess to show that? None whatsoever.

Isn’t dear Monarez aware that Kennedy was trying to clean up the ACIP from being an institutional cabal of shills for Big Pharma – and, by defending business as usual, she’s exposing herself as pro-Big Pharma?

It’s no wonder that Monarez rejected the notion that the CDC’s current childhood vaccine schedule, with over 70 jabs, needs to be reevaluated. In Monarez’ view, Moses came down from the mountain with the Ten Commandments and a mandatory childhood vaccine schedule – all etched in stone.

Monarez said she was “censored” when Kennedy gave her advice on how to interact with Congress but was vague about the conversation around her firing.

An important point here: the conversation does not matter.

Monarez was fired by President Trump and is remains fired by President Trump. She was evasive when asked if she told Kennedy she was untrustworthy. Monarez claims that she said to Kennedy, “if you find me untrustworthy, you can fire me.”

Monarez seems to agree that she was asked to violate her oath of office but was vague about how she was asked to violate it.

The ‘how’ thing is actually important and if one is going to make a claim like that. The answer should be right there on the tip of your tongue if a superior is directing you to violate an oath. Maybe that information was lost to Monarez, down the same memory rabbit hole where she forgot her attorney’s name.

Monarez said Kennedy called the CDC the most corrupt federal agency in the world. And I believe that Kennedy is 100 percent correct. We invite you to look at articles we have published in recent weeks about corruption at the CDC. Take Tuesday’s announcement of the arrest of Dr. Poul Thorsen, the fugitive felon vaccine researcher. Thorsen is yet another example of long-standing institutional corruption at the CDC.

Monarez claimed that Kennedy said that CDC employees were killing children without remorse, that they were owned by pharma and forced people to wear masks as in a dictatorship. Well, when CDC recommends that children take vaccines that have no medical benefit for them and that vaccine gives them myocarditis (among other issues), Kennedy's statement is accurate.

The issue around masking and other failed Covid lockdown policies directed by the CDC and other federal public health agencies is an open wound for many Americans. There has been no apology from the CDC. Monarez did not speak to those issues.

Monarez denied that she refused Kennedy’s requests to remove language such as “birthing people” from CDC web pages.

Senator Marshall described Monarez – not Kennedy - as the problem at CDC.

Senator Husted encouraged Monarez to stop scaring people and instead pursue transparency and choice regarding her stance on vaccines.

Senator Mullin suggested that a recording exists of the meeting during which Monarez was fired. Senators Cassidy and Sanders sought to clarify the existence, origins and availability of said recording. Cassidy later said that Senator Mullen told reporters he was mistaken about the existence of said recording.

Whether it was recorded or not, Monarez was fired by President Trump. End of story.

Oh, I forgot! ‘Resigned’ CDC Deputy Director Debra Houry was also present – we do not know why – and she said little. Houry said that she has no concern that any vaccines could potentially lead to childhood autism and called on Kennedy to resign.

In other words, the Senate hearing was a nothing burger. Its sole purpose was to attack Secretary Kennedy and sow division. Trouble is – many of the senators compelled to attack Monarez continue to live in the pre-covid world where the word of the public health establishment was gospel. Those days are over. The veil has been lifted on an array of failed CDC decisions.

When Senator Marshall asked Monarez if every child should get “all 70 to 80 jabs,” she responded, “The childhood vaccine schedule has been vetted and validated through science and evidence.” When asked if the vaccines should be mandated, Monarez stated the CDC does not mandate vaccines and that CDC has always made decisions based on available data.

But Monarez, who at a certain point during the hearing was no longer smiling, was fired for not providing Secretary Kennedy with the vaccine safety data.

Why would a CDC Director withhold data if it validated the safety of vaccines? The answer is obvious - the vaccine safety data shows that there are big problems.

The vaccine status quo isn’t working anymore. Neither is the public health status quo.

Kennedy and Trump are trying to fix the CDC and the public health establishment, while making America healthy again.

Wednesday’s hearing was not the Wild West standoff between team science and team anti-science. It was a show trial where the last bastion of the failed public health status quo rallied against improved vaccine safety, individual and family choice, informed consent, and a ‘science’ that is constantly looking to improve, rather than remain stuck in the past.

We want an effective public health infrastructure, but the old guard needs to walk away or be fired so that positive change can begin.

The Senate should have held a hearing on that.