Famous Wuhan Lab Debunker Is Revealed A Commie Paid Influencer

Written By BlabberBuzz | Sunday, 29 August 2021 20:30

It has been revealed that Deborah Seligsohn, an American academic frequently cited by Western media outlets to debunk the COVID-19 “lab leak” theory, has extensive ties to the Chinese Communist Party, having previously delivered a slew of lectures at the regime’s Central Party School and accepting fellowships from state-run universities.

When cited, mainstream media outlets routinely fail to disclose Seligsohn’s deep ties to Beijing, which call into question her ostensible status as a neutral arbiter of COVID-19’s origins.

Currently an Assistant Professor in the Political Science Department at Villanova University, Seligsohn was formerly in charge of science and health issues at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing throughout the SARS epidemic in the early 2000s.

 WATCH: WHOOPI GOLDBERG SLAMS ALL MALES THAT DISCUSS ABORTIONbell_image

 WATCH: WHOOPI GOLDBERG SLAMS ALL MALES THAT DISCUSS ABORTIONbell_image

Since her job in the U.S. State Department, Seligsohn has lectured and participated in multiple fellowships at institutions led by the Chinese Communist Party. She addressed the Central Party School of the Chinese Communist Party – the “exclusive training ground for the elite apparatchiks groomed to govern China” – in December of 2011. Additionally, she spoke at the regime-sponsored Shanghai World Expo in 2010.

 JOHN EASTMAN ALREADY PLEAD THE FIFTH AHEAD OF JAN 6 COMMITTEE APPEARANCEbell_image

 JOHN EASTMAN ALREADY PLEAD THE FIFTH AHEAD OF JAN 6 COMMITTEE APPEARANCEbell_image

Seligsohn also served as a research fellow at the state-run Nanjing University before leveraging her credentials to contribute to a host of mainstream media outlets including NPR, Foreign Policy, Associated Press, and more.

 NO CHOICE: UNIVERSITIES BANNING STUDENTS WHO DO NOT HAVE BOOSTERbell_image

 NO CHOICE: UNIVERSITIES BANNING STUDENTS WHO DO NOT HAVE BOOSTERbell_image

In a Foreign Policy op-ed titled “Demands for a Lab Leak Investigation Are a Dangerous Distraction,” Seligsohn posits there “is no actual evidence for the lab leak allegation” despite the theory counting support from scientists and government officials including former Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Chief Dr. Robert Redfield and former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe. Seligsohn’s op-ed was then utilized by Chinese state-run media outlet China Global Television Network (CGTN), amplifying her words in its article “Expert: Demands For Lab Leak Investigation Are Dangerous Distraction.”

 MUST WATCH: BIDEN'S BEHAVIOR SHOWS JUST HOW LITTLE HE THINKS OF HIS OWN RULESbell_image

 MUST WATCH: BIDEN'S BEHAVIOR SHOWS JUST HOW LITTLE HE THINKS OF HIS OWN RULESbell_image

Also widely cited by major Western media outlets such as the Washington Post and the Wall Street Journal, is an August report by the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee on COVID-19 origins which has now been proved to be full of mistakes. However, the report's errors have already been incorrectly used as evidence for a so-called lab leak accident in China's Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) in 2019..

 WHITE HOUSE NOW PLACES BLAME ON OMICRON FOR SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUESbell_image

 WHITE HOUSE NOW PLACES BLAME ON OMICRON FOR SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUESbell_image

The 84-page report, titled "The Origins of COVID-19: An Investigation of the Wuhan Institute of Virology," claimed that the WIV proposed a budget of over $606 million for a central air conditioning renovation project on September 16, 2019.

"Such a significant renovation so soon after the facility began operation appears unusual," the report proposed.

However, by tracing the source it referred to for the surprisingly high budget, one can find the number should be 3.9268764 million yuan (about $605,000) for air conditioning in the original procurement document in Chinese.

That means the alleged $606-million budged was 1,000 times exaggerated.

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's