Dr. Scott Atlas, Stanford’s Hoover Institution senior fellow, challenged COVID-19 lockdowns and mandates from early 2020, citing cruise ship data to argue fatality rates were overblown by counting only severe cases. As a Trump Task Force advisor (from July 31, 2020), he clashed with Fauci, Redfield, and others over evidence-based policies, exposing their media-backed resistance and bureaucratic loyalty. Natural immunity emerged within two years, yet child vaccine mandates persisted despite unproven safety and transmission benefits. Atlas warns against distrusting all expertise while defending rigorous science, urging data-driven solutions over pseudoscience—like cell phones causing glioblastomas—amid a crisis where public trust in institutions has eroded. [Automatically generated summary]
Hey everyone, it's Andrew Clavin with this week's interview with Scott Atlas, the doctor, obviously, and author of A Plague Upon Our House, my fight at the Trump White House to stop COVID from destroying America.
I have often talked about a passage in Winston Churchill's memoirs of his youth where he talked about going to a party filled with the leaders of Europe before World War I and going to another party after World War I with the leaders of Europe and how they were all different people because World War I had been such a disaster and the failure of leadership throughout Europe.
I truly believe that the response to the COVID epidemic was the greatest failure of Western leadership since World War I.
And I think one of the things we're seeing now is a lot of the people being thrown out and trying to cling to power as people basically wake up to what was done to them.
Dr. Scott Atlas was an advisor on the coronavirus task force in the Trump White House.
Hilariously, Wikipedia, when you look him up on Wikipedia, it accuses him of speaking misinformation about COVID and then lists his opinions, all of which turned out to be the exact truth.
So Wikipedia is still spreading the lies, trying to cling on to their power.
He is a senior fellow in health policy at Stanford University, Hoover Institution.
And as I say, he's the author of Plague Upon Our House, My Fight at the Trump White House to Stop COVID from Destroying America.
Dr. Atlas, thank you for coming on.
It's nice to meet you.
Happy to be here.
I have to read this to you because it just made me laugh.
Atlas was selected by President Donald Trump as Wikipedia in August 2020 to serve as an advisor on the White House Coronavirus Task Force.
In that role, Atlas at times said misinformation about COVID-19, such as theories that face masks and social distancing were not effective in slowing the spread of the coronavirus, which turned out to be exactly right, didn't it?
Right.
And we knew it then because there was plenty of data and in fact, randomized trials and solid studies showing that stuff.
But yeah, it's sort of shocking and to me a bit frightening that people use Wikipedia as a legitimate reference, but now it is ensconced, apparently, in our culture.
Yeah, yeah, I think it's disappearing a little bit with AI because AI gives you faster and better information, I think.
That's true.
So let's start with this.
Going back into this experience, you come into this task force.
When did you realize that things were going badly wrong?
Well, I realized that before I went in because I didn't go in.
I was called up by the White House and didn't start until July 31st, really, meaning basically August 1, 2020.
I had started looking at the pandemic sort of at the mid-February 2020.
So we're talking, you know, five, six months before I went into the White House and quickly realized, although I was, like everybody, sort of frightened at the statistics that first came out by the World Health Organization on the very high fatality rate, that the fatality rate was calculated incorrectly because they weren't considering everybody who was infected.
They were only considering people who were sick enough to go to a doctor.
And when you looked at the early data, even from the early cruise ship back in the Japanese cruise ship, you saw that it was grossly exaggerated, the fatality rate.
And of course, we had plenty of prior knowledge about not just viral respiratory infections, but coronavirus infections, because four of them are circulating in our society and are endemic, meaning they don't ever disappear and they come and go and they cause things like common cold or fluishness.
And so in March, I started to write about this because society was not only panicking, but the wrong remedies were being put in place, the lockdowns and school closures.
And these things were not just contrary to common sense, contrary to everything we knew about viral respiratory infections, contrary to the data on this virus.
So they weren't going to work to stop the spread or to stop people from dying.
But even more importantly, they were extremely destructive.
They were causing harm, known harms, known for 15 years about what lockdowns do to children, to businesses, to deaths from despair, alcoholism, spousal abuse, child abuse when people are shut down from work because businesses were closed.
And meanwhile, they weren't stopping the older people, the high-risk people from dying.
Yeah.
You know, so when you walked in to this task force and you're working with these people, what is the experience like?
I mean, you're saying these things from the start then.
What is happening?
Are you made to sit in the corner?
They're just not listening to you.
What happens?
Sure.
So I was called up mid-July 2020 by the Office of Personnel in the White House.
And this is because I had had some visibility with what I was writing.
I had a lot of millions of viewers actually on pieces I wrote saying, end the lockdowns.
The data is in.
We're destroying people.
And meanwhile, we're not protecting the high risk.
So people are still dying despite the harmful lockdowns and school closures.
And again, by summer, we had already seen, by the way, from school closures and the isolation of young people, one in four college-aged kids contemplated suicide.
We had a massive rise in depression, anxiety in teenagers.
Suicidal ideation in teenage girls was spiking.
We were destroying young people who, healthy young people had no serious risk from COVID.
So this was really a sinful, I hate to use the word sinful, but I can't think of a better word, abuse of our own children, non-thinking really by fools who were leading the advisory team to the president and to the governors, etc.
So this was Deborah Burks, who was running the White House coronavirus task force medical side and her colleague, Anthony Fauci and Robert Redfield, the head of the CDC.
All three were doing this.
So I go in because I was called in to speak to the president to ask, would you even speak to the president?
Which of course, my country, people are dying.
Of course, I would speak to the president.
And it wasn't political to me at all.
So I'm going in there, let's say mid-July.
I spent the day talking to the president, the vice president, Jared Kushner, Mark Meadows, the chief of staff, all the people you've heard of.
And they asked me questions.
I told them the answers.
They had seen what I wrote, what I was interviewing on TV about.
And they said, would you help the president?
Would you advise the president?
And I said, okay, absolutely.
But I just want to say, I'm not going to sign on to things that are wrong.
I'm not going to agree with things just because the president says agree, you know, if it's incorrect.
I'm not going to sign on to a group statement.
And Jared Kushner, to his credit, said, well, that's exactly why we want you.
So I said, okay, that's great.
And then he said, but they're going to destroy you once it becomes public.
So he meant the media.
This was in the height of the frenzy about Trump.
It was even worse than it is today, frankly.
This was a political campaign season.
Remember July 2020?
And so I said, well, you know, I'm naive to politics.
I'm not a political person.
I said, well, that doesn't sound very good to me.
So maybe I'll go home to California and see if I could advise from there.
And he said, okay, and we'll try that.
So I went home.
And of course, in a matter of days, it was not working because things are being decided real time.
President Trump was being fed completely false, wrong information by people who didn't know what they were talking about, frankly.
That's Deborah Burks, Anthony Fauci, Robert Redfield.
And again, like people may not agree or may not think that sounds reasonable.
They didn't know what they were talking about because they have such credentials, but they didn't know what they were talking about.
This is one of the things that was exposed was the failure of the so-called credentialed class, the expert class.
So anyway, I went back and this is now July 31st.
And in the beginning, and I outlined this in my book, but in the beginning, Jared Kushner said, okay, we need you to be in the task force too.
And I said, well, they're not going to listen to me.
You know, these are people that have been saying through these lockdowns, these completely wrong policies that are not working and they're killing people.
They're not going to listen to some outsider.
They're on TV all the time, et cetera.
And he said, well, no, it's very important.
You're going to be able to convince them.
I said, okay.
So he said, but in the beginning, I want you to just listen in on the meetings because Deborah Burks is going to go crazy and be threatened, basically, if you're there.
So I listened to some of the meetings, and this was sort of insane, what was going on.
And they were just really almost like a catch-22.
If you've ever read the book Catch 22, this sort of circuitous logic, this bizarre, you know, comical if it weren't so serious kind of stuff.
It was really like dark comedy in a way.
And then finally, I was told, well, you have to go in there.
So I went in there.
And here's what I found.
Vice President Pence was running the task force, but he was sort of running it like just running a meeting like a bureaucrat.
And the medical side of the task force, we were about eight of us around the Oval Table, me, Fauci, Burks, and a few other people.
And then in the room at the periphery were other people, non-medical people, people of logistics.
And there was an overflow room.
And this is the situation room that they talk about.
And then there was a lot of people on video and audio.
So Pence would say to me, well, Scott, what's the evidence about risk to children?
This is one example that I vividly remember.
So I came into the task force meetings with my briefcase filled with papers, with the scientific data, with the latest data.
I was up all night every night.
I had people on the outside sort of helping me when I would say, will you find all the data on this by state?
And there's a lot of problems with the data.
So I came in and I would answer with a five minutes or 10 minutes of the data, study after study, data after data, report after report.
And the bottom line on the children was, of course, healthy children had no significant risk from a serious illness or death from COVID.
That's a fact.
That was the data.
And it still is the data.
And then Pence turns to Fauci, no comment.
And he turns to Deborah Burks, who was again the person who wrote all the advice to the governors.
She was in charge of all the federal policy.
Her only comment was, you're an outlier to me.
No data.
In fact, not a single time of any of the meetings that I was at at the White House did Burks, Fauci, or Redfield have any scientific study or data with them.
Not once.
In fact, this was a big shock to me because I was used to, I've had a career in academic medicine.
You know, we have these meetings, we have journal clubs.
I mean, the first thing you do is you look at the study design, you discuss the paper.
If the study design is flawed, the conclusions are irrelevant.
If it's a bad study, it's done.
It doesn't matter what they say.
These people didn't even, they didn't even know the data.
They didn't have the studies.
They didn't know how to look or think about a, in a critical way, a scientific study.
I mean, it's shocking the low level of knowledge and critical thinking that was done at these meetings.
And of course, these people were in their positions.
They're bureaucrats.
They were in their positions for 30, 35, almost 40 years.
And they're, you know, that's something that, again, people wouldn't know unless you saw it.
These people are not living through and succeeding in multiple presidential administrations because of excellence.
They're there because they know how to navigate a highly politicized environment.
And how do they navigate it?
Well, they get friends in the agencies to back them up.
They have friends in the media.
They would call, they would say, oh, well, I want to talk to Sanjay later.
And I didn't know what they were talking about.
And it turned out it was Sanjay Gupta, CNN.
They talked to them by their first names.
They're friends in the media.
They're friends in the agencies.
They had entourages walking around with them.
Navigating Political Waters00:02:00
I had no one walking around with me in the White House.
They came in with three, four, five people.
They had a whole system set up to cover each other.
In fact, if I may go on, it turned out later, Burks wrote a book and she admitted that during 2020, she had a pact with Redfield, the head of the CDC, and Anthony Fauci, that if any of them were fired by President Trump, they would all resign.
Okay, these are, so first of all, what does that mean?
They're there to cover their own positions to me.
That's the thinking of a bureaucrat.
That's not the thinking of somebody who wants to help the country, in my opinion.
Have you checked your home title lately?
Most homeowners never do, myself included.
I'm ashamed to say.
But with the growing amount of digital scams targeting property owners, it's more important than ever.
With modern technology, criminals have found an alarming way to steal your home equity.
They simply forge your signature on a document, add a fake notary stamp, pay a small county fee, and just like that, your home title gets transferred without your knowledge.
Once they control your title, they can take out loans against your equity or even sell your property entirely.
The worst part, you might not discover anything's wrong until you receive an unexpected collection notice or foreclosure letter.
That happened to me.
It is a very uncomfortable feeling.
Do not wait until it's too late.
Take a moment right now to verify your home title status and protect what's likely your biggest investment.
Use promo code claven at home titlelock.com to make sure your title is still in your name.
You'll also get a free title history report, plus a free 14-day trial of their million-dollar triple lock protection.
That's 24-7 monitoring of your title, urgent alerts to any changes.
And if fraud should happen, they'll spend up to 1 million bucks to fix it.
Go to hometitalock.com now.
Use promo code Claven.
That's home titlelock.com promo code.
People Were Afraid00:10:38
Huh.
How do you spell that?
Oh, it's K-L-A-V-A-N.
But, you know, one of the things that confused me during the COVID pandemic was that it was happening all across the West.
I mean, everybody, all through Europe, they were closing governments.
They were locking people down, which speaks to me of some kind of systemic problem in the scientific community or not.
Well, I think this is a good point because it brings up the question, was it political, first of all?
And then you think, well, it's hard to make it political about the re-election of President Trump when it was all over the world.
Obviously, it can't be true, I don't think.
But it was true in the beginning.
I sort of felt like, if you remember, the immediate shutdowns in February, March, well, the economy was doing great.
Looked like Trump would have won.
And they shut everything down.
And so you could say, well, in the highlighting by the media, the vicious media, really, to incite fear, having the cases per day, even though these cases, some of them were completely asymptomatic, maybe half of them.
But anyway, that sort of seemed political.
But then the whole world did this.
And I think that there's a couple explanations.
Number one, you know, I think it would not be arrogant or delusional to think that when the U.S. speaks, the world listens.
Okay, so when you have somebody like Anthony Fauci, who keeps, who kept being touted as the country's number one expert in infectious disease, quote unquote, the world's authority on infectious disease, because he was head of the NIH's division on infectious diseases.
But he had been a bureaucrat for 38 years.
I mean, to see a picture of him in a white coat or with a stethoscope on the cover of a magazine is sort of ludicrous.
He hasn't seen a patient in 35 years.
But in any event, when he speaks or when he spoke, people listened, no question about that.
Secondly, you know, a bureaucrat in the United States is probably very similar to a bureaucrat in another country.
And in fact, most of the world did the same sort of lockdown school closure, insane rules about distancing, completely pseudoscience about wearing a mask when it was known they don't stop the spread of a viral respiratory infection.
Surgical masks, it was known.
And the real answer to the question is when I brought it, I had a discussion at an event once with Anders Tegnel, who was the head of Sweden's response.
He's an epidemiology public health official there.
They didn't do the lockdowns.
And I said to them, well, how was this received?
How was this?
How did you be able to do that?
He said, well, we decided we would treat our citizens like adults.
And he literally said that phrase.
And I thought to myself, that really rings true.
He said, instead of ordering them around, number one, we told them what we advise.
Older people should probably avoid crowds.
You know, this kind of stuff.
And of course, people have common sense.
That's obvious.
And secondly, he said to me something else, which I totally agree with.
The words novel coronavirus, this was an exaggeration.
He said, we weren't going to, we in Sweden, we're not going to throw out decades of knowledge about viral respiratory infections and coronaviruses and how they spread and how most people are asymptomatic or very minimal symptoms that give you a fluish symptomatology for a couple of days.
So we weren't going to destroy young people, destroy our educational system To stop a virus like that, when A, you couldn't stop it, and we just wanted to protect the elderly.
Now, Sweden, by the way, didn't do so well with protecting the elderly because in their nursing homes, something like 60, 70 percent of the deaths in their major cities were in nursing homes, which are already a controlled environment.
So they blew it on that.
They weren't perfect or anything like that.
But it is true that most of the world decided that the people in power were going to exercise that power.
I think this is something that we were, I was shocked at personally, that people in a free country that were in power could just simply override all guaranteed freedom, all guaranteed rights, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, freedom of confining you to your home, shutting down businesses.
And of course, the conclusion, therefore, by all logic, is that the guaranteed freedoms are not guaranteed if they can be overridden.
That by definition means they're not guaranteed.
We're talking to Dr. Scott Atlas.
He's the author of A Plague Upon Our House: My Fight at the Trump White House to Stop COVID from Destroying America.
When the disease first hit, I have a lot of friends in New York, and when this disease first hit, they were traumatized.
I mean, you came to New York.
It's still true today.
I mean, I will talk to friends in New York and say to them, you know, the mass didn't do anything.
They simply will not believe.
I mean, they will not believe that the shutdowns were wrong, that this was a damaging thing and didn't help.
So was there, in fact, a moment when the panic was more justified, or did you know right away the panic was never justified?
Yeah, I think, and I've said many times, I was afraid in the beginning when I heard all this initial data.
And I actually still think it wasn't absurd to do a very, very short-term, okay, we don't know what's going on.
We don't even have time to even think.
Let's shut down for, you know, 10 days, 14 days to quote, slow the spread.
There was a rationale for that that was logical, which the rationale, hypothetically, if you could slow the spread down, sort of generate some resources that were necessary, start making sure that hospitals were available to treat not only COVID patients, but all patients who, of course, still had serious illnesses.
But the problem was that the data was very short-term.
And people would have bought into that, I think, a blip of 10 days of, okay, let's just shut down for 10 days.
I don't think that would have been so traumatic.
The problem was it wasn't 10 days.
It extended beyond the problem of that doesn't work.
And the reason I say it doesn't work is: A, it didn't work, factually didn't work.
All the studies prove the lockdowns did not slow the spread, did not stop the illness, and did not decrease the dying.
In fact, added millions of deaths.
But secondly, 15 years before that, the people who were the experts at eradicating smallpox had written about lockdowns.
And those papers clearly stated very emphatically and point by point that lockdowns should never be done because they are extraordinarily harmful.
Stopping, and they don't work, stopping transportation, shutting down schools, shutting down business.
Things were explicitly stated as not working and very harmful.
So uh, people were afraid the, the.
I have some sympathy and empathy for people who who are still afraid, but not that much uh, and and here's why, uh yes, people were traumatized.
Yes uh, they were brainwashed.
Yes, the censorship had a lot to do with convincing people, because not only was the propagandized Medical Scientific Journals news, everything pushing that this was going to kill you and you better lock down uh, but they censored the the, the other side, my views and other people's.
Uh, you know, Facebook took down my post Youtube uh, took down my interviews.
Even when I was advisor to the president, Facebook blocked me.
I mean, you'd think in a free society yeah, people should hear what the advisor to the president was saying.
Right, I mean that that's really frightening to me uh, but uh, the the censorship is literally meant not just to shut someone up.
The censorship is meant to stop people from hearing.
Okay it's, it's a way to control what people know.
And so there are many people and you mentioned your friends in New York.
I have a lot of friends in New York and elsewhere they, they don't even know the information.
Today, five years later, they don't know the facts, uh and again.
Part of it is not just the censorship, but also the lack of integrity of the so-called experts at places like where I work, Stanford University and all the other universities and the high-level so-called academic medical centers, where people were so wrong and they made their careers talking about doing the lockdowns, shutting people up in their homes, confining people into the homes, by the way, where the infections are known to spread, rather than outside.
Remember arresting people who were in parks, locking playgrounds in New York City uh, to keep people indoors.
Going in San Diego off the coast and arresting people who are out surfboarding or uh, sailing.
I mean, this was really irrational behavior and uh, this kind of ego, uh based, uh sort of career uh, you know, people became famous pushing the lockdowns, pushing this.
They stake their careers on this.
They will never admit they were wrong and this is again a serious problem where we in in America and most of the world believe in experts.
Lost Faith in Science00:08:25
We need to trust doctors and scientists and and all kinds of people, because we can't expect regular people to know this stuff.
These people have no integrity.
They'll never admit they were wrong.
This is this is the thing that I want.
I've only got five minutes left.
I really one of the obvious reactions and perfectly reasonable reactions is people have lost all faith in things like science and expertise, and there are.
There is such a thing as science and there are such things as experts, but obviously these guys weren't it.
So this vaccine came out.
My impression is that, while the vaccine was nothing like what people said it was, it does seem to have broken the back of the pandemic or maybe i'll ask you if that's true or not, so that my my two questions are, one, was the vaccine helpful?
And I guess my other question is, is Rfk Jr nuts?
I mean that that?
That's what those are.
The two things I want to know is, is he saying something that like we should be listening to?
Or uh, is this a an overreaction to the ruination of our experts on our science?
Yeah, the first question, the vaccine, I'll be brief, is that the vaccine was never even studied appropriately.
But if you cut slack and say, okay, it was an emergency, et cetera, I think it's reasonable to have approved it initially, but only for emergency use in very high-risk individuals.
It should never have been approved for children, for low risk, for healthy people.
It should never even been recommended for them.
And we do know that it did not decrease in any effective really way the spread of the infection, not for more than a couple weeks.
Okay, so it takes a couple of weeks to build up antibodies.
And it only lasts for a few weeks, the stopping the infection, even in the best data early on.
So of course, it's ludicrous.
It doesn't stop the infection.
In the data I look at early on from Sweden and other countries, because I don't, frankly, the trust is really damaged in the United States.
I look at other countries and it seemed to have decreased the deaths in the high-risk people early on.
Of course, once the virus mutates and almost everybody has been infected, really within the first year and a half or two years, almost everybody was infected with COVID.
You have your own biological immunity and then you get into the harms of the vaccines.
The cost benefit, the risk-benefit, the risk-reward calculus goes away.
And there's a lot of side effects from the vaccine that have come out that are dangerous, some of which are serious.
And when you have a situation where you have a viral infection having very, very low risk, minuscule risk in a healthy young person, and you're giving them a vaccine, which has a risk, even a non-zero risk of serious side effect, you don't take the vaccine, let alone approve it for emergency use.
There is no public health emergency after the first year, year and a half.
So that whole thing is insane.
So that's the thing.
Now, let's get back to the trust and RFK Jr., if I may, because I think this is very important, because you're right, trust has been damaged.
This is the legacy, the legacy of the Fauci, Burks, the experts at the universities who pushed the lockdowns and then the vaccine mandates, the pseudoscience about the masks.
Their legacy is not just death and destruction.
Their legacy is not just shifting the burden to the poor people, to children, to use the children, our own children as shields, to inject them with an experimental drug for which they have no benefit of any serious level so that they don't infect us.
This is really immoral, unethical.
I don't know what you call that, but I'm a father.
I'm there to protect my children.
My children are not to be used to protect me as a shield for me.
That's really unethical, completely.
I don't even know how to characterize that.
But the question is, what is the reaction now?
Because I'm very concerned that the reaction to the loss of trust and integrity of our expert class is now the pendulum swung to the opposite side.
Has the pendulum swung to all medical science is not legitimate.
There's no such thing as valid expertise or experience.
Any kind of theory is equally valid to any kind of science.
All these wellness remedies and nutritional supplements and hallucinogens, yes, they're all great and cell phones cause glioblastomas and all kinds of stuff.
And I think that is extremely harmful and dangerous.
So I don't think that RFK Jr. is crazy to answer your direct question.
He said a lot of good things.
He's right that we should be concerned with chronic diseases.
We should use drugs that are determined to be safe.
should insist that they're safe, particularly for things that are injected in our children.
I believe I agree with him, or at least my belief is there should be no such thing as a mandated drug.
What kind of free society requires you to inject a drug into yourself or your child?
I mean, that's really no.
I totally disagree with that notion of mandated drugs.
And I think obesity, he's pointed out, is a very, is the number one public health problem.
I mean, this I've always said and known, and somehow we've tried to have a society where it's impolite to say someone's obese, or we have to have obese models on the cover of Sports Illustrated, or we have to, you look at lower than Manhattan with these big billboards of obese models modeling clothing and say cosmopolitan puts it on the cover.
This is the new healthy, the new beautiful.
And you have a morbidly obese woman striking a ballet pose or something.
I mean, this is really harmful.
So he's right about all that.
He's right about weeding out corruption.
I totally agree.
On the other hand, in my view, I don't think the number one health issue is food coloring.
Okay.
I'm not defending food coloring.
Okay.
But I want to talk about good science.
I do want to talk about, focus on the real data that exists that we know about in disease states.
To me, we have the data show the United States has the best outcomes from all serious illnesses in the world, despite the fact that we have a population that harbors the most lifestyle risk factors.
What do I mean by lifestyle risk factors?
Obesity, smoking, drug abuse.
Okay.
And so we need to focus on a scientific way.
I believe scientific expertise is legitimate.
There is such a thing as legitimate scientific expertise.
I mean, my, like I always say, the guy who fixed my hot water heater in my house, he said to me, we should have safe drugs and obesity is bad and we need to fix health of children.
That doesn't mean he should be secretary of HHS.
So, you know, I support all the good things that Bobby Kennedy is doing.
I have friends who took positions in the administration.
I withdrew.
I told them I don't want to do anything because I need to be supportive.
You can't take a position where you can't support the key things.
I believe in legitimate science and legitimate medical expertise.
I do not believe that we should have people saying hallucinogens are good for you.
Mushrooms are good.
Cell phones cause glioglastoma, these kinds of things.
So I think we have a lot of good things happening.
I hope we somehow get back to the reasonable place of the pendulum.
Healthy degree of skepticism.
Well, thank you very much.
Scott Atlas, the author of A Plague Upon Our House, My Fight at the Trump White House to Stop COVID from Destroying America.
Really great talking to you.
I hope you'll come back.
We'll talk some more.
It was really an interesting conversation.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
Happy to be here.
Thanks a lot.
All right.
We need about 10 more guys like that, maybe 100.
Can we clone Scott Atlas, who's a really, really interesting, straightforward guy?
That was just fascinating.
Dr. Scott Atlas, the author of A Plague Upon Our House, My Fight at the Trump White House to Stop COVID from Destroying America.