The Trump administration rolled out a revamped COVID.gov website Friday showing the ‘true origins’ of the coronavirus, while admonishing Democrats and the media for discrediting the theory the virus leaked from a lab and alternative health treatments, and for imposing strict mandates. 

‘This administration prioritizes transparency over all else,’ a senior administration official told Fox News Digital Friday. ‘The American people deserve to know the truth about the Covid pandemic and we will always find ways to reach communities with that message.’ 

The website, which previously had focused on promoting the coronavirus vaccine to Americans, now walks readers through evidence supporting the lab leak theory, how former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci promoted the idea that COVID-19 originated naturally, former President Joe Biden pardoning Fauci for ‘any offenses against’ the U.S. he may have committed, and providing details on the origin of the ‘social distancing’ rules and mask mandates. 

”The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2′ publication — which was used repeatedly by public health officials and the media to discredit the lab leak theory — was promoted by Dr. Fauci to push the preferred narrative that COVID-19 originated naturally,’ the site states, before launching into five bullet points on the origins of the virus. 

The new site outlines that a biological characteristic found in the virus was not found in nature, bolstering the lab leak theory, while noting that Wuhan, China, where the first coronavirus case was found, is also home to China’s ‘foremost SARs research lab’ and that ‘if there was evidence of a natural origin it would have already surfaced. But it hasn’t.’

The Trump administration’s CIA reported earlier in 2025 that a lab leak was the likely origin of the COVID-19 virus, which had been passed off by media outlets and scientists as a likely conspiracy theory during the early days of the pandemic. The Department of Energy under the Biden administration and former FBI Director Christopher Wray in 2023 also said evidence indicated the coronarius was the result of a lab leak. 

The website also walks readers through the origins of COVID-era rules, such as mask mandates and social distancing. 

‘The ‘6 feet apart’ social distancing recommendation — which shut down schools and small business across the country — was arbitrary and not based on science,’ it states. ‘During closed door testimony, Dr. Fauci testified that guidance ‘sort of just appeared.’ 

The website says of mask mandates: ‘There was no conclusive evidence that masks effectively protected Americans from COVID-19. Public health officials flip-flopped on the efficacy of masks without providing Americans scientific data — causing a massive uptick in public distrust.’ 

The website notes that content on the page was sourced directly from the House Oversight Committee’s Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic. 

‘Public health officials often mislead the American people through conflicting messaging, knee-jerk reactions, and a lack of transparency,’ the website states under a portion called ‘COVID-19 misinformation.’ ‘Most egregiously, the federal government demonized alternative treatments and disfavored narratives, such as the lab leak theory, in a shameful effort to coerce and control the American people’s health decisions.’ 

Many media outlets dismissed Trump in 2020 when he said he had seen evidence that the virus originated in a Wuhan, China, lab, before U.S. intelligence officials such as Wray and the Department of Energy reported that the virus likely originated there. 

Many outlets have since published articles showing the theory is credible, including the New York Times running a March column claiming the scientific community ‘badly misled’ the public in an effort to suppress theory, even after the paper’s own science writer called the theory ‘racist.’ 

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is probing ‘a major pediatric teaching hospital’ over the alleged firing of a nurse who sought a religious exemption to avoid administering puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children.

‘The Department will robustly enforce federal laws protecting these courageous whistleblowers, including laws that protect healthcare professionals from being forced to violate their religious beliefs or moral convictions,’ Acting HHS OCR Director Anthony Archeval said in a statement.

While HHS has not confirmed the hospital’s identity, it is believed to be Texas Children’s Hospital (TCH) — the largest children’s hospital in the U.S. — as the investigation follows whistleblower nurse Vanessa Sivadge’s testimony on Capitol Hill. Sivadge first came forward publicly in June 2024 and was later fired in August 2024.

Sivadge told lawmakers that she had witnessed ‘disturbing trends and concerning practices’ relating to the treatment of children diagnosed with gender dysphoria. She also said that she ‘observed the powerful and irreversible effects’ of treatments that patients were told were ‘lifesaving.’ 

‘I witnessed firsthand how doctors emotionally blackmailed parents by telling them that if they did not affirm their child’s false identity, their child would harm themselves. In particular, I was saddened to see young girls suffering from profound mental health struggles like depression and anxiety, many of whom had also suffered sexual abuse or trauma, persuaded by doctors at Texas Children’s that a hormone would resolve their gender confusion,’ Sivadge told lawmakers.

Dr. Eithan Haim, who was accused of violating HIPAA while in surgical training at Baylor College of Medicine, which is affiliated with TCH, also blew the whistle on the hospital for ‘lying about the existence of its transgender program.’ The Biden DOJ brought charges against Haim for the alleged HIPAA violations, but the case was ultimately dropped under the Trump administration.

Haim claimed the hospital was engaging in fraudulent billing practices to hide the fact that it was carrying out transgender procedures on minors even though it was against Texas law. This included recording mastectomies as ‘breast reduction’ surgeries and billing testosterone prescribed to a teen girl under a male diagnosis.

In her testimony, Sivadge said that federal agents came to her home when investigating the whistleblower, now known to be Haim, because of her objections to transgender medicine. She described the interaction as intimidating and said that one of the special agents ‘effectively asked me to compromise my Christian beliefs and made veiled threats regarding my career and safety if I didn’t comply with their demands.’

Sivadge’s attorney filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on April 11, alleging that she ‘observed TCH doctors, after very little deliberation or critical analysis, embarking children on dangerous and often irreversible courses of ‘gender-affirming’ treatment.’

According to the complaint, TCH ‘temporarily’ paused ‘gender-affirming services’ for minors after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in February 2022 that such treatments could constitute child abuse. The treatments were banned in the state following the passage of a bill in May 2023, which went into effect in September 2023. According to Sivadge’s attorney, she asked to be transferred back to cardiology in May 2024, citing her religious beliefs. 

Sivadge publicly blew the whistle on TCH on June 18, 2024, and was asked not to report to work the next day, according to the complaint. Just days later, on June 21, she was placed on administrative leave and was officially terminated in August 2024. TCH alleged that the termination of her employment was due to improper access to medical records.

On Jan. 28, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the ‘Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation’ order, which prevents minors from undergoing transgender treatments. In accordance with this order, HHS has issued guidelines for prospective whistleblowers.

Fox News has reached out to TCH and HHS for comment.

A federal judge in Baltimore issued a preliminary injunction Thursday restricting the Department of Government Efficiency’s access to Social Security data. 

U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, an Obama appointee, said DOGE-affiliated staffers must purge any of the non-anonymized Social Security data that they have received since Jan. 20. They are also barred from making any changes to the computer code or software used by the Social Security Administration, must remove any software or code they might have already installed, and are forbidden from disclosing any of that code to others.

The injunction does allow DOGE staffers to access data that’s been redacted or stripped of anything personally identifiable, if they undergo training and background checks. 

‘The objective to address fraud, waste, mismanagement, and bloat is laudable, and one that the American public presumably applauds and supports,’ Hollander wrote in the ruling issued late Thursday night. ‘Indeed, the taxpayers have every right to expect their government to make sure that their hard earned money is not squandered.’

But that’s not the issue, Hollander said — the issue is with how DOGE, led by billionaire Elon Musk, wants to do the work.

‘For some 90 years, SSA has been guided by the foundational principle of an expectation of privacy with respect to its records. This case exposes a wide fissure in the foundation,’ the judge wrote.

The case was brought by a group of labor unions and retirees who allege DOGE’s recent actions violate privacy laws and present massive information security risks. 

During a federal court hearing Tuesday in Baltimore, Hollander repeatedly asked the government’s attorneys why DOGE needs ‘seemingly unfettered access’ to the agency’s troves of sensitive personal information to uncover Social Security fraud.

‘What is it we’re doing that needs all of that information?’ Hollander said, questioning whether most of the data could be anonymized.

Attorneys for the Trump administration said changing the process would slow down their efforts.

‘While anonymization is possible, it is extremely burdensome,’ Justice Department attorney Bradley Humphreys told the court. He argued the DOGE access doesn’t deviate significantly from normal practices inside the agency, where employees and auditors are routinely allowed to search its databases.

But attorneys for the plaintiffs called it ‘a sea change’ in terms of how the agency handles sensitive information.

Skye Perryman, President and CEO of the legal services group Democracy Forward, which is behind the lawsuit, said the ruling has brought ‘significant relief for the millions of people who depend on the Social Security Administration to safeguard their most personal and sensitive information.’ 

Hollander made clear that her order didn’t apply to SSA workers who aren’t affiliated with DOGE, so they can still access any data they use in the course of ordinary work. But DOGE staffers who want access to the anonymized data must first undergo the typical training and background checks required of other Social Security Administration staffers, she said.

Hollander, 75, is the latest judge to consider a DOGE-related case. Many of her inquiries Tuesday focused on whether the Social Security case differs significantly from another Maryland case challenging DOGE’s access to data at three other agencies: the Education Department, the Treasury Department and the Office of Personnel Management. In that case, an appeals court recently blocked a preliminary injunction and cleared the way for DOGE to once again access people’s private data.

Hollander’s injunction could also be appealed to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the Trump administration in other cases, including allowing DOGE access to the U.S. Agency for International Development and letting executive orders against diversity, equity and inclusion move forward.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump said Thursday that China has been reaching out ‘a lot’ ever since he nearly tripled U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports, and he suggested to reporters that the two nations could reach a deal in as soon as three to four weeks. 

During a gaggle with reporters after signing executive orders related to deregulating the seafood industry, Trump was asked about his ongoing negotiations with Chinese officials and, in particular, whether he has yet spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping about the ongoing trade battle.

‘They have reached out a number of times,’ Trump said, referring to high-level Chinese officials. When asked how frequently they’ve been in touch since last week – after Trump tripled his Chinese tariff increase from 54% to 145% – the president responded, ‘A lot.’

His comments come amid media reports that Trump has indicated he is unwilling to reach out to China first amid the ongoing trade war. According to sources close to Trump, U.S. officials have been urging the Chinese to initiate a call between Xi and Trump, but so far they have not.    

When asked if he had spoken to Xi yet, Trump would not confirm one way or the other.

‘I’ve never said whether or not [it’s] happened, but I have a very good relationship with President Xi, and I think it’s going to continue. They have reached out a number of times,’ Trump told reporters. 

The press then quickly pounced on Trump’s response, requesting the president to clarify if he was referring to Xi or other Chinese officials when he said, ‘They have reached out a number of times.’

‘I view it very similar,’ Trump responded. ‘It would be top levels of China, and if you knew [Xi], you would know that if they reached out, he knew exactly – he knew everything about it. He runs it very tight, very strong, very smart. And, yeah, we’re talking to China.’

The president said that while some have urged him to fast-track his negotiations, he believes there is ‘plenty’ of time left to make a deal with China and expects it will eventually come to fruition.

‘I would think over the next three or four weeks, I think maybe the whole thing could be concluded,’ Trump told reporters Thursday. 

The president added that if a deal cannot be reached, things will ‘be fine.’

‘At a certain point, if we don’t make a deal, we’ll just set a limit. We’ll set a tariff. We’ll set some parameters, and we’ll say, ‘Come in and shop,” Trump said. ‘They always have a right not to do it, so they can say, ‘Well, we don’t want it, so we’re not going to shop there, we’re not going to shop in the store of America.’ We have something that nobody else has, and that’s the American consumer.’