That is not at all what the reply stated. In fact they explicitly stated that "the mechanism is baked into the system". Then go on to methodically explain what they mean.

It exceedingly well argued and articulated point of view - and that goes to pnf's all other replies.

I salute the author pnf for being able to put into words what I would not be able to.

I could say there's no point in arguing with you for the exact same reasons. I see you really don't want to understand my argument and would rather blithely dismiss strawmen. That's your prerogative. For anyone else who reads this, I'll continue clarifying why I think you're argument is naive and, frankly, simplistic. You seem not to have a clear understanding of American politics. Maybe you don't live here or, if you do you don't pay much attention to deep politics. That's forgivable. Most people don't have the time, heart, or stomach for it. I assume you're talking about the former President pushing the claim? That is hardly the most powerful position in America. Do you think Joe Biden is the most powerful person in America? LoL. Read Glennon's book National Security and Double Government, or Sheldon Wolin's Democracy Incorporated for a primer.

You clearly don't grok ruling class ideology and discourse policing. Please don't mislead other people with these tired arguments about conspiracy theories. Although, there is plenty of evidence of actual conspiracy at the top of the FDA and NIH if you want to nitpick. You might also want to investigate the modus operandi and principle funding structures of the WTO and WHO. But you would probably argue there were no conspiracies in Imperial Britain because they're just not possible. Your lack of historical knowledge blinds you to possibility.

But I'm not even talking about technical "conspiracy" so called. I'm talking about ideological control structures for the ruling class and those within it. Your statements are a prime example of someone who cannot see outside your ideology. You don't even know that you don't know. That's the essential feature of ideological compliance. There absolutely are conspiracies to suppress information, that's called censorship. Wait, don't tell me. You're a fan of that, too. But only to suppress disinformation and protect the feebleminded masses from their own stupidity, right? But not you! You've got enough grey matter to handle it and come to the "right" conclusions. We all know the "right" opinions and we all want to be on the "right side of history", don't we? That's right. We don't need to be told that certain ideas are junk disinformation while other, approved ideas, are justified true belief. There's a good lad, off you go.

Btw, the lab leak hypothesis was originally making a splash in the blogosphere in January 2020 before the narrative could get ahead of it. Then the political arms of the government science institutions and the pathetically complicit media leaped to the rescue by savaging the people who would dare suggest such a thing. Google "lab leak Wuhan" with a date filter if you want to relive those heady days. It's especially funny that you would make such a claim since that's exactly the sort of thing members in good standing of the establishment are expected to believe. There's really no point in arguing with someone who's mind has been broken by propaganda. I'm sorry for your loss.