Michael Hiltzik, Pulitzer-Prize winning columnist for the Los Angeles Times, explains why Dr. Anthony Fauci took the Fifth Amendment and refused to testify when questioned by Senator Rand Paul’s committee. It wasn’t because he’s guilty of Senator Paul’s charges against him.
Hiltzik writes:
There’s a comic trope beloved by playwrights, novelists and screenwriters about the fighters all suited up for battle, only to discover that their adversary refuses to play.
A real-life example of this stratagem unfolded Wednesday on Capitol Hill, where Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) convened a committee hearing aimed at trapping Dr. Anthony Fauci into saying something under oath that Paul could use to prosecute him for perjury.
Fauci, who was appearing before Paul’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee under subpoena, took the weapon out of Paul’s hands by simply refusing to answer a single question other than to state — 116 times by my count — “On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based upon my rights under the 5th Amendment to the Constitution.”
During the nearly three-hour hearing, Fauci’s response left Paul and his seven GOP colleagues on the panel confronting a brick wall. They resorted to the common, if infantile tactic of asking repeated simple but irrelevant questions in an attempt to embarrass their target.
“What day of the week is it today?” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) asked. “What color tie are you wearing?” He elicited the same boilerplate response.
Presumably most of the senators were aware that protocol requires a witness pleading the Fifth to plead it to all questions. Certainly Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who participated in this performative charade, knew that. During a 2000 civil deposition in a lawsuit related to the healthcare firm Columbia/HCA, of which he was chief executive until 1997, he pleaded the Fifth at least 55 times, using phraseology almost identical to Fauci’s.
(Scott left his post after it was learned that his company was under investigation for filing false claims with Medicare and other government healthcare programs. By 2000, it had paid $1.7 billion in fines, penalties and restitution, which the Justice Department called “by far the largest recovery ever reached by the government in a healthcare fraud investigation.” Scott wasn’t charged personally with wrongdoing.)
Fauci, 85, and his lawyers presumably knew they had no choice but to turn away all questions. Experience told him that engaging with Paul would merely feed what Fauci, in a brief opening statement, labeled Paul’s “unhinged obsession” with blaming him for the COVID-19 pandemic.
Trump knows too. At a civil deposition in 2022, he invoked the Fifth more than 440 times.
They all know too that the Supreme Court has upheld the idea that the Fifth protects not only the guilty but also the innocent. So their shtick about how Fauci wouldn’t be pleading the Fifth unless he had something to hide is sheer duplicity.
It was left to the Republicans to fulminate into the wind about how Fauci is a “megalomaniac” (Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio) or “a villain” (Scott), or worse. Early in the proceedings, Paul ordered Fauci’s lawyer, David Schertler, from the hearing room for trying to make a statement on his client’s behalf.
Let’s examine the backdrop to Wednesday’s farce.
As I have documented many times over the last five years, Republicans and right-wingers are fixated on the notion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes COVID, escaped from a Chinese lab to infect the rest of the world.
There is not a speck of evidence to validate that theory. Rather, it’s the overwhelming consensus of epidemiologists and virologists that COVID originated in wildlife, probably bats, and migrated to humankind via the illicit trade in wildlife in China and other south Asian territories, a process known as zoonosis.
The case against Fauci, who retired in 2022, rests on several false claims. One is that as director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, he manipulated scientists into downplaying the lab-leak theory in favor of zoonosis.
His accusers base this idea on questions raised by the first scientists who examined the virus in early 2021, literally days and weeks after it appeared and it was a pathogen new to everybody. Some hadn’t seen some features of the virus in the wild, so they pondered whether it was man-made.
But they were wrong — the features were familiar to virologists, just not to the ones examining SARS-CoV-2. Following the science, they came to discard the lab-leak theory as nothing more than an exceptionally remote possibility; that conclusion has held up over time.
Fauci didn’t downplay the possibility of a lab leak in his discussions with scientists, as his enemies claim, but instead urged them repeatedly to follow their research wherever it took them.
Paul’s particular hobby horse in this debate is the claim that Fauci downplayed the lab-leak theory because NIAID had provided funding for “gain-of-function” research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, in the same teeming city where COVID was first seen, which made it complicit in the pandemic. For Paul’s purposes, “gain-of-function” is a shibboleth, akin to conservative attacks on “DEI” and “critical race theory”—useful because laypersons don’t know what it is but it sure sounds sinister.
Generically, the term refers to laboratory work that augments natural qualities of a microbe to facilitate experimental scrutiny or achieve a necessary goal, such as allowing microbes to produce a flu vaccine or bacteria to produce artificial insulin.
From 2014 to 2017, the U.S. suspended gain-of-function experiments to develop a standard identifying research that might produce “potential pandemic pathogens.”
The lab-leak camp asserts that NIAID-funded experiments created a virus in the Chinese lab with features making it infectious for humans.
Professional virologists say that nothing like that is possible given the state of science. A declassified report issued in 2023 by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said the U.S. had no evidence that any genetic engineering at the Wuhan lab “involved SARS-CoV-2, a close progenitor, or a backbone virus that is closely-related enough to have been the source of the pandemic.”
NIAID examined the work it funded in China against the post-2017 standard and determined it did not breach that standard. Paul raised that very issue with Fauci at a contentious July 2021 hearing, but Fauci rejected it forthrightly.
“Sen. Paul, you do not know what you’re talking about, quite frankly,” Fauci told him.
The other brief against Fauci aired by the GOP majority on Paul’s committee is that Fauci is somehow responsible for the anti-pandemic steps undertaken by states and localities across the U.S. in the heat of the pandemic. The absurdity of this contention is manifest, since Fauci never had any authority to impose any regulations on anybody.
No, the damage was done by the virus, not Fauci, and it unquestionably was mitigated by the measures he recommended. Even so, some 1.2 million Americans have died from the disease — many of them succumbing because anti-vaccine agitators have discouraged them from getting COVID shots.
For the right wing, “Fauci” is just a slogan. Here’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, boasting in a 2021 fundraising appeal, “I refused to blindly follow Dr. Fauci … and allow him to strip Floridians of their God-given freedoms” by resisting lockdowns and school closures. Never mind that Florida emerged from the pandemic with one of the worst COVID mortality rates in the country.
The truth is that while school closures wreaked damage on children’s learning opportunities, they almost certainly saved the lives of thousands of children and their family members.
“What would have happened had schools remained open without any mitigation measures?” New York neurologist and psychiatrist Jonathan Howard has asked.
The number of deaths among children younger than 18, which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has pegged at about 2,000, “would have been higher had 60-70 million unvaccinated children contracted the virus over several months’ time in 2020,” Howard reckoned. “It’s reasonable to assume that several thousand children would have died.”
Fauci plainly understood that anything he said at the hearing would only be weaponized against him through selective disclosure — as happened when Paul this week released about 1,000 pages from Fauci’s personal diary dating from the pandemic era.
None of it validated Paul’s accusations. And nothing at Wednesday’s hearing told us anything new about COVID’s origins or the course of the pandemic. That’s a dangerous shame, because the GOP’s obsession with falsely blaming Fauci for a tragic global natural event for purely partisan purposes will only make it harder to fight the next pandemic, which inevitably will arrive, someday.
While they’re distracted with their witch hunt, important work will have to be done to stave it off. But doing it while the GOP goes off on its malevolent persecution of Fauci and other scientists will be like trying to swim upstream against a torrent of slime.

There never was held a session of the House Un-American Activities Committee that produced any substance. Same old tune on the instrument built by Martin Deis, Richard Nixon, and Joe McCarthy. All show, no substance.
LikeLiked by 2 people
When you cross-reference Fauci’s public statements to what he wrote in his diary, it’s clear that he lied numerous times. Not misspoke – lied, intentionally. I had four Covid shots and in my mind I gave Fauci wide latitude during the Covid era. I forgive errors made in good faith during a time of crisis, but it’s now clear that many times Fauci did not operate in good faith. He’s not afraid of criminal prosecution because of the pre-emptive pardons that Biden gave him. But he is afraid of having his halo tarnished and losing his reputation, so he stayed silent yesterday. I don’t care who it is: when a public figure lies to me, he loses all benefit of the doubt whether I was on his side of an issue or not. That principle applies to Trump, Fauci, et al.
As so often happens on this blog, the host puts on her partisan blinders and further diminishes her former reputation as a serious scholar. Likewise for Heather Cox Richardson. (“Joe Biden shows no signs of cognitive decline” – HCR and DR).
LikeLike
Examples? Facts?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Few people who read this blog ever make the effort to access information outside the left-wing bubble. Linked below is just one of many essays that doesn’t hero worship Fauci. I expect the usual lazy ad hominem attacks.
“Overall, the profile signals to the rest of the D.C. chattering class that the image of Fauci as our perfect, trusted, wise leader during the pandemic was, at best, a generous exaggeration. It’s a crack in the foundation of the metaphorical giant heroic statue of Fauci built during the pandemic.”
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/why-todays-senate-appearance-is-not-helping-dr-anthony-fauci/
LikeLike
Melanie,
Since you find my blog so odious, why do you read it? Are you reading from a script? Do you read regularly or never?
LikeLike
Melanie Sweet,
If you can’t actually state a single example of what you claim Fauci did – lying to the American people when he said the opposite in his diary – then you lose all credibility. State some examples — even one example – that support what you are saying Fauci did.
Instead of offering a single example of Fauci lying, you quote the same vague attack from an opinion article. Your lack of any specific examples to support your attack makes you sound like Trump riling up violence against Obama because like you, Trump also claimed he had “proof” that Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii and his birth certificate was fake, and Trump was lying. You sound like Trump telling the American people he had clear evidence that the 2020 election was stolen from him, even though he couldn’t produce any examples (but he would cite other people who also claimed it was stolen, as if someone else’s opinion is evidence!) Trump expected a Republican Georgia official to lie for him because Trump believed all his supporters would lie for him AND shoot someone on Fifth Avenue based on the word of the guy who told them to attend Trump University and told them he had proof that Obama wasn’t a legitimate president.
Just linking to an essay when you can’t yourself state a single example is pretty embarrassing.
By the way, you do have a lot of chutzpah falsely accusing anyone of saying “Joe Biden shows no signs of cognitive decline”, especially when Trump can’t get through a single appearance without signs of cognitive decline that are far more severe than Biden’s. Is Trump still claiming that there were airports during the Revolutionary War and referring to the “Islamic Republic of Japan”?
People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.
But it’s hard to take seriously the people who are still shouting that Democrats are “Communists” because Dems support Medicare and then those folks who hate Communism vote for the Republicans who want to end “Communist” Democratic programs like Social Security and Medicare. Especially the sad people who still believe that anything Trump tells them is based on facts and evidence instead of the thinking of a demented man who told them that some random guy destroyed the reflecting pool that Trump wasted taxpayer money to hire his pal to fix.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Melanie,
I have never seen a comment from you in the 14 years I have been writing this blog. When did you start reading it? Why have you never made a comment before? His many of my books have you read? Which ones?
If you don’t trust public officials who lie, do you loathe Trump?
LikeLike
The diary is long and it appears you have read it thoroughly, at least enough to claim 4 distinct lies that Dr. Fauci told as a direct contrast to his diary.
Can you share those with us? The diary statements along with their correlating false statements to the public?
My sister in law died in July of 2020, before the vaccine. I had 2 neighbors pass away as well. There has been a lot of controversy about masks, but we wore them. I would again if and when another pandemic were to hit us.
But please share the public lies and notes from Dr. Fauci’s diary. I really do want to know.
LikeLike
I can’t say that Fauci & the CDC made no mistakes in their dealings with Covid, but I can’t deal with all of the Monday morning quarterbacking about what coulda or shoulda been done about an insanely quick, new & vicious outbreak of a nasty virus which had already torn up Italy horribly, along with various other countries before it arrived to our shores in the US. I truly believe that if we did not have a paranoid, narcissistic, uneducated, sociopathic president at the helm when Covid hit us, we would have handled it in a much better way, with many fewer deaths than we suffered. Trump was more worried that it would make him look bad if the economy took a hit due to an epidemic outbreak. His mis- & dis-information only made things worse, as we know from his taped interview with Bob Woodward, when he stated that he knew it was highly contagious & very serious, but failed to inform the public as such. I could list many more examples of his stupidity, missteps & excuses, but as time goes on, too many people seem to forget many of those details & fall for the lies & distortions by the dishonest Republicans who support Trump & help cover for him & many of themselves.
LikeLike
I wonder how many people took ivermectin, because Dr. Trump endorsed it.
Why did Trump never publicize the fact that he and his family got vaccinated?
LikeLiked by 3 people
I think the truth about Fauci and COVID probably lies somewhere in the middle. I don’t believe he was completely transparent, but I also think many of his critics—especially libertarians—remain fixated on COVID vaccine mandates and government overreach.
There are legitimate questions about whether Fauci pressured scientists to present a unified public message and whether NIH-funded research conducted through EcoHealth Alliance should have been considered gain-of-function. At the height of the pandemic, people who suggested a possible lab origin were often dismissed or censored. Today, several U.S. intelligence agencies consider a research-related lab incident the more likely explanation, although confidence levels remain low to moderate and there is still no consensus.
Based on the public evidence, I don’t think Fauci’s actions warrant criminal prosecution. Given today’s political climate, I can understand why he would invoke the Fifth Amendment to protect himself from what he may see as overly aggressive prosecutors. Invoking the Fifth is a constitutional right and is not, by itself, evidence of guilt.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“At the height of the pandemic, people who suggested a possible lab origin were often dismissed or censored. Today, several U.S. intelligence agencies consider a research-related lab incident the more likely explanation, although confidence levels remain low to moderate and there is still no consensus.”
While I agree with most of your overall comment here, it’s depressing and concerning that you conceded unearned legitimacy to a right wing narrative that is entirely false.
It’s not true that people who suggested possible lab origin were dismissed or censored. People with zero understanding of science who were pushing an entirely false narrative that a lab leak was a certainty or near certainty when it was just the opposite – there was at the time ZERO evidence of a lab leak and the evidence at the time pointed to a different origin – were given only “some” credibility by ignorant media folks when they deserved none.
When COVID was first known, a couple scientists were speculating about the cause in emails, but as soon as those scientists had actual evidence, they realized that a source other than a lab leak was more likely, BUT THEY DIDN’T STOP LOOKING INTO THE CAUSE.
Meanwhile, the lab leak folks kept presenting their side as having certainty, and the scientists criticizing that FALSE presentation by the far right never claimed there was absolutely certainty to any other theory – what they were saying is that at the time, the evidence was pointing to something other than a lab leak. And, I repeat, the people who knew there was yet zero evidence for a lab leak and criticized those who falsely claimed that was the cause NEVER STOPPED INVESTIGATING. Because they weren’t interested in politicizing science, they wanted to know the truth.
And the truth, so far, is that the evidence for a lab leak is almost non-existent. It can’t be ruled out 100%, and no one is stopping researchers who keep claiming they know it from presenting evidence to support it. But the SCIENCE doesn’t seem to support it. That might change, but it’s like claiming that vaccines cause autism because sometime in the future it might turn out that it does, despite there being yet no credible scientific evidence that it does.
The fact that we live in a time where a statement like “several U.S. intelligence agencies consider a research-related lab incident the more likely explanation” is used to balance actual scientific evidence is a sad reflection of how the right wing has propagandized us all. There’s no science behind those intelligence agencies’ beliefs – it’s just based on what they think the motives of various political actors would be. It has the same so-called “credible” evidence as people who claim that vaccines cause autism because the government and vaccine makers would want to cover that up instead of revealing it. Since we can’t deny that vaccine makers would want to cover that up, it must be true! Or very likely true! After all, that’s “evidence” that’s as strong as real science! At least in our warped mediaverse.
If you don’t write an article that says that the dangers of vaccines are very serious, then you are “censoring” it.if you don’t write that it is very likely that the MMR causes autism you are “censoring” it. Science has been confused with politics, and the more certainty with which one claims something, the more credibility our co-opted, cowardly liberal media will give to their claims, and the more people will believe it, which then makes the media give it even more credibility!
This is the right wing playbook. The 2020 election was stolen. Some people say that and some disagree. The people who say it are much louder and get outsized attention in the media, and the more people who believe it, the more that the media presents it as if it is “LIKELY TRUE”!
Evidence? Who likes to talk about that? Why does it matter that one side has credible evidence and the other side just claims something very loudly with complete certainty and offers zero evidence? Both sides have different opinions, and that’s the story the media always writes.
After all this time of people trying to prove the lab leak, there is almost no credible evidence. After all this time of proving the 2020 election was stolen, there is ZERO credible evidence. But the liberal media is afraid to report on evidence because that’s too “biased” when the evidence doesn’t support a right wing false narrative.
LikeLiked by 1 person