Anthony Fauci apparently walked into his congressional hearing with what he thought was a bulletproof game plan. Read a fancy prepared statement defending your entire career, then invoke the Fifth Amendment 111 times whenever anyone asks you a real question, then stroll out the door with Biden's pardon tucked safely in your pocket. Foolproof, right? Well, as USA Journal reported, investigative journalist Catherine Herridge may have spotted the massive hole in that strategy.
Here's the thing about the Fifth Amendment. It's not a buffet where you get to pick and choose which questions you feel like answering. The legal precedent goes back to Lois Lerner, that IRS official who went after Tea Party organizations during the Obama years. She pulled the exact same move in 2013, delivering an opening statement before a House oversight panel and then refusing to answer follow up questions. Legal experts argued she had partially given up her privilege by voluntarily putting her version of events on the record. You can't tell your side of the story and then slam the door when somebody wants to ask about what you just said.
Fauci apparently did precisely that. He sat down, read his prepared remarks about pandemic decisions, COVID origins, gain of function research, and all his public statements. Then, the moment senators started asking substantive questions about those very same topics, he suddenly remembered his constitutional rights. Oklahoma Senator James Lankford called this out during the hearing, pointing directly to the Lerner precedent.
But wait, there's a bonus round. Kentucky Senator Rand Paul brought up the fact that destroying government documents is a federal crime. Fauci's own records reportedly contain a February 2020 email where he allegedly told then NIH Director Francis Collins to delete an email after reading it. This was apparently sent right after a phone call regarding COVID origins. That email was later found in HHS records, which kind of defeats the whole "delete this" strategy. Destroying federal documents could constitute obstruction, and that might not fall under Biden's preemptive pardon depending on the specifics.
Tulsi Gabbard didn't hold back either, calling his performance an exercise in "smug arrogance" with "zero remorse" and "zero accountability." She also reminded everyone that taxpayer money funded coronavirus lab research in Wuhan and that Fauci allegedly coordinated with intelligence community officials to conceal it. She referenced declassified documents that the CIA reportedly seized before she could release them.
Now a contempt vote is on the schedule for this week. If it passes, a criminal referral heads straight to the Justice Department. Peter Navarro did prison time for contempt of Congress. Steve Bannon did prison time for contempt of Congress. Fauci doesn't have some special force field protecting him from the same consequences.
So let's recap the legal strategy here. Step one, voluntarily address controversial topics on the record. Step two, refuse to answer questions about those topics. Step three, hope nobody notices the glaring contradiction. Brilliant work by his legal team. If Herridge's analysis is correct, Fauci essentially opened the very door he was desperately trying to keep bolted shut.
Read more conservative news commentary at: USA Journal News
Last edited by a moderator:
