Fauci Took the Fifth 111 Times and Now Faces Congressional Contempt

The Senate Homeland Security Committee voted Thursday to hold Dr. Anthony Fauci in contempt of Congress, and honestly, this was always where we were headed. When a witness invokes the Fifth Amendment 111 times during congressional testimony, refusing to answer a single question under oath, something has gone seriously wrong. Either with the witness or with the system that allowed him to get there.

Rand Paul, the committee chairman, didn’t mince words. Holding someone in contempt is serious business, he said, and it should be rare. But the contempt power exists for precisely this circumstance. The vote split 8 to 5 along party lines, with every Democrat opposing. That tells you everything about where we are as a country right now. Not whether Fauci should answer questions about the origins of a pandemic that killed over a million Americans, but whether your team wins or loses.

Here’s what actually happened. Fauci appeared before the committee under subpoena as part of their investigation into COVID-19’s origins. Before the hearing, Paul released more than 1,000 pages of Fauci’s journal entries from his time running the government’s pandemic response. You know what Fauci did with that mountain of evidence sitting there? He pleaded the Fifth to every single question. Every one.

His attorney called the contempt vote a crude political stunt meant to punish Fauci for exercising his constitutional rights. That’s one way to look at it. Another way is to ask why a man who spent 50 years in public health suddenly needs the Fifth Amendment’s protection when asked about his work during the biggest public health crisis of our generation.

The legal question here isn’t simple, and that matters. Paul argues that Fauci can’t actually invoke the Fifth because he’s already protected by a Biden-era pardon. If you’ve been pardoned, the reasoning goes, you can’t incriminate yourself because you can’t be prosecuted. Fauci’s lawyers say he has solid legal ground to assert the privilege anyway. Paul says it’s an unsettled question. Somebody’s going to have to figure that out, probably in court.

But step back from the legal gymnastics for a second. This is about whether Congress can compel testimony from witnesses who have relevant information about matters of urgent public concern. If a blanket pardon means you never have to answer questions again, even under subpoena, then we’ve just created a new class of untouchable government officials. That should worry everyone, regardless of party.

Fauci claimed in his opening statement that Paul has an obvious obsession with calling for his prosecution. He suggested the only reason he was called before the committee was so Paul could try to get him to say something that would vindicate Paul’s repeated public statements about wanting Fauci behind bars. Maybe that’s true. Paul has been relentless in his criticism of Fauci for years, accusing him of misleading the public about the pandemic’s origins and the government’s role in funding risky research.

Democrats on the committee tried repeatedly Thursday to table or postpone the vote. They were blocked by the GOP majority every time. That’s how majorities work. They get to set the agenda and push through what they want. Democrats did the same thing when they controlled these committees.

Paul skipped the typical next step of a full Senate floor vote and sent the contempt resolution directly to the Justice Department as a referral. A congressional aide confirmed later Thursday that the referral had been transmitted. Now it sits with DOJ, which gets to decide whether to pursue charges against one of the most recognizable faces of the federal government’s pandemic response.

The attorney representing Fauci called this a continuation of Paul’s personal vendetta against an honorable public servant. He said it’s shameful and wrong that Paul is abusing his power by trying to weaponize the Justice Department. That language, weaponize, gets thrown around a lot these days. Usually by whichever side feels like it’s losing.

What gets lost in all this back and forth is the fundamental question Paul raised before the vote. This isn’t about Fauci’s opinions or his policies, he said. It’s about whether a witness who received a sweeping federal pardon can be ordered by a committee to answer questions and then defy that order without consequence. We only have one question, Paul insisted. Whether to hold a witness responsible for his contempt toward Congress.

Fauci had many chances to answer questions relevant to the investigation. He made his decision 111 times. That’s not a legal argument or a political talking point. That’s just what happened.

Related: JD Vance’s Fraud Task Force Has Already Stopped 56 Billion Dollars From Walking Out the Door