Dr. Anthony Fauci on Friday declined a request to appear voluntarily before a second Senate panel after majority Republicans on the Homeland Security Committee voted along partisan lines last week to hold the longtime infectious disease expert in contempt.

In a pointed letter to Sen. Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican, a lawyer for the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said any effort to compel him to appear before a Senate subcommittee, after a contentious July 29 hearing, would be to "impermissibly harass or degrade Dr. Fauci for political purposes.”

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    3 days ago

    If only it were just sound bites.

    They want to put him in prison because that’s what the nutjobs in their base want. They can (and have before) combed through testimony to find any discrepancies to charge people with perjury. They would do the same with Fauci, except Biden granted a pardon to Fauci. But that pardon wouldn’t cover any new testimony Fauci gives.

    So their plan was to bring in Fauci, ask him a bunch of questions, if even a single word can be interpreted to mean anything that could be considered false, then they charge him for perjury.

    Which is why Fauci took the 5th on every question last time. It’s not that he’s done anything incriminating (he was pardoned anyway) it’s that he knows the point of the whole exercise is to incriminate him with perjury.

    • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      This is why we need to abandon this mentality that pleading the 5th is the same thing as admitting guilt. Not only is it fundamentally not the same thing, and explicitly distinct from it, but it’s also our first line of defense against abuses of power and politically targeted libel/smear campaigns such as this.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Well the main problem is using the justice system to prosecute political enemies. This led to abusing perjury laws, so now pleading the 5th is the prudent thing to do when you’re a political enemy of those in power.

        • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          so now pleading the 5th is the prudent thing to do when you’re a political enemy of those in power.

          🌎👨‍🚀🔫👨‍🚀
          Always has been.

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      It’s not that he’s done anything incriminating (he was pardoned anyway).

      This assumption is too strong. Imagine making this same statement about Jan 6th rioters.

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yes. The rioters certainly did something incriminating before they were pardoned.

          Claiming Fauci didn’t do anything incriminating, but was pardoned anyway, is pure speculation.

          • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            Except that we have live footage of the J6 rioters committing federal crimes up to and including sedition, insurrection, and treason; which was broadcast on national television and replayed extensively for weeks. And not one but two investigations by a special counsel who successfully brought the case before a grand jury which concluded that a crime did likely occur. And multiple FBI investigations resulting in hundreds of convictions, to boot.

            Versus Anthony Fauci, where the only even suggestion that he was involved in any wrongdoing comes directly from the same propagandists and conspiracy theorists who were responsible for the J6 riot and have brazenly weaponized the justice department on sham trials in retaliation against perceived political opponents.

            Yeah, you’ve got no paddle in this argument. He was pardoned preemptively because it was already obvious that these freaks would try to persecute him.

            Claiming Fauci committed any crimes is what’s pure speculation here. And besides, the burden of proof is on the accuser. They couldn’t come up with anything to incriminate him before, so harassing him again about it is akin to double jeopardy.

            • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              He was pardoned preemptively because it was already obvious that these freaks would try to persecute him.

              Or he did something that needed pardoning. Which is more likely.

              Claiming Fauci committed any crimes is what’s pure speculation here. And besides, the burden of proof is on the accuser.

              Funding research abroad is not a crime. Covering up a paper trail leading to gain of function bat virus experimentation is.

              We don’t know that he didn’t do anything indictable. We do know he can’t be indicted.

              harassing him again about it is akin to double jeopardy.

              Agreed. Pleading the 5th is the only sane response.

              • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                2 days ago

                Or he did something that needed pardoning. Which is more likely.

                …you claim without evidence while accusing me of speculating about his innocence…

                Covering up a paper trail leading to gain of function bat virus experimentation.

                Is there any reason to believe he did this other than right-wing conspiracy nutjobs say he did? Just cause Cousin Earl talks about it at holidays is no reason to indict.

                We don’t know that he didn’t do anything indictable

                We don’t know that you didn’t do anything indictable either. Fortunately for you that’s not enough to bring you to court. That’s not how our justice system works.

                Pleading the 5th is the only sane response.

                Which is what he did. And now he’s refusing to play their games because he knows they have no cards.

                • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  …you claim without evidence while accusing me of speculating about his innocence…

                  The claim above was that “It’s not that he’s done anything incriminating”. We do not know this. The preemptive pardon makes this even less likely.

                  Is there any reason to believe he [covered up a paper trail].

                  It depends how linked he is to his aide

                  We don’t know that you didn’t do anything indictable either.

                  I have made no claim either way.

                  • wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    We do not know this.

                    Please, go ahead and make it more abundantly clear that you don’t know how the US justice system works. If people could be indicted simply because there’s no proof of their innocence, then no one would be safe from prosecution.

                    It depends how linked he is to his aide

                    Say you work retail and your coworker gets busted for murder. Are you somehow implicated because you work with the person?

                    I have made no claim either way.

                    Neither has Fauci. That’s what pleading the fifth is.

      • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        A whole bunch of people believe in conspiracy theories over science, so they want to put a prominent scientist into prison.

        Do you think it’s an assumption that conspiracy theories have made people stupid?

        • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 days ago
          • Is the possibility that Covid-19 leaked from a lab a conspiracy theory?

          • Was there a DARPA research group planning to insert a "proteolytic cleavage site” into bat coronaviruses?

          • Did Niaid award a research grant to a company, who then issued a sub-award to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China (and intentionally hide communications from public view)?

          Not questioning government sources is the stupid part (particularly with this administration, but also with others).

          Yes Fauci was pardoned, but we can’t assume him to be innocent.

          • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            2 days ago

            Is the possibility that Covid-19 leaked from a lab a conspiracy theory?

            How the problem originated isn’t relevant to the people whose job is to deal with the problem.

            Was there a DARPA research group planning to insert a "proteolytic cleavage site” into bat coronaviruses?

            I think you may have gone too deep into covid conspiracies. No idea what you’re even talking about here.

            Did Niaid award a research grant to a company, who then issued a sub-award to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China (and intentionally hide communications from public view)?

            Yes, there were grants to a research lab. Not sure what that indicates other than they wanted access to the results of the research. It’s not at all disputed that there are research grants and the research lab in Wuhan received a research grant.

            The problem with conspiracy theories is the generally fall apart when as soon as you ask “why would they want to do this?” So why would China want to intentionally release a virus on it’s own people in the hopes that it would spread to the rest of the world? How would that benefit them in any way?

            Yes, it’s possible that the virus accidentally came from the lab in Wuhan. But how does having testimony from a guy that’s retired help determine that? What does it even accomplish even if you did determine that a virus came from a lab in Wuhan?

            Sounds to me like you just want someone to say “you were right, the virus came from a lab.” So ok…

            You were right, the virus came from a lab.

            Are you happy now? Has your life suddenly gotten better? Will you stop pretending that fascists cracking down on individual scientists is a good thing to do because you now feel emotionally vindicated about some internet arguments you had around five years ago?

            • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              How the problem originated isn’t relevant to the people whose job is to deal with the problem.

              If they caused the problem it is relevant.

              No idea what you’re even talking about here.

              Leaked Grant Proposal Details High-Risk Coronavirus Research This research plan was rejected inside the US, so abroad is the likely place where this could be done.

              It’s not at all disputed that there are research grants and the research lab in Wuhan received a research grant.

              The point is that fauci’s associates were deliberately keeping communications a secret. Literally a conspiracy.

              “why would they want to do this?”

              Maybe they want to hide that they funded the gain of function research that lead to millions of deaths.

              how does having testimony from a guy that’s retired help determine that? What does it even accomplish even if you did determine that a virus came from a lab in Wuhan?

              To find out exactly what research Wuhan was doing for Niaid, and who authorised it. This would lead to even stricter controls on gain of function research worldwide.

              why would China want to intentionally release a virus on it’s own people

              I doubt they would. Most likely the virus was accidentally “walked out of the lab”.

              Will you stop pretending that fascists cracking down on individual scientists is a good thing.

              I don’t care who cracks down. I don’t want dangerous viruses to be artificially mutated to make them even more dangerous for humans.

              • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                2 days ago

                Are you under the impression that Dr. Anthony Fauci worked at the research lab in Wuhan?

                This is like wanting to arrest a fire fighter because you suspect someone else burned down your house. You went in too deep on the anti-vax conspiracy theories, bud.

                • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  Are you under the impression that Dr. Anthony Fauci worked at the research lab in Wuhan?

                  No. Are you? However, he may have been (ultimately) responsible for authorising funding for the research in Wuhan that created Covid.