The Media Takes the Fifth and Denounces Those Questioning Fauci as an “Assault on Science”

As I wrote yesterday, Dr. Anthony Fauci was not the only one taking the Fifth yesterday on his record during the pandemic. The media effectively invoked the same privilege to avoid self-incrimination for their years of deifying the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Across the cable networks, hosts and guests were going into vapors as Republican senators pummelled Fauci over his COVID policies and the glaring contradictions found in his diary entries. Some, like Dr. Scott Ratzan, echoed Fauci’s own prior claim that any questioning of his judgment was an attack on science.

Once again, Fauci had every right to invoke his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. That does not mean that it was the right thing to do. Fauci already had a pardon that notably extended back to 2014 when his agency approved gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab in China. Any prosecution would be difficult in light of the pardon. It would not be impossible since he could be charged with perjury for any false statements. Yet, that was the same threat that existed during countless prior hearings for Fauci.

So what was the difference now? The answer is found in diary entries and other evidence that contradicts Fauci’s public statements on subjects ranging from the lab theory to school closures. It is not that Fauci would have been tripped into false answers but that he did not have any obvious answers to some of these criticisms.

Instead, Fauci invoked the privilege 111 times. That fell short of Vito Genovese’s record, who invoked the privilege 150 times.

Rather than address the long list of criticisms and contradictions for Fauci, the media rallied around the scientist. Fauci was portrayed as something akin to the St. Sebastian of Science, taking barbs and arrows for his faith. It did not matter that over 1.2 million people died, an economy shut down, and millions of children were prevented from attending school based on these alleged errors. Fauci would remain silent rather than risk being charged with false testimony.

On CNN, Dr. Scott Ratzan repeated Fauci’s much-maligned claim in June 2021 that “attacks on me, quite frankly, are attacks on science.” Yesterday, Ratzan declared: “This is an assault on science and scientists, and unfortunately, Dr. Fauci is in that seat. 38 years of service to the country, one of the best-known scientists for infectious disease, unfortunately, has taken a lot of heat…”

It was a maddening statement, repeated by many, that treated Fauci as inviolate, if not infallible. Fauci was wrong about issues that produced tragic costs for this country. When confronted about policies such as school closures, he insisted he had never recommended them while privately admitting he had.

Fauci owes the public explanations, including millions who lost loved ones. Instead, he refused to take the risk of being accused of perjury.

Fauci is no Sebastian. Notably, Sebastian remained silent in public to conceal his faith, but when discovered by Diocletian, he remained faithful. The price was to be shot through with arrows, but he somehow survived. After being nursed back to health by Irene of Rome, he immediately confronted Diocletian in public and denounced his abuses. For that act he was beaten to death with clubs and tossed into a sewer.

Fauci spoke endlessly in public and remained silent only when asked to address the contradictions in his diaries and the costs of his alleged errors.

What is also frustrating for many is the reappearance of figures who toed the line on prior narratives about masks, the virus’s origin, and other issues. They are now claiming victimization in being asked to account for evidence that they were wrong. As Dr. Scott Atlas has laid out, many of those who abused dissenting scientists faced no repercussions after those scientists were largely vindicated in later research.

During this period, dissenting scientists were barred from social media, removed from positions, and vilified for expressing views, despite now being vindicated on subjects ranging from the lab origin of the virus, the efficacy of masks, the six-foot rule, natural immunity, and school closures.

Many previously echoed Fauci’s view that questioning these conclusions was an attack on science. One leading columnist wrote a piece titled “The COVID lab leak claim isn’t just an attack on science, but a threat to public health.”

When courageous scientists put their careers at risk (and some lost their positions) to voice their opposition to Fauci’s policies, neither he nor these acolytes said a thing in their defense. Fauci did not defend them as fighting for science and the need to challenge orthodoxy. When their views were later embraced, they received no apologies, let alone restoration.

For my part, I am not interested in hearing from scientists who remained silent as their counterparts were vilified, shadow-banned, and fired. Their deep faith in science did not prompt them to defend those with opposing views even though orthodoxy is the very antithesis of scientific thought.

Again, Fauci has every right to remain silent, but that does not make it right.

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”