Last week, Sen. Rand Paul and National Institute of Allergy and Infection Diseases Director Anthony Fauci went at it again. This time, the issue was whether or not the nation’s top doctor had allowed funding for gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China.
Paul believes that his sources, including Fauci’s private emails published by Buzzfeed in June, support the idea that Fauci approved the funding. The doctor denies it. The Republican senator reminded Fauci that lying to Congress was a crime. Fauci was unmoved. “If anyone is lying here, senator,” he responded, “it is you.”
I wouldn’t bet on that.
When Paul has challenged Fauci in recent months, it played out as follows: Paul says X. Fauci denies X. Social media and left-leaning pundits excoriate Paul for even bringing up X. Then, eventually, everyone agrees with Paul on X. We have seen this scenario play out at least twice.
In March, Paul told Fauci during a Senate hearing that vaccinated people no longer needed to wear masks, according to his scientific sources. Fauci insisted that masks were still needed, even for those who were vaccinated. Paul called it “theater.” Fauci said it was not theater. By May, however, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that vaccinated people no longer needed to wear masks. Fauci agreed.
True, things change over time, especially during a pandemic. But for Fauci to behave in March as if Paul was being irresponsible or reckless on mask policy looks foolish in hindsight.
Later in May, Paul asked Fauci if the origins of the global COVID-19 pandemic could be found in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. That is to say, the Chinese lab where U.S. funding for gain-of-function research had occurred. Fauci denied this, and many dismissed Paul as promoting a conspiracy theory.
Today, the lab leak theory is no longer considered conspiratorial. Indeed, it is viewed across the political and media spectrum as a serious possibility.
When Paul again challenged Fauci last week whether the United States had funded research that might have led to the coronavirus pandemic, left-leaning pundits and social media commentators immediately bashed him. “What is wrong with Rand Paul?” asked CNN’s Don Lemon. “There’s nothing to prove there, and he keeps embarrassing himself. Rand Paul, stop it. You look like an idiot.” The View’s Joy Behar said Paul should be “thanking” Fauci instead of attacking him.
That Lemon or Behar or any other pundit would see last week’s exchange as Paul merely attacking Fauci, as opposed to an elected representative questioning a powerful government official about policies that could affect billions, is telling. These critics predetermined that Paul was the bad guy and Fauci the hero. They won’t listen to what Paul is saying and can’t consider possible chinks in Fauci’s armor.
But no matter how much heat he gets, Paul calmly continues. He is trying to determine who in our government might have been responsible for, or at least had a hand in, unleashing the greatest global pandemic of our age. Maybe no one did. But the questioning is prudent and morally justified.
Paul also has reasonable concerns that some might also be trying to cover up aspects of the pandemic.
After last week’s exchange, Washington Post columnist Josh Rogin said, “Hey guys, Rand Paul was right and Fauci was wrong. The NIH was funding gain of function research in Wuhan but NIH pretended it didn’t meet their ‘gain of function’ definition to avoid their own oversight mechanism. SorryNotSorry if that doesn’t fit your favorite narrative.”
The possibility of Paul being right on this front yet again won’t fit the narratives of Fauci, Lemon, or Behar. But it is not far-fetched to consider that what we eventually learn about possible funding for the Wuhan lab and gain-of-function research could look close to what Paul alleges.
Right or wrong, we should be glad someone in Congress thinks it important to ask these questions.
Jack Hunter (@jackhunter74) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is the former political editor of Rare.us and co-authored the 2011 book The Tea Party Goes to Washington with Sen. Rand Paul.
