Login
Dr. Anthony Fauci’s U.S. Senate testimony on Wednesday marked the beginning of a broader public reckoning, according to physicians, scientists and health freedom leaders who spent years challenging the federal government’s response to COVID-19.
Speaking during an online discussion hosted by MAHA Action after the hearing, they said Fauci’s repeated invocation of the Fifth Amendment reinforced long-standing concerns about the government’s handling of the pandemic.
But they also said the hearing should shift attention beyond Fauci to the policies, institutions and incentives they believe drove the nation’s COVID-19 response.
Journalist and author John Leake said the hearing symbolized what he sees as the collapse of honest scientific debate during the pandemic.
Fauci “says infamously, ‘I am science,’” Leake said. “He’s in effect proclaiming something like papal infallibility. He’s science incarnate. And anybody that questions him is something along the lines of a heretic.”
Looking back, Leake said, “Any reasonable adult who has possession of his faculties who’s not overwhelmed by fear and propaganda can see the absurdity of this. And yet this is what we were stuck with.”
Children’s Health Defense CEO Mary Holland, who attended Wednesday’s Senate hearing, said the proceedings marked the start of a long-awaited process of accountability.
“This is just the beginning,” Holland said. “This is just the start of a true COVID reckoning.”
‘People are not going to stop paying attention’
Holland said Fauci began the hearing by calling it “a witch hunt,” then responded to nearly every question the same way.
“On the advice of counsel, I respectfully decline to answer based on my rights under the Fifth Amendment,” he said repeatedly.
But Holland said the testimony itself was only part of what stayed with her.
While waiting to enter the hearing room, she met parents who had lost children, spouses and other loved ones during the pandemic.
“People are not going to stop paying attention to this,” Holland said. “They’re not going to give up on this. And I do believe that we’re at the beginning of a new era in accountability for what happened during COVID.”
She also criticized Democratic senators, who she said sidestepped the substance of the hearing.
“They really deflected,” Holland said. “They flattered Dr. Fauci. They said we shouldn’t be looking backwards. We should only be looking forwards.” This exposed what she described as “this huge chasm in the reality that Americans are still dealing with about the travesty that was the COVID era.”
Several speakers also pointed to more than 1,000 pages of Fauci’s recently released diaries, saying they revealed a sharp contrast between his private reflections and his public image during the pandemic.
Tony Lyons, president of MAHA Action and publisher of Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s bestselling book “The Real Anthony Fauci,” argued that while Americans became sicker, Fauci became increasingly influential.
“Health got worse. And yet he got more and more power,” Lyons said. “The country as a whole, everybody got more and more sick. And yet he got more and more fame and more and more power. And he gloated in his diary over that fame and power.”
Revisiting the pandemic’s biggest controversies
For many panelists, the hearing was less about Fauci’s testimony than about reopening debates they believe were never honestly settled during the pandemic.
Epidemiologist Martin Kulldorff, Ph.D., co-author of the Great Barrington Declaration, said the greatest injustice was closing schools.
“If I could change only one thing with the pandemic, it would be the closure of the schools,” he said. “That was a huge injustice to our children.”
Kulldorff argued officials ignored evidence that schools could safely reopen, overstated the benefits of masking and dismissed natural immunity after infection.
He also rejected the idea that pandemic restrictions reflected scientific consensus.
“When I talked privately with colleagues, most were appalled and against those measures,” Kulldorff said. “But they were afraid to speak up. … And those things are still going on. There are many scientists who are afraid to speak up.”
Dr. Meryl Nass said Fauci’s influence stemmed not only from his scientific authority but from the power he accumulated during nearly four decades leading the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
“His MO was always transactional,” Nass said. “He rewarded people and he expected others who he had rewarded to do what he wanted. And if they didn’t, they would be in hot water.”
She also criticized Fauci’s support for school closures, 6-foot distancing and remdesivir, as well as his handling of hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin.
“You can spend hours talking about all the terrible things this man did,” Nass said. “Hopefully, now he will finally get his comeuppance.”
Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., research scientist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), said the hearing also revived questions about the safety of mRNA vaccines and the mandates that accompanied them.
“It’s much, much safer to just get the disease than it is to risk this vaccine and then get the disease anyway because the vaccine doesn’t actually protect you,” Seneff said, citing a 2021 paper she co-authored.
She recalled being shocked that she might have to leave her position at MIT rather than receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Ultimately, she obtained a religious exemption.
“I could not imagine … then that it would ever come to the point where I would be forced to take this vaccine or quit my job,” she said. She added that the experience fundamentally changed how many Americans think about informed consent and medical choice.
“It was the whole COVID nightmare,” she said. “I couldn’t believe it was happening as it unfolded. And it kept getting worse and worse.”
‘This is a systemic problem’
While much of the hearing focused on Fauci, several speakers said that replacing one public official would not solve what they view as a much larger institutional problem.
Former White House adviser Steve Bannon called Fauci “a very evil individual” but said the larger issue extends far beyond one person.
“This is a systemic problem,” Bannon said. “And it hasn’t gone away.”
He argued that despite recent changes in federal leadership, the relationships among government agencies, pharmaceutical companies and other powerful institutions remain largely intact.
“We’ve only scratched the surface,” he said. “We still have a massive, massive, massive mission in front of us.”
Health freedom advocate Sayer Ji said the pandemic exposed coordinated efforts by powerful institutions to silence opposing views.
“Our government laundered censorship by using NGOs, the media, academia, in order to violate our basic constitutional medical and human rights,” Ji said.
He contrasted Fauci’s legal protections during the hearing with the treatment of people such as the “Disinformation Dozen,” who challenged official COVID-19 policies.
“Those who questioned the dominant narrative, they didn’t have the luxury of Fauci today who took the Fifth,” Ji said. “He has due process. He has representation. … When it comes to those Americans who spoke up, they were treated as criminals.”
Ji argued that withholding information from the public undermined informed consent.
“When you deprive someone of that fundamental information, you cannot make an informed medical choice,” he said.
Yet he also said the experience ultimately strengthened the health freedom movement.
“There were very few of us” before the COVID-19 era, Ji said. “Right now, we have literally a hundred times more people that are aware of the importance of health freedom.”
This article was funded by critical thinkers like you.
The Defender is 100% reader-supported. No corporate sponsors. No paywalls. Our writers and editors rely on you to fund stories like this that mainstream media won’t write.
‘Fauci’s malfeasance is so great’ that he should face criminal prosecution
Leake argued the hearing should ultimately lead investigators beyond Fauci’s testimony to a larger body of documentary evidence.
“It seems to me that the documentary evidence of Anthony Fauci’s malfeasance is so great that he really should be referred to the Justice Department for a criminal prosecution,” Leake said.
Lyons said the hearing reinforced what he has argued since publishing “The Real Anthony Fauci” in 2021 — that the pandemic response became less about scientific debate than suppressing dissent.
“This was never a story about honest scientific disagreement,” Lyons said. “It was about one man using the power of government to enforce orthodoxy and crush dissent.”
He argued that the hearing’s lasting significance extends beyond Fauci.
“When you have the facts on your side, you can argue,” Lyons said. “When you don’t, you censor. You deplatform.”
For Lyons, the lesson is one he hopes survives long after the hearing fades from the headlines. “Real science is skepticism,” he said. “Curiosity. The freedom to question anything.”
Bannon predicted the hearing’s impact is only beginning to unfold.
“I had mainstream media people blowing my phone up” during Fauci’s hearing, he said. “They are freaked out that that happened.”
He urged supporters to watch Fauci’s testimony “from beginning to end” and pay close attention to “what Fauci did and what he refused to answer.”
“And that, I think, will gird our loins for future battle,” Bannon said.
Watch health freedom advocates discuss Fauci’s hearing here:
Related articles in The Defender
- Congress Asked Fauci at Least 111 Questions — Fauci Refused to Answer at Least 111 Times
- ‘I Am the Most Famous’: Fauci Basked in Media Spotlight, Newly Released Diaries Show
- Watch ‘The Lockdown Dissidents’: WSJ Video Spotlights COVID Censorship and Its Lasting Impact
- ‘Damning’ Ivermectin Tape Exposes Pressure by Big Pharma to Suppress Ivermectin, RFK Jr.’s New Book Reveals
- The ‘Disinformation Dozen’: Targeted by Government, Maligned by Media. Where Are They Today?
