Sen. Paul: "Very real chance" Fauci could be prosecuted after Senate hearing

Senator Rand Paul suggested that Dr. Anthony Fauci faces a "very real chance" of prosecution following his testimony before a Senate committee. Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination in response to all questions posed during the hearing.

The hearing was marked by years of contentious exchanges between Paul, a Republican, and Fauci, both medical doctors, concerning the U.S. response to the COVID-19 pandemic and the virus's origins. Fauci has consistently defended his actions, while Paul has repeatedly accused him of dishonesty. Recently, Paul's office released journal entries from Fauci.

“

I think there is a very real chance that he could be prosecuted for that.

In an opening statement, Fauci indicated his intention to assert the Fifth Amendment, citing Paul's "obvious obsession with calling for my prosecution" and "slanderous comments." He then proceeded to invoke the amendment for several hours while Republicans criticized him and Democrats offered their support.

Speaking to CBS News after the hearing, Paul contended that Fauci's refusal to answer questions could lead to federal criminal charges for contempt of Congress or obstruction of a congressional proceeding. "I think there is a very real chance that he could be prosecuted for that," Paul stated.

“

We are completely confident that Dr. Fauci has a valid Fifth Amendment privilege here and is on solid legal ground in asserting it. Rand Paul may be a doctor, but he is not a lawyer.

Paul raised a complex legal question regarding a preemptive pardon reportedly issued to Fauci by former President Biden. Paul theorized that this pardon might prevent Fauci from validly invoking the Fifth Amendment, as he cannot be prosecuted for the matters in question. However, Fauci's attorney, David Schertler, countered via email, expressing full confidence in Fauci's "valid Fifth Amendment privilege" and asserting that Paul, despite being a doctor, is "not a lawyer."

Paul acknowledged this as an "unsettled legal question," noting the rarity of individuals with pardons refusing to testify before Congress. He believes a court would ultimately need to decide whether the Fifth Amendment applies to someone who has already received a pardon. Federal law criminalizes the "willful" refusal of witnesses to answer questions before Congress, and another law prohibits obstructing congressional investigations. Paul announced that his committee plans to hold a vote on recommending contempt of Congress charges against Fauci.

“

I don't think this has ever been truly and fully adjudicated. There aren't that many people with pardons who have come before a congressional committee and refuse to testify. A court ultimately would have to determine: Does the Fifth Amendment apply to someone who already has a pardon?