RESOLVING THE LEDGER
This is one outlet's own report from The Independent — the article as it was filed. Other outlets are covering the same event; open the full story to compare every source side by side.
See the full story · 26 sourcesRand Paul wants the top doc to face ‘consequences’ for refusing to testify
Bookmark Comments Go to comments Bookmark popover Removed from bookmarks
Senator Rand Paul says Dr. Anthony Fauci will face “consequences” for asserting his Fifth Amendment right to avoid answering questions about the COVID-19 pandemic after the infectious disease expert blasted the Republican lawmaker for his “unhinged obsession” with him.
The Senate Homeland Security Committee will vote next week on whether to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress, according to Paul. “It’s against the law to obstruct an investigation of Congress. There will be repercussions for your refusal to testify,” Paul told Fauci on Wednesday.
It’s unclear whether the charges can stick. Before leaving office, Joe Biden issued a preemptive pardon for Fauci that effectively blocks federal criminal prosecutions for any official conduct between 2014 and 2025, a period covering Fauci’s response to the pandemic.
Senate Republicans argue that the pardon waives Fauci’s ability to lean on his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination if he has already been pardoned for any actions at the center of the committee’s questions. They argued that Fauci should have just answered their questions, even if it included an admission of any past wrongdoing.
Fauci, however, could still be prosecuted for making any false statements to the panel while under oath. Democratic members of the committee argued that Paul was trying to lead Fauci into committing perjury, which would then fall outside the bounds of the pardon.
“The courts will have to figure out whether you have a complete pardon, whether you have liability against incrimination,” Paul told reporters after Wednesday’s hearing. “Can you incriminate yourself if you have a pardon? I think it’s going to be a question for the courts.”
Fauci “didn’t need to hide behind the Fifth amendment, and maybe the Fifth Amendment doesn’t attach when you have a pardon in place,” according to Paul.
If approved by the committee, the contempt resolution would then head to the full Senate. It would need 60 votes to advance, which would require some Democratic support, which is unlikely.
From there, the referral would go to the Department of Justice to determine whether to prosecute. A conviction on criminal contempt of Congress carries a fine of up to $100,000 and a prison sentence of up to 12 months.
Members of Congress voted to hold two of President Donald Trump’s allies in contempt after they defied subpoenas to appear before a committee investigating the January 6 attack on the Capitol . Lawmakers referred the men to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution, and they each served four months in prison.
Trump and Republican members of Congress are also hoping to declare Biden’s pardons “void” over the former president’s use of a so-called “autopen,” a mechanical device used by virtually every modern president from both political parties.
Rep. James Comer, the top Republican on the House Oversight Committee, claims his committee has “exposed” how the former president “abused the autopen and any actions taken without clear authorization should be deemed null and void.”
“Dr. Fauci clearly knows his autopen pardon is on legally questionable grounds and decided to protect himself today rather than provide the truth to the American people,” Comer said in a statement Wednesday.
Fauci’s attorney David Schertler was forced to leave Wednesday’s hearing after he tried to defend Fauci’s invocation of the Fifth Amendment. Paul had him removed from the room while he tried to speak in Fauci’s defense.
“It was outrageous for Sen. Paul to exclude his counsel [from] making a legitimate legal point,” Schertler said in a statement to The Independent. “It proves the baseless and vindictive nature of this proceeding and Rand Paul’s personal vendetta against Dr. Fauci.”
After the hearing, Paul conceded that he’s not “the final word” on whether Fauci can be held in contempt.
“I’m not the final word on that. I can say that I think there are questions,” he told reporters. “That’s for a court to decide. The DOJ will have to look at that.”
Before responding to the panel’s questions by invoking the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times, Fauci delivered an opening statement condemning Paul’s “obvious obsession” with calling for his prosecution, as well as his “repeated slanderous comments” and attempts to “embarrass” and “intimidate” the 84-year-old public health expert.
“Although it pains me to say so, and because of the respect I have for the legislative branch of the federal government … under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right to the Fifth Amendment to refrain from answering your questions,” he said.
Republicans on the panel used Fauci’s stock response to ridicule him; Sen. Josh Hawley asked him basic questions about the color of his tie and the day of the week before labeling him a “narcissist and a megalomaniac and a liar.”
“You don’t have any rights under the Fifth Amendment because you’ve been pardoned,” Hawley told him. “You know that. Your lawyers sitting behind you, now shifting nervously in your chairs, they know it.”
It’s not the first time a congressional witness has faced contempt of Congress allegations after invoking the Fifth Amendment.
In 2013, IRS official Lois Lerner was hauled in to testify to a House committee over allegations that the tax agency had targeted right-wing groups.
After her opening statement to the House Oversight Committee , Lerner cited her Fifth Amendment right and refused to answer questions, but the committee’s Republican chair Darrell Issa claimed she “effectively waived” that right by delivering an opening statement.
Every House Republican and six House Democrats would later vote in favor of a resolution to hold her in contempt of Congress — but the Department of Justice declined to bring a criminal case against her.
Lerner “did not waive her Fifth Amendmen...
AIPROPX is an independent multi-source news index — we track, compare, and connect coverage from across the web into one place you won't find anywhere else.