Leaked diary reveals US COVID chief’s view on a ‘rambling’ Trump and his own fame

Anthony Fauci, the former head of the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), faced intense scrutiny during a Republican-led Senate hearing on July 29, 2026, where he invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times to avoid answering questions about the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and his role in managing the crisis. The hearing, chaired by Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, lasted nearly three hours and featured relentless questioning aimed at challenging Fauci’s credibility and past decisions. Fauci, who stepped down from his position in 2022, had previously been granted a presidential pardon by Joe Biden in early 2025 to shield him from potential legal repercussions tied to his pandemic-related actions. Despite this, Paul and other Republicans argued that the pardon did not absolve Fauci from testifying, and they threatened to move forward with a contempt of Congress vote should he continue to refuse answers. The central issue of the hearing revolved around allegations that Fauci had indirectly supported research involving coronaviruses in Wuhan, China, where the virus is believed to have originated. Paul has long contended that Fauci’s leadership at NIAID may have contributed to the conditions that led to the virus escaping a laboratory. Fauci consistently denied these claims, stating that the research conducted with funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) involved viruses that were genetically distinct from SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the pandemic. His refusal to answer specific questions about the research, however, left the door open for further investigations into the matter. During the hearing, Fauci directly confronted Paul, accusing him of harboring an “unhinged obsession” with seeing him incarcerated. He noted that Paul had made numerous public statements predicting his eventual imprisonment, suggesting that the hearing was designed to extract a confession or admission that could validate those predictions. Fauci emphasized that his legal team advised him to invoke the Fifth Amendment to avoid self-incrimination, a stance that frustrated the Republican lawmakers present. They argued that the law allows for compelled testimony, even if it involves potential self-incrimination, and that the 1896 Supreme Court ruling permits Congress to require witnesses to testify without violating their constitutional rights. The hearing also brought to light previously undisclosed aspects of Fauci’s personal life and professional experiences. A trove of over 1,000 pages of diary entries released by Paul revealed Fauci’s reflections on his interactions with former President Donald Trump, whom he described as increasingly erratic and difficult to manage. Fauci documented moments of cooperation with Trump early in the pandemic, followed by mounting frustration as the president frequently contradicted public health guidelines. These entries also highlighted Fauci’s awareness of his growing public profile, noting instances where he was recognized globally, including in Australia, where he was dubbed a “household name.” One entry specifically referenced his praise for Australia’s strict public health measures, which helped curb the spread of the virus in Melbourne. Fauci’s legal team expressed outrage over the treatment he received during the hearing. His attorney, David Schertler, was forcibly removed from the room by Paul after attempting to interject and defend his client’s right to remain silent. Schertler later criticized the proceedings as “biased and baseless,” arguing that the accusations leveled against Fauci were unfounded and driven by political motives rather than factual evidence. The Democrats, meanwhile, denounced the hearing as a partisan effort to undermine Fauci’s legacy and divert attention from broader issues related to the pandemic response. The controversy surrounding Fauci’s involvement in the pandemic continues to fuel debate among scientists, policymakers, and the public. While many credit him with guiding the United States through one of the most severe health crises in modern history, others criticize his evolving recommendations and the perceived politicization of public health measures. As the hearing concluded, the outcome remained uncertain, with Republicans vowing to pursue further action if Fauci continued to refuse to cooperate. The situation underscores the deep divisions within the U.S. political landscape regarding the management of the pandemic and the ongoing quest to determine its true origins.