Rand Paul: Trump Didn’t Have to Let ‘Menace to the Truth’ Fauci Run COVID Committee

[mystery-ak]

Rand Paul: Trump Didn’t Have to Let ‘Menace to the Truth’ Fauci Run COVID Committee

Ian Hanchett 21 Jun 2023

On Tuesday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Jesse Watters Primetime,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said that even if civil service rules prevented then-President Donald Trump from firing Dr. Anthony Fauci, “there’s no reason he had to head up the pandemic committee” and be in a position where he was, if not the head of the committee, “he was the committee” with then-Vice President Mike Pence and Trump should have done a better job of keeping Fauci’s “nonsense and his misinformation from infecting the rest of us.”

Paul stated, “He should not be so proud of keeping Fauci around. Fauci was a menace to the truth. Talk about a fount of misinformation, it’s Anthony Fauci. More misinformation came out of the government than any other source. So, he should have fired him.”

He added, “There may be civil service rules about actually firing him, but there’s no reason he had to head up the pandemic committee — the COVID committee. So, he was on the committee. In fact, if not the lead, he was the committee with the vice president. They met all of the time. And if you talk to Robert Redfield, he was pushed out. He was the one sane voice on the committee and he was pushed out by Deborah Birx and pushed out by Anthony Fauci. And they spread the misinformation that immunity didn’t work. The one thing that could have saved thousands of lives before the vaccine was that — the nurses and the assistants and the people taking care of people in the nursing homes, we should have put people in those positions who had already been infected and recovered knowing that naturally-acquired immunity would then protect those senior citizens from getting infected. And we never did that, because Fauci kept saying, well we’re not sure, we’re not sure. Well, immunity we are pretty certain of. That’s what vaccines are based on, is naturally-acquired immunity from the disease, we try to simulate that with the vaccine. So, by denying it, I think that many lives were cost. And there would have been a better way, I think, under the Trump administration to marginalize and push Fauci out of the spotlight and keep his nonsense and his misinformation from infecting the rest of us.”

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2023/06/21/rand-paul-trump-didnt-have-to-let-menace-to-the-truth-fauci-run-covid-committee/

[mountaineer]

Scott Morefield
@SKMorefield
Sen. @RandPaul rips Trump for keeping Fauci around:  "He should not be so proud of keeping Fauci around. Fauci was a menace to the truth. Talk about a fount of misinformation. It's Anthony Fauci. More misinformation came out of the government than any other source, so he should have fired him."

https://twitter.com/SKMorefield/status/1671307345236770817

[PeteS in CA]

Monday morning quarterbacking. In the context of what Trump could and did know in January 2020, the head of the Institute for infectious diseases heading up a committee to coordinate an effort against an infectious disease. By the time Trump could see signs that Fauci was plating a double-game, canning Fauci would have caused a huge scandal. Trump instead decided to try to harness and mitigate Fauci's damage.

Rand Paul's criticism is almost entirely founded on what Trump could not know in January 2020, not very honest of Rand Paul.

[bigheadfred]

Monday morning quarterbacking. In the context of what Trump could and did know in January 2020, the head of the Institute for infectious diseases heading up a committee to coordinate an effort against an infectious disease. By the time Trump could see signs that Fauci was plating a double-game, canning Fauci would have caused a huge scandal. Trump instead decided to try to harness and mitigate Fauci's damage.

Rand Paul's criticism is almost entirely founded on what Trump could not know in January 2020, not very honest of Rand Paul.

 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Rand Paul: Trump Didn’t Have to Let ‘Menace to the Truth’ Fauci Run COVID Committee

Ian Hanchett 21 Jun 2023

On Tuesday’s broadcast of the Fox News Channel’s “Jesse Watters Primetime,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) said that even if civil service rules prevented then-President Donald Trump from firing Dr. Anthony Fauci, “there’s no reason he had to head up the pandemic committee” and be in a position where he was, if not the head of the committee, “he was the committee” with then-Vice President Mike Pence and Trump should have done a better job of keeping Fauci’s “nonsense and his misinformation from infecting the rest of us.”

This is exactly the point I've made here before.  Firing Fauci as a federal employee was never the issue, so the Trump/Trumpers defense that he couldn't fire Fauci was always a red herring.

[libertybele]

Monday morning quarterbacking. In the context of what Trump could and did know in January 2020, the head of the Institute for infectious diseases heading up a committee to coordinate an effort against an infectious disease. By the time Trump could see signs that Fauci was plating a double-game, canning Fauci would have caused a huge scandal. Trump instead decided to try to harness and mitigate Fauci's damage.

Rand Paul's criticism is almost entirely founded on what Trump could not know in January 2020, not very honest of Rand Paul.

I disagree.  It was well known that Fauci had headed the gain of function research over in Wahun.  That research was shut down when Bammy was in office.  Fauci somehow came into the scene again during the Trump administration.  So, how did that even happen??

I don't see that Trump tried to harness Fauci's damage in the least -- he let him run. Trump accepted and went with his b.s. to flatten the curve and advised to shut us down.

If you're trying to say that Trump didn't know about Fauci's research and involvement over in Wahun then shame on him.  Once again his choice of selecting someone was horrible.

[bigheadfred]

This is exactly the point I've made here before.  Firing Fauci as a federal employee was never the issue, so the Trump/Trumpers defense that he couldn't fire Fauci was always a red herring.

It is still Monday morning quarterbacking.

[Kamaji]

It is still Monday morning quarterbacking.

Not really.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Monday morning quarterbacking. In the context of what Trump could and did know in January 2020, the head of the Institute for infectious diseases heading up a committee to coordinate an effort against an infectious disease. By the time Trump could see signs that Fauci was plating a double-game, canning Fauci would have caused a huge scandal. Trump instead decided to try to harness and mitigate Fauci's damage.

Rand Paul's criticism is almost entirely founded on what Trump could not know in January 2020, not very honest of Rand Paul.

Nobody is claiming that Trump should have known this in January 2020, or is blaming Trump for the initial response to the pandemic when there were so many unknowns.   That also is a red herring.

But - as has been pointed out here many, many times - plenty of others had it figured out by May 2020 that 1) the government had drastically overestimated the mortality rate from COVID, and 2) mortality was orders of magnitude less than that unless you were in a high risk group.   The risk to healthy children and young adults in particular was miniscule.  And that was known by May 2020

It is Trump keeping fear-mongering Fauci in charge after that point, and not directing any changes in federal policy/recommendations for which Trump is justifiably blamed.

If the defense of Trump's inaction is "well, that would have upset people", that is inexcusable.  First, the entire premise of his 2016 candidacy was that he was the guy unafraid to take on the powers that be.  If there was one thing for which we should have been able to count on him, it was to do what he thought was right regardless of the political blowback.

Second, regardless of what he had promised as a candidate, and how he had portrayed himself as President, the Covid pandemic was the single biggest crisis to hit this country since 9/11, and likely bigger than that.  As President, he owed it to us to give it his maximum attention, stay involved, get himself informed, and make the tough decisions.  He failed completely to do that, and passing the buck to those who would have criticized him for replacing Fauci is disgraceful on his part. 

And obviously, the sheer obscenity of awarding both Fauci and General Milley with Presidential Commendations the day before he left office in 2021 is inexcusable.

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/president-trump-awards-presidential-commendations-operation-warp-speed-team/

[Kamaji]

Nobody is claiming that Trump should have known this in January 2020, or is blaming Trump for the initial response to the pandemic.   That also is a red herring.

But - as has been pointed out here many, many times - plenty of others had it figured out by May 2020 that 1) the government had drastically overestimated the mortality rate from COVID, and 2) mortality was orders of magnitude less than that unless you were in a high risk group.   The risk to healthy children and young adults in particular was miniscule.  And that was known by May 2020

It is Trump keeping fear-mongering Fauci in charge after that point, and not directing any changes in federal policy/recommendations for which Trump is justifiably blamed.

If the defense of Trump's inaction is "well, that would have upset people", that is inexcusable.  First, the entire premise of his 2016 candidacy was that he was the guy unafraid to take on the powers that be.  If there was one thing for which we should have been able to count on him, it was to do what he thought was right regardless of the political blowback.

Second, regardless of what he had promised as a candidate, and how he had portrayed himself as President, the Covid pandemic was the single biggest crisis to hit this country since 9/11, and likely bigger than that.  As President, he owed it to us to give it his maximum attention, stay involved, get himself informed, and make the tough decisions.  He failed completely to do that, and passing the buck to those who would have criticized him for replacing Fauci is disgraceful on his part. 

And obviously, the sheer obscenity of awarding both Fauci and General Milley with Presidential Commendations the day before he left office in 2021 is inexcusable.

https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/president-trump-awards-presidential-commendations-operation-warp-speed-team/

[DefiantMassRINO]

Ummm ... in addition to raking Fauci across the coals, what is Congress and the President doing to hold China accountable for unleashing Covid19/SARS2 upon the world as a result of its irresponsible and negligent gain-of-function testing in Wuhan?

It's fair to hold Fauci, CDC, and NIH accountble for their missteps, but it is also unfair to not hold the Chi-coms accountable.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Ummm ... in addition to raking Fauci across the coals, what is Congress and the President doing to hold China accountable for unleashing Covid19/SARS2 upon the world as a result of its irresponsible and negligent gain-of-function testing in Wuhan?

It's fair to hold Fauci, CDC, and NIH accountble for their missteps, but it is also unfair to not hold the Chi-coms accountable.

Well, we can hold accountable American politicians who screwed up by not electing them again.  Not much we can do about guys like Fauci who were government employees and whose actions were sanctioned by their political superiors.

As for China, heavy sanctions, etc., seem appropriate.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

It is still Monday morning quarterbacking.

No, it isn't.  Plenty of people were screaming back in May 2020 that we needed to change course.  Everything that came after that was more like Sunday afternoon quarterbacking.

The funny part about the MMQ excuse is that you guys are just making it up for Trump's benefit.  That's not the excuse Trump himself has made.  The excuse Trump has made is that people would have been mad at him.

[DCPatriot]

Monday morning quarterbacking. In the context of what Trump could and did know in January 2020, the head of the Institute for infectious diseases heading up a committee to coordinate an effort against an infectious disease. By the time Trump could see signs that Fauci was plating a double-game, canning Fauci would have caused a huge scandal. Trump instead decided to try to harness and mitigate Fauci's damage.

Rand Paul's criticism is almost entirely founded on what Trump could not know in January 2020, not very honest of Rand Paul.

  

[libertybele]

Ummm ... in addition to raking Fauci across the coals, what is Congress and the President doing to hold China accountable for unleashing Covid19/SARS2 upon the world as a result of its irresponsible and negligent gain-of-function testing in Wuhan?

It's fair to hold Fauci, CDC, and NIH accountble for their missteps, but it is also unfair to not hold the Chi-coms accountable.

Brandon has profited off of COVID and China and that 'relationship' is ongoing.  There's no way that he or our DOJ are going to hold China accountable.  Fauci, the CDC, WHO and the NIH all are profiting.

There are a couple of Senators and Congressmen that have voiced that they want China held accountable and as usual nothing has happened.

[libertybele]

It is still Monday morning quarterbacking.

No it isn't.  With Fauci being in the picture and doing gain of function research and leading the funding for the research during the Obammy administration, and that research was shutdown, how could Trump nor his administration not know of Fauci's record??? How did Fauci appear again anyways?  How could they not know that he was involved over in Wahun? 

[LMAO]

Monday morning quarterbacking.

If I screwed up something and my wife tells me “I would have done xyz differently,” she would  have the benefit of my mistake to be able to make such a bold assertion.

There is a bit of Monday morning quarterbacking when it comes to Trump and Covid. When he closed travel to and from China in early 2020, the Democrats and the media not only excoriated him for that, but told people they should go to Chinatown and live their lives normally in spite of Trump.

Yes, there were people who dissented. That’s gonna be the case no matter what the issue is.  I hope we don’t make the same mistakes when the next pandemic hits.

[PeteS in CA]

Nobody is claiming that Trump should have known this in January 2020, or is blaming Trump for the initial response to the pandemic when there were so many unknowns.   That also is a red herring.
...

No, @Maj. Bill Martin, it is what happened, https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/480627-white-house-announces-task-force-to-monitor-coronavirus/ :

Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar is leading the task force, the White House said. Other members include national security adviser Robert O’Brien, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Robert Redfield, top National Institutes of Health official Anthony Fauci and several other administration officials.

Except that Fauci was a member of this task force, not its leader. So, what about Operation Ward Speed, announced in May? Well, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2020/05/15/coronavirus-operation-warp-speed-could-deliver-vaccine-years-end-trump/5199969002/ :

At the news conference, Trump brought to the podium venture capitalist and former pharmaceutical head Moncef Slaoui. It was announced Wednesday he would lead the partnership.

Slaoui was chair of the vaccines division at pharmaceutical GlaxoSmithKline, a British multinational pharmaceutical company headquartered in London. He is now a partner at Medicxi Capital, a Philadelphia-area venture capital firm.

So Fauci participated in, as the head of NIAID, Operation Warp Speed, but Moncef Slaoui was OWS's leader.

So, ignoring Rand Paul's error, his claim that Fauci "headed up the pandemic committee", Trump's Covid "task force", in which Fauci was a member was formed in January. My comment, "In the context of what Trump could and did know in January 2020 ..." was based on what happened. It may detract from Rand Paul's claim, but my comment is what actually happened. And, contrary to Rand Paul's claim, Fauci was neither the head of the Covid task force nor of Operation Warp Speed.

My memory is anything but perfect, but the news links about the announcements of the task force and OWS are easily found here, https://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,395099.0.html .

[roamer_1]

Monday morning quarterbacking. In the context of what Trump could and did know in January 2020, the head of the Institute for infectious diseases heading up a committee to coordinate an effort against an infectious disease. By the time Trump could see signs that Fauci was plating a double-game, canning Fauci would have caused a huge scandal. Trump instead decided to try to harness and mitigate Fauci's damage.

Rand Paul's criticism is almost entirely founded on what Trump could not know in January 2020, not very honest of Rand Paul.

Poor little Tumpy... He can't help it...

[The_Reader_David]

It is still Monday morning quarterbacking.

No.  It is not.  Having an expert on infectious disease be essentially the sole input into public health policy in dealing with the pandemic was a mistake which should not have been made, and for reasons that any sober observer of public policy and/or the behavior of scientists and bureaucrats would have known in advance:  an infectious disease expert will set policy as if the sole good is the prevention of infection and/or death from the given disease, and will thus give advice without regard to cost-benefit analyses, in particular other harms likely to result from the most effective means of preventing the spread of the disease.  Sweden got it right.  The Great Barrington Declaration signers got it right.  A committee including Fauci and experts on cost-benefit analyses in public health might have managed to get it right.  Fauci given carte blanche to set policy got it wrong.

I made these critiques in real time throughout the pandemic:  that setting public policy as if the sole human good was the prevention of infection by and death from the Sars-Cov2 virus was simply wrong.  The destruction of a generation's education, the disruption of the economy, the excess deaths of despair from lockdown and job loss, none of it needed to have happened.  Sweden had a lower per capita death rate than the US or UK. But the question was not debatable:  Fauci got social media companies to censor posts referencing the Great Barrington Declaration.  That there was not robust debate on policy, either within the Trump administration or in American society at large was Trump's fault. 

[christian]

As so often used and abused, if we can obsess with giving Trump all the blame, then cleverly walk away giving the real perps a pass.  The we can have real WOKE justice, blame it all on
Trump, and of course the real perps involved by omission get a pass.  Getting mighty noticeable and could lead to another 4 years of Biden.  Like setting up the gullible fools for the coming election, eh?

[Right_in_Virginia]

It is still Monday morning quarterbacking.

Agree.

I like Paul, a lot.  I wish he'd tell us how many times he met with Trump, laying out his concerns, advising the president to fire Fauci and pledging his support for it in the Senate.  If memory serves, Paul always had Trump's ear and respect. Sounds like Paul may have failed the President ---- and us ----- in this critical moment.

[Right_in_Virginia]

Monday morning quarterbacking. In the context of what Trump could and did know in January 2020, the head of the Institute for infectious diseases heading up a committee to coordinate an effort against an infectious disease. By the time Trump could see signs that Fauci was plating a double-game, canning Fauci would have caused a huge scandal. Trump instead decided to try to harness and mitigate Fauci's damage.

Rand Paul's criticism is almost entirely founded on what Trump could not know in January 2020, not very honest of Rand Paul.

 

[Kamaji]

No.  It is not.  Having an expert on infectious disease be essentially the sole input into public health policy in dealing with the pandemic was a mistake which should not have been made, and for reasons that any sober observer of public policy and/or the behavior of scientists and bureaucrats would have known in advance:  an infectious disease expert will set policy as if the sole good is the prevention of infection and/or death from the given disease, and will thus give advice without regard to cost-benefit analyses, in particular other harms likely to result from the most effective means of preventing the spread of the disease.  Sweden got it right.  The Great Barrington Declaration signers got it right.  A committee including Fauci and experts on cost-benefit analyses in public health might have managed to get it right.  Fauci given carte blanche to set policy got it wrong.

I made these critiques in real time throughout the pandemic:  that setting public policy as if the sole human good was the prevention of infection by and death from the Sars-Cov2 virus was simply wrong.  The destruction of a generation's education, the disruption of the economy, the excess deaths of despair from lockdown and job loss, none of it needed to have happened.  Sweden had a lower per capita death rate than the US or UK. But the question was not debatable:  Fauci got social media companies to censor posts referencing the Great Barrington Declaration.  That there was not robust debate on policy, either within the Trump administration or in American society at large was Trump's fault. 

[Maj. Bill Martin]

No.  It is not.  Having an expert on infectious disease be essentially the sole input into public health policy in dealing with the pandemic was a mistake which should not have been made, and for reasons that any sober observer of public policy and/or the behavior of scientists and bureaucrats would have known in advance:  an infectious disease expert will set policy as if the sole good is the prevention of infection and/or death from the given disease, and will thus give advice without regard to cost-benefit analyses, in particular other harms likely to result from the most effective means of preventing the spread of the disease.  Sweden got it right.  The Great Barrington Declaration signers got it right.  A committee including Fauci and experts on cost-benefit analyses in public health might have managed to get it right.  Fauci given carte blanche to set policy got it wrong.

I made these critiques in real time throughout the pandemic:  that setting public policy as if the sole human good was the prevention of infection by and death from the Sars-Cov2 virus was simply wrong.  The destruction of a generation's education, the disruption of the economy, the excess deaths of despair from lockdown and job loss, none of it needed to have happened.  Sweden had a lower per capita death rate than the US or UK. But the question was not debatable:  Fauci got social media companies to censor posts referencing the Great Barrington Declaration.  That there was not robust debate on policy, either within the Trump administration or in American society at large was Trump's fault.