Fauci remains silent as senators grill him on COVID-19 origins

0:01WBUR Podcasts, Boston. Under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my right under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution to refrain from answering your questions. Thank you. Dr. Anthony Fauci is testifying in front of Congress today, but he's keeping it tight-lipped and invoking the Fifth.

0:36It's Wednesday, July 29th, and this is Here and Now Anytime from NPR and WBUR Boston. I'm Kalyani Saxena. Today on the show, we're going to talk about the Department of Homeland Security's top lawyer, who's going after U.S. District Court judges by name on social media. We'll hear from one judge who knows just how dangerous that rhetoric can be. This is an intentional act by this administration to churn out this negative PR campaign against the judiciary. There is a more sinister reason, and that is if something happens to one of us, we had it coming. Also, we'll take a closer look at how medical schools are responding to new recommendations around nutrition.

1:19From Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. here. I think when we are talking about nutrition education components in med school, it's definitely important for it to be there. But we also cannot spend all of our time speaking about nutrition because there's so many other components about medicine that need to be taught. But first, we've got to unpack that strained hearing on Capitol Hill today with Dr. Anthony Fauci. Here's a quick recap to get you up to speed. Dr. Anthony Fauci led the U.S.'s response to the coronavirus pandemic. He was the federal government's top infectious disease expert for decades.

1:58But in the years since, he's faced accusations from Republican lawmakers that say that he lied about the origins of the pandemic. Republican Senator Rand Paul is leading the charge on those accusations. And while Dr. Fauci was pardoned by former President Joe Biden, he could be in hot water if he perjures himself under oath now. So experts say it's actually in his best interest to say very little. And Dr. Fauci seems to have taken that strategy to heart. Today, he repeatedly exercised his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination at a hearing in front of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

2:38In simple terms, he refused to answer questions about the origins of the pandemic. Host Indira Lakshmanan spoke with Atlantic staff writer Catherine J. Wu about the hearing and her latest article, The Unmaking of Anthony Fauci. So Senator Rand Paul led the charge on this hearing. He has long accused Dr. Fauci of covering up an alleged leak of COVID-19 from a lab in Wuhan, China. That lab leak theory has been widely discussed and debated. The consensus among virologists seems to be that the virus likely came from a wild animal through wet markets. First, let's address that theory. Do Paul and other critics of Fauci have any legitimate reason to distrust the origins or the government's handling of the pandemic?

3:27Certainly, this is a question that is still unresolved. I think anyone who says at this point that the matter is completely a closed case doesn't have legs to stand on. But exactly as you say, you know, the scientific consensus points to a natural origin so far. And the preponderance of evidence does really point in that direction. I think the accusation of there being dangerous funding of research and possible biosecurity issues is worth looking into because if that were to be the case, we would certainly want to prevent that from happening again. But it really seems like in the past five years or so, the evidence on the lab leak side has really been a series of accusations cycled over and over and over, and very little new evidence has emerged.

4:16So the accusations seem to recycle themselves, but we're not really moving very much far forward on that front. Well, one thing that we do know that we didn't know a few days ago, Senator Paul released more than a thousand pages from Anthony Fauci's private diary that apparently he had kept on a government server. Why now? Some of those were kind of embarrassing personal observations that seem to show Fauci as seeking fame or enjoying fame. Why did Senator Paul do this? What does he stand to gain? That is certainly a question for Senator Paul, but it really does seem like, based on the timing of this and the way that he framed those diary entries, he seems to be very intent on catching Fauci in a lie, finding some sort of evidence that he engineered some sort of massive cover-up, and pointing to this idea that, oh, in his diary he admitted that there was a possibility that there may have been a lab leak very, very early on in 2020, and he did look into that.

5:20But, you know, as science just works in general, understanding evolved over time as new evidence emerged. Really seems like an additional motivation here was to embarrass Fauci significantly before this hearing, where there was an enormous attack on his character. Right. Well, in 2020, listeners will remember that Dr. Fauci was appearing almost nightly in front of the nation talking about the COVID pandemic. He became, you write, a public health saint for those who looked up to him as defending science and protecting our health. Conversely, he was demonized by those who thought he was mishandling the pandemic, who were upset about the lockdowns and upset about the vaccine.

6:04Will today's hearing change anybody's mind? It's hard to say. I think for a lot of people who have seen him as a complete hero for the past six years, I doubt this hearing will change their minds. But, you know, with the flip side of that is people are very set in their characterization of him as a villain. One difficult thing about today's hearing is that, you know, Fauci did repeatedly invoke his Fifth Amendment right. He wasn't really responding to the allegations against him. He wasn't taking the opportunity to defend himself for understandable reasons. But that did mean that the sort of consensus line from the hearing was a series of accusations without defense against them.

6:43So was there an opportunity for some people to become even more hard lined in their persecution of him? Possibly. And I think that is an immense concern among many of his colleagues that I heard from in the past few weeks. All right, Catherine, I mean, briefly, you've covered both Fauci and the COVID pandemic for years. Over his long career, he made significant contributions to public health. He helped transform HIV from a death sentence into a survivable condition. Yet at the same time, ever since President Trump retook office last year, he's been engaged in what you call a systematic effort to obliterate Fauci's legacy.

7:19His image was removed from the National Institutes of Health. Programs that he was involved in have been dismantled. Why is President Trump so focused on trying to undo Fauci's legacy? I think there's still immense bitterness over the way that the COVID pandemic was handled, even though, you know, certainly, ironically, the first year of that handling was under President Trump's first term. But he's become the scapegoat for all of the things about COVID that became controversial, as much as he was made into a saint. You know, as we've talked about, he was also villainized, demonized. People want someone to blame.

7:54People want someone to answer for the things that they still feel upset about. All right. He has become that person. And I don't think the attacks are going to stop anytime soon, specifically because of that singular fixation. Thank you so much, Catherine Wu, staff writer from The Atlantic. Thank you so much for having me.

8:15Here's what's coming up next. Increased threats to members of the judiciary are raising a big question. Is it safe to do the job? You may remember earlier this month, Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett spoke about the day she brought home a bulletproof vest. And it's not just everyday members of the public that are raising the temperature. Some of the rhetoric against judges is coming from within the administration. Just this week, DHS General Counsel James Percival took to social media to call four federal district judges who challenged Trump's orders the worst of the worst. Judge Esther Salas knows all too well how rhetorical attacks against judges can turn into devastating violence.

9:03She speaks with Indira after the break. The Department of Homeland Security's top lawyer is openly attacking U.S. District Court judges by name. DHS General Counsel James Percival used his official government social media account on X to condemn four federal judges who have presided over cases challenging the legality of President Trump's immigration orders, calling those judges, quote, the worst of the worst. There's concern that the targeted rhetorical attack could spill over into physical violence. The U.S. Marshals Service reports a rise in threats against judges to more than 560 last year.

9:43One judge who experienced a deadly targeted attack is now ringing the alarm. New Jersey District Judge Esther Salas lost her son and nearly lost her husband when a gunman angry about a Latina woman wielding power from the bench targeted her family in their New Jersey home in 2017. 2020. Authorities later learned the same gunman was also hunting Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. Salas remained in her job and has argued for more measures to protect judges, and she joins us now. Judge Salas, welcome. Thank you for having me, Indira. First of all, there are no words for the horror that you endured losing your son, and you were so brave to talk about it.

10:22Your son Daniel would have turned 26 years old this month. What makes you worried that what happened to your family could happen again to another judge. What makes me worry are the facts, right? Facts matter. We're seeing a rise in threats to the judiciary. We're seeing it come from the right and left. We've seen the Department of Homeland Security use their official website to say a judge in Rhode Island was a threat to national security. We see Judge DuBose, who they withheld critical information. And as a result, when she released the person, they then posted information that she was letting known people who were charged of murder in another district letting them out.

11:10That resulted in Judge DuBose being threatened. And this is repeated acts by the Department of Homeland Security, and they are putting judges' lives, and in particular, the general counsel is putting judges' lives at risk. You know, this is a pattern that continues from President Trump's first term. He and his allies have openly attacked judges who they have seen as blocking his priorities. In President Trump's first term, he tweeted angry attacks against a U.S. district judge who had temporarily blocked the president's travel ban against visitors from Muslim countries. And that judge got 40 ,000 threatening messages and had to have round-the-clock protection.

11:49So tell me, you know, the president and his allies will say, well, this is free speech. We have a right to criticize any ruling that comes down from any judge. But are you concerned that the DHS general counsel's tweets naming judges could have a similar effect of targeted threats and attacks? I would ask the general counsel, what's the end game? What is he trying to do? Obviously, we all have rights to do certain things, but should we? As political leaders setting a tone and setting examples for the citizens of this country, should we be acting so recklessly? Chief Justice Roberts warned us about this.

12:28There's not a problem at criticizing a judge's opinion on the merits. But when we look at what has been posted by general counsel, these are value-laden attacks. This is, by the way, equal to what a representative in Congress did last year with a wanted poster and had judges faces on that wanted poster. Well, what are you hearing from fellow judges? How are they responding to the most recent wave of online threats or even direct threats they're getting? You know, it's very stressful. I had a judge just yesterday tell me how he had to testify in court after someone threatened his life and charges were brought.

13:08We're getting threats, calls, vicious calls to our chambers. I understand, I don't have all the details, but there is a judge out of the Southern District of Florida, Judge John Steele, who passed away. I understand the judge had been recently labeled a rogue judge from the Department of Homeland Security. And I understand a number of threats were coming to his chambers. This is very stressful on a human being, on any human being. And that's why I think it's important for our political leaders on down to understand that their words will result in, we've seen it, result in people believing that it is appropriate for them to take actions into their own hands.

13:52So let me ask, polls show that more Americans are willing to justify violence if it's in pursuit of a political aim. I'm wondering what can public figures like yourself do to reverse this trend in somehow justifying that it's OK to attack public officials if they're on the, quote, wrong side of an issue? You know, I think we bring it back to what ties us together, our humanity. I try every day to live in a way that I know my son will be proud of. every day when I wake up and I say my morning prayers and every night when I go to bed and talk to my son in spirit, I say, I hope I made you proud today.

14:36I hope I made you proud today. And the way that I spoke to every litigant that came in my courtroom and the way that I treated the person that held the door for me at the coffee shop, I hope I made you proud today. And, you know, that's what we have to start doing is holding ourselves to the very standards that we want to live by and holding our leaders to those standards, Indira. And I think that if we all begin to start demanding more of ourselves and our leaders, we will start turning this tide. I wonder in listening to you about, you know, you're giving such an impassioned defense of the judiciary, which is meant to be one of the three co-equal branches of government.

15:21but we're seeing how political leaders are able to weaponize anger against the judiciary when there are rulings that they don't like, even if those rulings uphold the Constitution. In a case like this, what do you think can be done on a societal level to help restore faith in the rule of law? Well, I will tell you, Indira, that I do believe this is an intentional act by this administration to turn out this negative PR campaign against the judiciary. There is a more sinister reason, as Daniel's mom, I'm saying this, and that is if something happens to one of us, we had it coming. And so for me, what judges need to continue to start doing is being impeccable with their rulings, impeccable with their words on the bench.

16:09We need to try to welcome the community. We have a food pantry in our courthouses. We've seen one open in Hawaii in Daniel's honor. We need to keep showing the judiciary in the beautiful light that I think we stand in. That's Judge Esther Salas, a New Jersey district judge who lost her son in a 2020 attack intended for her. Judge Salas, thank you so much for taking the time to speak with us today. Thank you so much for having me and for covering this story.

16:43When it comes to med school, soon-to-be doctors are already drowning in learning material. But the Department of Health and Human Services has some new recommendations in mind. Secretary Robert F. Kennedy wants schools to teach a whole host of nutrition-related topics. And while some of the suggestions are backed by science, others, not so much. After the break, Indira speaks with Lauren Chan, a registered dietitian and a fellow at our editorial partner, Sat, about how schools are navigating the new recommendations.

17:29Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s campaign to make America healthy again is finding its way into medical schools. Kennedy's agency has recommended that med schools teach at least 40 hours of nutrition and other wellness approaches that may not be seen in current medical school curricula. 73 schools in three dozen states have signed up to revamp their curriculum. Some of Kennedy's recommendations are backed by science, but other ideas like biomonitoring or using wearable devices to track your body metrics or referring patients to health coaches are light on evidence and have some educators raising their eyebrows about including them in med school curriculum.

18:10Lauren Chan is a registered dietitian and a reporting fellow with our editorial partners at STAT, the health and medicine publication. She wrote about this and she joins us now. Welcome, Lauren. Hi, thank you so much for having me. So nutrition has long been a component in, I think, most medical school curricula. So what is changing here? That's absolutely correct. Nutrition has been a component in medical education for some time. And many have been pushing to have even more nutrition education in med school. And so what we're really seeing now is an opportunity for schools to highlight and expand their nutrition education offerings.

18:48We found that some sources were reporting wanting to make their curricula more patient-focused or more actionable so that their students walked away knowing how to talk about nutrition in a way that their patients would actually understand. So giving examples of food or talking about how to cook things potentially. You write about a school in Houston that in response to the recommendations now has med students doing cooking demonstrations and touring a campus garden. That all sounds great. But I'm wondering, is that how future doctors should be spending their limited time that they have to study?

19:27That's a great point. I think when we are talking about nutrition education components in med school, every source that I spoke with talked about how it's definitely important for it to be there, but we also cannot spend all of our time speaking about nutrition because there's so many other components about medicine that need to be taught. And so sources were talking about these various types of programs that maybe are even just to half day doing cooking demos and walking through the garden and talking about where food is grown. And those kinds of meaningful immersion experiences may have better lasting components in memory that could help students retain those types of lessons.

20:08But nutrition is also woven through the entire medical curricula. So they'll really have opportunities not only to see an idea once, but to see it again and kind of have that repetition that helps them to grasp the nutrition pieces, even if they really are not spending every hour of med school focusing on nutrition. So in other words, experiential learning, some key hands-on things might actually matter even more than spending hours and hours studying in a classroom. All right, HHS pulled some recommendations from a panel of experts back in 2024, but not all. Which ones did they leave out and why?

20:47They did leave out a few of the recommendations from the expert consensus statement that was from 2024. And some of the common themes of those were things like sensitive and non-judgmental conversations about food, obesity, eating disorders, as well as understanding the impacts of social determinants of health on patient food choices. And so it really was a potential missed opportunity there to expand some of those important conversations about being sensitive when discussing food and really meeting patients where they're at. So schools that we spoke to were adamant that they're still going to be discussing those topics in their coursework with their students.

21:30But it's for anyone to say why they were excluded. I don't think we have a clear understanding of why they were left off. Well, if med schools refuse to adopt the specific HHS recommendations, could they lose federal funding? At this point, it is not currently tied to federal funding. So med schools that are not participating in this program should not have any specific negative ramifications. Alternatively, though, schools that are participating do have opportunities to submit for a challenge program that could allow them to get additional funding because of the nutrition education programs that they've been developing.

22:11So, so far, a carrot rather than a stick. So the link between good nutrition and good health is not disputed. You're a registered dietitian. What do you think could and should be done by the health care establishment to connect nutrition to better public health? I think increasing the access of the public to dietitians would make a major change in how individuals are able to view their own nutrition. Something like the Medical Nutrition Therapy Act that looks to expand the types of conditions that are able to be covered by Medicare so that individuals can actually get insurance coverage to see a dietitian, that would make potentially a world of difference.

22:54The Medical Nutrition Therapy Act, for example, looks to expand coverage to prediabetes. And if you could see a registered dietitian when you have prediabetes, that might help you avoid progressing to diabetes. Lauren Chan is a reporting fellow with our editorial partners at STAT, the health and medicine publication. Thanks so much, Lauren. Thank you.

23:17Here and Now Anytime comes from NPR and WBUR Boston. Today's stories were produced by Wilder Fleming, James Mastromarino, and Jessica Carissa. Today's editors were Todd Munt, Micaela Rodriguez, and Kat Welch. Technical direction from Caleb Green and Nick Dussault. Chris Bentley wrote the theme music with Mike Moschetto and Max Liebman. Our digital producers are Alison Hagen and Grace Griffin. Here and now's executive producer is Alan Price. Thanks for listening. See you tomorrow.

23:52Thank you.