Dr.Anthony Fauci, the point man for America’s pandemic response who was once the doyen of Hollywood (see here and here), turned in a less-than-stellar performance before the Senate Homeland Security Committee.
After giving a short, entirely self-serving opening statement during which he accused Committee Chair Sen.Rand Paul of having an "unhinged obsession" with him, Fauci invoked the 5th Amendment Self-Incrimination Clause, which allows a witness to refuse to answer questions if doing so might incriminate him, 111 times to avoid answering questions.
But was his invocation proper, and, regardless, what can the Senate do about it?Several factors suggest Fauci’s invocation was improper.Two are critical.The first is Fauci’s pardon.
Prior to leaving office, Joe Biden issued a blanket pardon to Fauci for any federal crimes he might have committed "from January 1, 2014, through [January 19, 2025] arising from or in any manner related to his service as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, as a member of the White House Coronavirus Task Force or the White House COVID-19 Response Team, or as Chief Medical Advisor to the President."CAN FAUCI HIDE BEHIND THE FIFTH? GAME-CHANGING BIDEN PARDON MAY NOT PROVIDE COMPLETE COVER, EXPERTS SAYThe second is time: Fauci retired in 2022, making it unlikely that any state crime he might have committed would fall within the applicable statute of limitations, assuming any state could credibly claim that he committed a crime or that venue was proper in that state.In Hoffman v.
United States (1951), the Supreme Court said the privilege against self-incrimination protects against real dangers, not remote or speculative possibilities.Two other things are clear.First, a witness can refuse to answer questions that might implicate him in a crime, not to avoid embarrassment.
The Fifth Amendment is available only to avoid criminal exposure, not public ridicule.Prior to the hearing, Sen.
Paul released over...