Newly released diary entries show Anthony Fauci privately trashed President Trump and praised a flawed Ebola study in public while criticizing it in private.
Story Highlights
- Senator Rand Paul published Fauci diary excerpts from 2015–2019 with sharp anti-Trump remarks.
- Entries show Fauci called Trump “truly unscrupulous” and said he “should be impeached” in 2019.
- Fauci privately slammed a 2015 Ebola vaccine trial design but publicly called results “very encouraging”.
- A 2016 note described an aerosolized Ebola primate test with mass deaths after vaccination.
Paul Publishes Fauci Diary Excerpts With Political Barbs
Senator Rand Paul released a new batch of Anthony Fauci’s diary entries spanning 2015 through 2019. The excerpts include blunt criticism of President Trump and his staff, using phrases like “a scary bunch” and “truly unscrupulous.” One 2019 entry said Trump “should be impeached.” The documents were posted through Paul’s channels and highlighted by outlets that reviewed the pages. The release adds to Paul’s long-running effort to document what he calls political bias in high-level health decisions.
The entries come from periods before the pandemic, including the 2016 campaign and early Trump years. They reflect Fauci’s personal views of Trump’s conduct and White House aides. Reporting on the pages says Fauci described Trump as having made “a fool of himself” after a 2016 debate. The diaries are presented as contemporaneous notes, which gives them weight as first-person records rather than later recollections. Paul argues the tone shows contempt that matters for public trust.
Ebola Trial: Private Critique, Public Praise
The document set includes Fauci’s private description of a 2015 Ebola vaccine trial as having a “terribly flawed study design.” Around the same time, Fauci publicly told The New York Times the results were “very encouraging” and “impressive.” That split is central to Paul’s charge of duplicity. Supporters of stricter oversight say this mismatch suggests officials packaged data for public optics while withholding sharper technical doubts from citizens and Congress.
Paul’s materials also point to a journal entry from March 2016 that detailed a high-risk military-linked study. In that test, vaccinated nonhuman primates were exposed to aerosolized Ebola. Sixteen of twenty vaccinated animals died, and both control animals died. The entry described severe lung injury, including necrosis and fibrin. Reporting on the note says Fauci later wrote the work “never should have been done,” even while acknowledging potential biodefense value.
Why This Matters Under Trump’s Second Term
The Trump administration now leads the federal government. That means the White House and Congress can demand full records so Americans see what officials said in private and in public. The diary set opens a documented window into the mindset of a powerful public health voice. When a senior official praises a study to the press but doubts it on paper, citizens deserve a straight answer about why that happened and who approved the talking points.
Conservatives have long warned about elite experts who look down on voters and elected leaders. The diaries echo that concern. Harsh private attacks on Trump and his team fuel the view that some officials pushed politics over openness. That matters for trust, budgets, and national security. Pandemic policy, vaccine safety claims, and research on deadly pathogens all rest on faith that gatekeepers tell the full truth to the people who pay the bills and bear the risk.
What Accountability Could Look Like
Congress can press for complete, authenticated copies of the diaries, along with related emails and briefing notes. Lawmakers can review the Ebola trial’s protocol, statistical plan, and internal reviews to see whether public praise matched the actual endpoints and uncertainty. They can seek who approved public language and why the harsher critique stayed private. If military or health agencies funded the aerosolized Ebola work, committees can also check compliance with safety and classification rules.
Paul’s push focuses on a simple principle: one standard of truth for the lab and the public. If Fauci believed a study was flawed, the public should have heard the caveats with the compliments. If a risky pathogen test happened with grim outcomes, elected oversight should have been clear-eyed and informed. President Trump’s team can use these records to tighten transparency rules, reaffirm Congress’s right to know, and stop any culture of spin inside the health bureaucracy.
Sources:
lifesitenews.com, paul.senate.gov, yahoo.com, usatoday.com, theepochtimes.com
