Sen. Rand Paul's ongoing investigation into former COVID czar Dr. Anthony Fauci has unearthed diary entries that directly contradict Fauci's public statements about the origins of the pandemic. The Kentucky Republican's probe reveals that Fauci privately acknowledged the initial outbreak did not stem from a wet market, even as he publicly endorsed that theory.
According to entries dated January 26, 2020, Fauci wrote that the first infection occurred in December 2019 and was not connected to the Hunan Seafood Market. “Now we know the market was not the source, it was the amplifier,” Fauci noted. This admission clashes with his later public support for the animal spillover hypothesis.
Just days later, on February 1, 2020, Fauci participated in a call with 12 scientists to discuss COVID-19's origins. That discussion eventually led to the “Proximal Origins” paper, which strongly endorsed animal spillover and downplayed a lab leak. But the diary reveals that only two of the 12 scientists believed animal spillover was likely; the rest felt “deliberate insertion was possible.”
Despite this internal consensus favoring a lab leak, Fauci pressed scientists to rule it out. Critics argue he did so to protect his legacy and funding for gain-of-function research, which he had championed for decades. The diaries mention Chinese scientist Shi Zhengli, known as the “bat lady,” whose experiments Fauci had supported.
In later entries, Fauci grew defensive, railing against FBI investigators who concluded a lab leak was possible. He dismissed them as uninformed and lashed out at senators like Paul who pushed for a lab leak inquiry. The diaries portray Fauci as “extremely smug and convinced of his own greatness,” often opining beyond his expertise.
One entry recounts a call with then-President Donald Trump, in which Fauci offered political advice, warning that ignoring his recommendations could hurt Trump politically. This further undercuts Fauci's claim of sticking to science.
The revelations have intensified scrutiny of Fauci's role in shaping the pandemic narrative. Paul has vowed to press Fauci on these discrepancies in upcoming hearings, building on earlier clashes. The case also echoes broader concerns about transparency, as seen in the released Fauci diaries that showed media fixation and White House tensions.
As the investigation continues, the diaries raise serious questions about whether Fauci deliberately misled the public. For now, they provide the clearest evidence yet that he knew the wet market origin story was false long before he publicly abandoned it.
