A Senate committee effort to compel testimony from a longtime Anthony Fauci aide failed Wednesday despite receiving eight votes, after all seven Democrats opposed granting immunity to a witness who had invoked the Fifth Amendment while being questioned about alleged destruction of federal records.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom.
Sen. Rand Paul’s attempt to secure testimony from a longtime aide to former National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci failed Wednesday after the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee did not obtain the two-thirds vote required to seek a court order compelling the witness to testify under immunity.
The resolution received eight votes in favor and seven against, with Republicans supporting it and Democrats opposing it. Although a majority voted for the proposal, federal law requires approval from two-thirds of committee members before a congressional committee can apply for a court order granting immunity and compelling testimony. The committee had formally scheduled the immunity resolution for consideration as part of Paul’s continuing investigation into COVID-19 origins, federal records practices and federally supported research.
The unidentified witness had appeared privately before senators the previous week under subpoena but repeatedly invoked the Fifth Amendment rather than answer questions. Paul has described the individual as a longtime special assistant to Fauci who worked with him from 2007 until Fauci left NIAID in 2022.
Paul said his objective in seeking immunity was to remove the witness’s potential exposure to prosecution for testimony involving the destruction of federal records and allow senators to question her about what she knew concerning records handling inside Fauci’s office.
He also said he wanted information about communications surrounding the early debate over whether SARS-CoV-2 might have originated from a laboratory in Wuhan, China, and about NIAID-funded research connected to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Paul did not publicly identify the witness during the committee proceedings.
The senator said the aide had been positioned “in the flow of communications” during the opening weeks of the pandemic, when Fauci and then-Wellcome Trust Director Jeremy Farrar were communicating with scientists examining possible origins of the virus.
Documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act litigation and congressional investigations have subsequently shown that several scientists involved in those discussions privately considered laboratory-origin scenarios before publication of the influential Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2 paper, which argued that the available evidence did not support a laboratory-based origin. A timeline of those communications documents discussions beginning in late January and early February 2020 in which some participants expressed concerns about characteristics of the virus and coronavirus research in Wuhan.
Paul said Wednesday that he believes responsibility for any improper destruction of records ultimately rests with Fauci rather than the subordinate witness and that he did not want the aide prosecuted for providing information to Congress.
Following the failed immunity vote, however, Paul said he intends to refer the matter to the Justice Department and seek additional records covering approximately the past three years to determine whether any destruction of federal material continued.
“Let me be clear about what just happened here. A majority of the committee voted to seek the truth. All Republicans voted to seek the truth. We voted to protect this witness, and hear her story. All we needed were two Democrats willing to hear her story, but not a single one of them is interested in the investigation or the truth about the destruction of federal records,” Paul said. “This is disappointing. It doesn’t end here.”
Those comments reflected Paul’s characterization of the Democrats’ motives. Democratic senators opposed the resolution, but the vote itself does not establish why each member voted against it.
The dispute follows another confrontation between Paul’s committee and Fauci this summer.
Fauci appeared before the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on July 29 and invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination more than 100 times while declining to answer questions about the government’s pandemic response and related matters. Paul subsequently pursued a contempt resolution, which the committee advanced on an 8-7 party-line vote in August.
The latest witness dispute involves a separate question: whether an aide can be compelled to testify after invoking the Fifth Amendment if Congress provides immunity sufficient to eliminate the risk that the testimony itself will be used in a criminal prosecution.
Paul has also suggested that the unidentified special assistant could have been involved in destroying public records for many years, potentially extending across much of her service with Fauci. The senator has not publicly released all of the evidence underlying that assertion.
Publicly available records separately identify Patricia Conrad as a special assistant who worked in Fauci’s office during that period. A document released by Paul’s office includes material involving Conrad, while records compiled from early 2020 communications show her included in exchanges involving Fauci and other officials. Paul has not publicly confirmed that Conrad is the witness whose immunity was considered Wednesday.
The early-pandemic communications have become an important part of Paul’s broader inquiry.
A separate chronology of the Proximal Origin discussions documents emails and conference calls involving Fauci, Farrar and scientists who were examining the virus in January and February 2020. Some participants privately expressed uncertainty about a natural origin and discussed whether laboratory research could have played a role before subsequently co-authoring or contributing to public scientific arguments favoring natural emergence.
The existence of those private doubts does not establish that SARS-CoV-2 originated in a laboratory. The origin of the pandemic has remained disputed, and the communications have instead become central to congressional questions about whether officials accurately represented the range of scientific views being discussed privately at the time.
The Senate investigation is also unfolding against evidence that federal employees did improperly conceal or destroy government records during the pandemic.
Former NIAID senior adviser David Morens pleaded guilty in August to conspiracy to commit offenses and defraud the United States in connection with efforts to evade the Freedom of Information Act and Federal Records Act requirements involving coronavirus research communications. The Justice Department said Morens admitted participating in a scheme involving federal records that should have been created, maintained and exchanged through government systems.
Earlier congressional records had revealed Morens writing that he learned methods for avoiding disclosure from an NIH employee associated with Freedom of Information Act requests.
In one email examined by the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, Morens wrote that he had learned from the agency’s “foia lady” how to “make emails disappear.” The House investigation identified Margaret Moore, an NIH Freedom of Information Act official, in connection with those communications and alleged that she had advised NIAID personnel about avoiding disclosure requirements. Moore later indicated through counsel that she intended to invoke the Fifth Amendment before the House panel.
Morens’ case has since moved beyond congressional allegations. He pleaded guilty last month to the federal conspiracy charge arising from the records-concealment scheme. He served as a senior adviser in the NIAID director’s office from 2006 through 2022.
Paul has sought to determine whether those practices extended further into Fauci’s office and whether other employees deleted, concealed or moved official communications outside federal recordkeeping systems.
The unidentified special assistant is potentially significant to that inquiry because Paul says she worked closely with Fauci for approximately 15 years and had access to communications during the earliest stages of the COVID-19 outbreak.
Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, criticized Democratic committee members Wednesday for opposing the immunity resolution by proxy rather than appearing at the business meeting, with the exception of Sen. Maggie Hassan.
“Evidently there’s more important things to do in the United States Senate than to find out who destroyed public records,” Moreno said. “I guess when you get paid to be a United States senator it’s optional to show up for committee hearings.”
The committee’s inability to secure the necessary two-thirds majority means it cannot proceed with the proposed court application on the basis of Wednesday’s vote.
Paul, however, indicated that the failed immunity effort would not end his investigation. His announced next steps include seeking additional records and referring information concerning possible records destruction to the Justice Department, while the committee continues examining what Fauci’s staff and other federal officials did with pandemic-related communications that were subject to federal preservation and disclosure laws.
Original article
Comments