Fauci’s U.S. Senate Hearing: Analysed at the Source
Fauci’s Diaries, Biden’s Pardon and the Fifth Amendment.
Preface
A friend of mine from Kharkiv, Ukraine — who helped to produce my music for the Divya Trikona project on YouTube — recently sent me the Facebook post that has recently attracted lots of attention, even in war-torn Ukraine. The post focuses on the recently released Fauci diaries and his testimony before a U.S. Senate committee on July 29, 2026, highlighting several remarkable claims about Anthony Fauci.
Rather than simply reposting the Facebook post, I decided to locate the underlying documents and provide a source for each of its principal claims—following my own principle: “I do not believe anyone. I need to see the source myself.”
Below is the Facebook post, translated into English, followed by the original diary entries, official documents and Senate testimony on which its claims are based. The appendix includes the official YouTube video of the U.S. Senate hearing.
FB post from Ukraine:
Do you remember Fauci, the main American official during the COVID times?
First of all, upon the request of Health Secretary Kennedy, personal notes of Fauci from this period were collected from government servers. To be honest, everything was as expected. Yes, he hid from everyone that he had pulmonary embolism a few months after vaccination, and was treated secretly.
Yes, he knew about the origin and danger of the virus, but told the public something completely different. An ordinary bureaucrat who could not withstand responsibility or sudden fame.
(For example, the record from August 22, 2022, shows that he managed to convince the CDC to cancel the statement that COVID vaccines are completely ineffective in preventing infection and transmission. Otherwise, this could have affected vaccinations. The full text of the record is in the photo.)
Secondly, Fauci was summoned to the Senate for testimony. For all questions from libertarian Paul, Fauci refused to answer for two hours, citing the 5th amendment of the American constitution, which allows a person not to give testimony if it may lead to a conviction.
The point is that Biden granted Fauci immunity from prosecution for all actions during the pandemic. In this case, it is not possible to refer to the 5th amendment, as the punishment is not imminent. Fauci’s lawyers came up with the following structure - what if Fauci fakes the senate now, answering? then he will be tried for perjury now, during the period that is not covered by immunity. And therefore he has the right to refer to the 5th and refuse to answer. This, of course, will be contested by senate lawyers in courts.
Now the original source and analysis
Original source: The complete Senate-released diary
1. Fauci’s private notes were recovered from government computers
The post says that Fauci’s personal notes were collected from government servers at the request of Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
Kennedy said that HHS personnel spent approximately eight months retrieving Fauci’s records from 11 government servers and then supplied them to Senators Rand Paul and Ron Johnson. The Associated Press likewise reported that HHS extracted the diary from government computers and provided it to the Senate committee. (BCI 24 News Network)
Senator Paul published more than 1,000 pages through the Senate committee’s Reading Room under the title:
Tony’s Diary: What He Wrote Privately vs. What He Said Publicly
The official Reading Room describes these as documents released as part of Paul’s investigation into COVID-19 origins and federally funded biological research. (Senator Rand Paul)
Read the complete Senate-released diary
2. Fauci experienced a pulmonary infarction after vaccination
The Facebook post calls this a pulmonary embolism. The wording reported from Fauci’s diary is more precise: it describes a pulmonary infarct—damage to lung tissue caused by interruption of its blood supply.
The medical passage was subsequently blacked out in the publicly available Senate PDF. However, a transcription of the earlier version quotes Fauci’s entry as saying:
“The only definite thing on the film was the pulmonary infarct.”
According to the same passage, the physician recommended a follow-up CT scan and immediate anticoagulation with Eliquis.
Fauci had received his first Moderna dose publicly on December 22, 2020. The pulmonary event was recorded approximately five to six months later. Kennedy subsequently accused Fauci of not telling the public about it. (100PercentFedUp.com)
Two distinctions should remain clear:
The diary supports that Fauci experienced a pulmonary infarction and received anticoagulant treatment. It does not, by itself, demonstrate that vaccination caused the event.
And while the treatment was not publicly disclosed at the time, describing it as “secret treatment” is an interpretation. Kennedy’s own allegation was that Fauci “never told anybody” about the event.
3. What Fauci knew privately about the virus’s possible origin
The Facebook post says Fauci knew about the virus’s origin but told the public something different.
The diary does not show that Fauci knew with certainty where the virus originated. It does show that, from the earliest days, he participated in serious discussions about the possibility that the virus had been constructed or had escaped from a laboratory.
On January 31, 2020, Fauci wrote that Jeremy Farrar and evolutionary biologist Kristian Andersen had contacted him after examining the virus’s sequence.
According to Fauci:
“The people on the phone felt that the mutations around the furine cleavage site of the spike protein could not have occurred naturally.”
He recorded that they raised the possibility that the feature had been deliberately inserted and that the virus was then released—possibly accidentally:
“The former being the most likely.”
Fauci responded by proposing that a larger group of evolutionary biologists and virologists be convened to investigate.
In his account of the February 1 discussion, Fauci wrote that there was no consensus:
“There was not total agreement about the likelihood of deliberate insertion.”
He recorded that some participants believed the feature could arise naturally, while:
“The rest felt that deliberate insertion was possible.”
He also noted that researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had been conducting coronavirus research involving adaptation of spike proteins to human ACE2 receptors, concluding:
“We could not let this go.”
Fauci later summarized the initial meeting this way:
“About half of the people felt that this was possibly a constructed virus and the other half were convinced that this was a natural occurrence.”
Yet on April 17, 2020, when publicly asked whether the virus could have been manufactured or released from a Chinese laboratory, Fauci cited a scientific paper and said its mutations were:
“Totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.” (Trump White House Archives)
The documented contrast is therefore not that Fauci privately knew the virus came from a laboratory. It is that he privately knew prominent scientists had initially considered laboratory construction or release a serious possibility, while his public answer emphasized the subsequently published natural-origin interpretation.
4. Fauci and his sudden fame
The Facebook writer calls Fauci an ordinary bureaucrat who could not withstand sudden fame. That is an opinion.
What can be documented is how Fauci himself described his new celebrity status. In March 2020, he wrote:
“It is not hyperbole to say that today I am the most famous and talked about person in the country.”
He added that he had become:
“One of the most recognizable person[s] in the world.”
He wrote that the press was “going wild” over him and that he could not read everything being written because there was so much of it.
Readers can form their own opinion about what these entries reveal.
5. The CDC, infection, transmission and the booster campaign
The Facebook post gives the date as August 22, 2022.
The correct date is August 13, 2022.
Fauci wrote that he, Vivek Murthy, Steve Cha, David Kessler and others had been negotiating with the CDC:
“We thought we had gotten them pulled back from making the statement that the vaccines were not effective at all in preventing infection and transmission.”
Fauci did not agree that protection was absolutely zero. He described it as:
“Some degree of modest but declining protection.”
His explanation of why the wording mattered is particularly revealing.
First, he wrote that an absolute statement of no effectiveness against infection and transmission would conflict with:
“The statement and effort of recommending that people get the updated bivalent BA.5 vaccine in September.”
Second, he wrote:
“In addition, it would undermine the DoJ’s efforts at mandates for vaccines under certain circumstances.”
Fauci said the CDC agreed to “pull back” and instead describe vaccine protection against infection and transmission as modest and waning.
However, an MMWR report appeared with what Fauci called:
“The same original damning language.”
He recorded that Larry Horowitz “went off the wall” and believed White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain might fire CDC Director Rochelle Walensky. Ashish Jha was reportedly calmer but thought Walensky might eventually have to leave.
Entries from the preceding week reinforce the point.
On August 6, Fauci questioned why the CDC would say protection against infection was zero:
“Exactly at the time when we are pushing people to get the new BA.5 variant.”
On August 8, he wrote that the White House was concerned the CDC would describe the protection as zero. Fauci said that, “by my suggestion,” waning protection was instead presented as a reason to receive the updated booster.
He believed this wording had avoided a White House–CDC confrontation that:
“Would have endangered Rochelle.”
6. Biden’s pardon of Fauci
The Facebook post calls this “immunity.” Legally, it was a presidential pardon.
On January 19, 2025, President Biden granted Fauci:
“A full and unconditional pardon.”
The official warrant covered federal offences Fauci might have committed from January 1, 2014, through January 19, 2025, arising from his work at NIAID, the White House Coronavirus Task Force, the COVID-19 Response Team or as chief medical adviser. (Department of Justice)
It was therefore broad, but it did not cover:
conduct occurring after January 19, 2025;
possible state offences;
or any new false statement or perjury committed during later testimony.
7. Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment before the Senate
Fauci appeared under subpoena before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on July 29, 2026. (Homeland Security Committee)
Before questioning began, Fauci said that Senator Paul had an “obvious obsession” with prosecuting him and was trying to get him to say something that could eventually place him “behind bars.”
On the advice of his lawyers, Fauci then invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times, declining even to answer apparently harmless questions. (AP News)
Senator Paul’s position is that Biden’s pardon removed any reasonable danger of federal prosecution for Fauci’s pandemic-era conduct and therefore removed the basis for invoking the Fifth Amendment.
Fauci’s lawyers argue that anything he said in 2026 could be used to initiate a new false-statement or perjury investigation—conduct outside the pardon’s date range. Legal specialists have also pointed to possible state investigations and continuing political challenges to the validity of Biden’s pardons. (AP News)
This is not yet a settled legal conclusion. As of August 5, Paul’s committee was preparing to vote on holding Fauci in contempt and referring the matter to the Department of Justice. (AP News)
Summary
The Facebook post is based largely on genuine and remarkable source material. But several details require correction:
The vaccine-related diary entry is dated August 13, not August 22.
Fauci’s recorded medical diagnosis was a pulmonary infarction, not simply “pulmonary embolism.”
The timing after vaccination does not, on its own, prove causation.
The origin entries show that Fauci knew a constructed virus or laboratory release was initially considered plausible—not that he possessed definitive proof of a laboratory origin.
Biden gave Fauci a federal pardon, not unlimited immunity.
And whether the pardon eliminated Fauci’s Fifth Amendment protection is now the subject of an active legal and congressional dispute.
The primary records are more precise—and in several places even more revealing—than the summary circulating on Facebook.
That is why the IVIM method remains simple:
Find the original document. Quote it accurately. Provide the source. Let readers see the evidence for themselves.
Primary references
U.S. Senate Reading Room: Tony’s Diary: What He Wrote Privately vs. What He Said Publicly. (Senator Rand Paul)
Anthony Fauci’s complete Senate-released diary: Download the PDF.
White House press briefing, April 17, 2020. (Trump White House Archives)
President Biden’s pardon warrant for Anthony Fauci, January 19, 2025. (Department of Justice)
Senate hearing: Testimony of Anthony Fauci, July 29, 2026. (Homeland Security Committee)
Associated Press legal analysis of the Fifth Amendment and proposed contempt referral. (AP News)
Appendix:
Full Coverage of Fauci’s U.S. Senate Hearing
xcxc