Lying Weasel Fauci's Infatuation with Fame, While People were Dying
- Thread starter WCM
- Start date
And a no good Commie Antifa loving socialist who is a friend of George Soros
stephenPE
Verified User
We learned.......we just have an imbecile for a leader.............
Yakuda
Verified User
It wasnt. The recovery rate was 98% with a "vaccine"
Yakuda
Verified User
Maybe but irrelevant
Just like your Red Hat Club comrades, you think letting Covid run its course, packing ERs and cemeteries while waiting for a natural immunity not develop would have been the wiser course, got itYou don't. The only way to develop natural immunity is to survive the disease.
Another reason why MAGAts are morons. They are science-deniers. The ones who know the difference and lie about it are evil and I pray God strikes them down as the evil fucks they are.
And I forgot, in your world, he is also a tran who uses female locker rooms
Poor anchovies, Trump never discovered a vaccine.
Who told you there was no natural immunity.
Ah, how fast they forgot their hero George Zimmerman
So you say. Describe them.
DU answered your question.
What’s the point of getting the “vaccine” ( a misnomer) when you’ve already got the antibodies and memory B and T cells from having the disease?
Hmmm.
Biden’s pardon of Anthony Fauci (issued January 19, 2025) was a full and unconditional preemptive pardon for federal offenses.
The official text states it covers:
A valid, accepted presidential pardon removes the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination for the specific federal offenses it covers. The privilege exists only when answering could reasonably lead to criminal prosecution. Once a pardon eliminates that risk for the covered conduct, the privilege no longer applies to questions about it.
In Brown v. Walker (1896), the Supreme Court held that if a witness “has already received a pardon, he cannot longer set up his [Fifth Amendment] privilege, since he stands, with respect to such offense, as if it had never been committed.” Later cases and commentary reaffirm this: a pardon functions like immunity for the covered acts, so the person can be compelled to testify about them.
In short: for accepted pardons and the federal offenses they cover, the self-incrimination privilege is gone because the legal jeopardy is gone. It is not a total loss of “Fifth Amendment rights,” and residual state or new-crime exposure can still support a valid claim.
The pardon significantly weakens his ability to invoke the Fifth Amendment for questions about the covered past conduct, but it does not eliminate the right entirely in today’s hearing.
Under Brown v. Walker (1896) and related precedent, the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination privilege applies only when there is a realistic risk of criminal prosecution. Biden’s January 19, 2025, pardon is a full and unconditional federal pardon for any offenses Fauci “may have committed or taken part in” from January 1, 2014, through the pardon date that arise from or relate to his roles as NIAID Director, White House Coronavirus Task Force/COVID-19 Response Team member, or Chief Medical Advisor.
For questions strictly about that covered federal conduct, there is no remaining federal prosecution risk, so the privilege generally does not apply. Senate Chairman Rand Paul has explicitly made this argument and directed Fauci to answer despite the privilege claim.
Fauci can still validly claim the Fifth for residual risks, including:
Fauci has repeatedly invoked the Fifth (reportedly over 100 times) in the July 29, 2026, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing chaired by Sen. Rand Paul. He cited the risk that the hearing is designed to generate material for prosecution. Paul has rejected the claims for covered matters, ordered answers, and announced a planned committee vote next week on holding Fauci in contempt.
The pardon removes the Fifth Amendment shield for the specific past federal acts it covers. It does not give blanket immunity from answering or protect against contempt proceedings or new charges based on today’s statements. Whether any particular privilege claim is upheld would ultimately be decided by a court if the committee pursues civil enforcement or a criminal contempt referral.
Biden’s pardon of Anthony Fauci (issued January 19, 2025) was a full and unconditional preemptive pardon for federal offenses.
The official text states it covers:
Key details
- Time period: January 1, 2014 through the date of the pardon (January 19, 2025).
- Scope: Limited to acts connected to his official roles at NIAID, the White House Coronavirus Task Force / COVID-19 Response Team, or as Chief Medical Advisor.
- Type: Preemptive (issued before any charges) and covers only federal offenses. It does not cover state crimes or acts outside those roles/timeframe.
- Biden’s accompanying statement emphasized that the pardon was not an acknowledgment of wrongdoing and that acceptance should not be seen as an admission of guilt. It was framed as protection against potential politically motivated investigations.
A valid, accepted presidential pardon removes the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination for the specific federal offenses it covers. The privilege exists only when answering could reasonably lead to criminal prosecution. Once a pardon eliminates that risk for the covered conduct, the privilege no longer applies to questions about it.
Core Legal Rule
In Brown v. Walker (1896), the Supreme Court held that if a witness “has already received a pardon, he cannot longer set up his [Fifth Amendment] privilege, since he stands, with respect to such offense, as if it had never been committed.” Later cases and commentary reaffirm this: a pardon functions like immunity for the covered acts, so the person can be compelled to testify about them.
Key Caveats
- Acceptance is required. A person can refuse a pardon (see Burdick v. United States, 1915) and thereby keep the Fifth Amendment privilege. The government cannot force acceptance of a pardon specifically to strip the privilege.
- Federal only. A presidential pardon covers only federal crimes. If the same conduct could still support state prosecution (and the state statute of limitations has not run), the person can still invoke the Fifth on that residual risk.
- Limited scope. The privilege remains available for:
- Conduct outside the pardon’s coverage (e.g., different time period or different offenses).
- New potential crimes arising from the testimony itself (most commonly perjury or false statements).
- Other Fifth Amendment protections (due process, grand jury, double jeopardy, etc.) are unaffected. The statement concerns only the self-incrimination privilege.
In short: for accepted pardons and the federal offenses they cover, the self-incrimination privilege is gone because the legal jeopardy is gone. It is not a total loss of “Fifth Amendment rights,” and residual state or new-crime exposure can still support a valid claim.
The pardon significantly weakens his ability to invoke the Fifth Amendment for questions about the covered past conduct, but it does not eliminate the right entirely in today’s hearing.
Why the privilege is limited by the pardon
Under Brown v. Walker (1896) and related precedent, the Fifth Amendment self-incrimination privilege applies only when there is a realistic risk of criminal prosecution. Biden’s January 19, 2025, pardon is a full and unconditional federal pardon for any offenses Fauci “may have committed or taken part in” from January 1, 2014, through the pardon date that arise from or relate to his roles as NIAID Director, White House Coronavirus Task Force/COVID-19 Response Team member, or Chief Medical Advisor.
For questions strictly about that covered federal conduct, there is no remaining federal prosecution risk, so the privilege generally does not apply. Senate Chairman Rand Paul has explicitly made this argument and directed Fauci to answer despite the privilege claim.
Why he can still assert it (and has been doing so)
Fauci can still validly claim the Fifth for residual risks, including:
- New potential crimes arising from the testimony itself — most importantly perjury or false statements made today. The pardon does not cover future offenses.
- Any state-level exposure (presidential pardons do not cover state crimes).
- Conduct falling outside the specific roles or time period covered by the pardon.
Fauci has repeatedly invoked the Fifth (reportedly over 100 times) in the July 29, 2026, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing chaired by Sen. Rand Paul. He cited the risk that the hearing is designed to generate material for prosecution. Paul has rejected the claims for covered matters, ordered answers, and announced a planned committee vote next week on holding Fauci in contempt.
Bottom line
The pardon removes the Fifth Amendment shield for the specific past federal acts it covers. It does not give blanket immunity from answering or protect against contempt proceedings or new charges based on today’s statements. Whether any particular privilege claim is upheld would ultimately be decided by a court if the committee pursues civil enforcement or a criminal contempt referral.
Poor anchovies,
How many jabs/boosters did you decide were enough? Mr. Tiny Penis confessed to six, and look what it did to him.
Been there, done that, it’s like playing whack a mole, one MAGA after another pops up with the same thing, you want an answer scan fhe preceding posts scan
Yeah, well good luck that one
I didn't think you'd describe any alleged "kids in hoodies walking down your street", Anchovies.
Yakuda
Verified User
Maybe but again entirely irrelevant. Id abandon the discussion too if i was you but thank God Im not
Luck has nothing to do with it, Anchovies. Fauci is 85. His last days will be spent under constant attack.
Another one, so, inorder for this natural immunity to develop you are saying for the first years of Covid, those years when the ER’s were overflowing and mass burials were witnessed, the wiser course would have been to encourage social contact so that the natural immunity could develop and spread, correct?