For #BlueAnon, in my opinion, Fauci is more and more a "Mount Rushmore face" ranking right up there with former president Dear Leader.
Lies by him continue to go unchecked.
Yesterday, in another Tar Baby-like argument with Squirrel Hair (Rand Paul), one that I'm sure both of them like for its Tar Baby reasons, Fauci again claimed the US had not sponsored Gain of function research at Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Hellz yes we did.
Fauci was busted six weeks and more ago for lies, lies by omission and lies by redefinition about his agency and others helping the Wuhan Institute of Virology in "gain of function" research on coronaviruses. This busting also applies to the fellow travelers above. Before that, Fauci is on record openly supporting gain of function research in general.
Jaime Metzl, who used to work for President Clinton, and also for then-Sen. Joe Biden, so not a wingnut, has also said WIV did gain of function research. That link is a long read but well worth it. Among other things, he VERY SPECIFICALLY notes that "gain of function" research is NOT "genetic engineering." Fauci knows this, but, IMO, he's hand-waving, gaslighting or whatever, and even if not actively conflating the two ideas himself, letting others do the lifting for him.
Finally, as with his original Platonic Noble Lie, and his follow-up Noble Lie on population percentages for herd immunity, on his emails as well, St. Anthony of Fauci is unapologetic. He claims the outrage is all Republican and all anti-science. Tell that to the likes of me and Zeynep Tufekci.
Or, per the Fauci emails, have your toady, Kristen Andersen, tell them that after his lying on your behalf on viral engineering. Per that piece, Andersen lamely claims that "new evidence" arose between his email to Fauci and one to the Lancet which squashed, for public consumption, the lab leak idea like a bug. Metzl asked, how much new info could arise in four days. (For open minded people like Jaime, try THIS on size: Times Higher Ed reports that critics claim Lancet, and other journals with the same take, had potential conflicts of interest.)
As I've said before, if Fauci had any ethics, he'd resign. But, I more and more question just how much or how little ethics he has. I don't question how much of a bureaucrat he is.