The Foibles of Fauci: Private Diary, Public Performance
Newly released diary entries from Anthony Fauci, covering 2015–2019 and made public by Senator Rand Paul, document a pattern of private reservations, political judgments, and institutional caution that sat alongside the public role of the long-serving National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director. The pages do not rewrite the scientific record of any single episode, but they illustrate the distance that can open between what an official records for himself and what he conveys to the public.
In January 2019, amid a government shutdown centred on funding for a border wall, Fauci wrote that Trump was "acting more and more bizarre" and "should be impeached," while noting that Democrats were concerned such a move would galvanize the president's base. The same diary shows earlier and consistent criticism of Trump dating to the 2016 campaign, including reactions to debate performances and the Access Hollywood tape. These entries establish that Fauci's assessment of the incoming and then sitting president was not confined to policy disagreements over pandemic response; it predated the outbreak and extended to broader political judgment.
On scientific matters, the diary records a similar gap on the Ebola vaccine. Fauci noted "multiple flaws" in the study design and analysis and stated that the data were not statistically significant. He nevertheless described the vaccine as inherently good and effective in media appearances. In the diary he argued against public criticism of the study, citing the risk of press scrutiny and tension between the Department of Health and Human Services and the World Health Organization. The private assessment of methodological weakness was not matched by public caveats of comparable force.
Other entries touch on institutional relationships and security. In September 2017 Fauci recorded hosting Gao Fu, then director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, describing him as "very smart and nice," and participating in meetings with senior Chinese health officials. Separately, in July 2016 he documented a ransomware attack that encrypted an unprotected personal folder containing, among other materials, confidential files related to earlier anthrax incidents and letters written during his government service. He noted that he had originally created the folder to keep such material inaccessible and later added other documents to it; "Bad idea!!!"
These episodes sit within a longer record. Earlier releases of Fauci's COVID-era notes, also obtained through Paul's committee, showed private consideration of laboratory-origin possibilities in early 2020 alongside later public emphasis on natural spill over, as well as reflections on messaging, testing, and internal government disagreements. The 2015–2019 pages add pre-pandemic examples of the same habit: private registration of political opposition, scientific limitations, and operational vulnerabilities that were not foregrounded in contemporaneous public statements.
The practical implication is not that every private doubt must be broadcast, or that every institutional caution is improper. It is that the cumulative record of a senior official who was presented as the voice of apolitical science includes repeated instances in which personal or political assessments, and acknowledged weaknesses in data, remained internal while public messaging projected greater confidence or neutrality. The diary entries, now part of the public record through congressional release, supply the primary evidence for that discrepancy.
https://gellerreport.com/2026/10/fauci-diary-reveals-new-horrors-wanted-trump-impeached-over-border-wall-praised-china-fudged-covid-death-numbers-misled-public-about-ebola-vaccine-lost-secret-confidential-files-in-hack.html/
