Trump Revokes Security Detail For Anthony Fauci

Trump Revokes Security Detail For Anthony Fauci

President Donald Trump has officially ended taxpayer-funded security for Dr. Anthony Fauci.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Fauci served as a leading health official and public figure, which led to threats against him. In response, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) requested security for him in 2020, according to a report by Fox News.

This decision comes after Trump previously revoked the security clearances of 51 intelligence officials who had inaccurately claimed that Hunter Biden’s laptop exhibited “all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” Among those affected were former CIA Director Mike Pompeo and former National Security Advisor John Bolton.

Fauci has frequently made headlines since Trump’s inauguration on January 20.

In a series of last-minute pardons aimed at safeguarding allies, then-President Joe Biden extended clemency to a select group of individuals. However, this controversial move has raised questions about the legal implications for the recipients.

Among those pardoned were former Wyoming Republican Congresswoman and January 6 Committee co-chair Liz Cheney, as well as Dr. Anthony Fauci. According to Biden’s aides, the pardons were intended to prevent potential retaliation by Trump or his incoming administration.

Legal experts have pointed out that these pardons do not exempt recipients from testifying under oath if subpoenaed. Federal litigation attorney Jesse Binnall emphasized that Biden’s pardons do not protect Cheney or Fauci from consequences should they commit perjury. In his view, the pardons could actually serve as “great news” for those seeking accountability.

“The pardons are actually great news. No one who was just pardoned will be able to refuse to testify in a civil, criminal, or congressional proceeding based upon the 5th Amendment,” Binnall stated on X. He further commented, “And let’s just be realistic. Most of these disgusting individuals would probably have to be charged in Washington, DC, which doesn’t convict partisan leftists.”

Other users on X suggested addressing the perceived bias in Washington, DC courts. Retired U.S. Army officer, attorney, and author Kurt Schlichter recommended an alternative venue. “This is key – the depositions and the actual testimony must take place outside of Washington DC. Washington DC is a biased venue that will not convict Democrats when they commit perjury. Accordingly, take this show on the road,” he wrote.

Other recipients of Biden’s Sunday night pardons included former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman and Army General Mark Milley, who had criticized Trump during his first term, as well as all members of the January 6 Committee.

Trump addressed Biden’s pardons, specifically criticizing Cheney, during a Monday Oval Office signing of executive orders. Referring to the January 6 panel, he told reporters, “I was going to talk about the things that Joe did today with the pardons of people that were very, very guilty of very bad crimes, like the unselect committee of political folks.”

He continued, “Why are we doing this? Why are we trying to help a guy like Milley? Why are we helping Liz Cheney? I mean, Liz Cheney is a disaster. She’s a crying lunatic and crying, crying.”

Former Arizona state legislature candidate Josh Barnett (R) also weighed in on X, explaining the limitations of presidential pardons. He clarified that such pardons do not offer blanket immunity for all potential crimes.

“A pardon typically grants forgiveness for a specific offense or set of offenses committed before the pardon was issued. However, if someone is found guilty of treason after receiving a pardon for previous crimes, the pardon does not extend to this new offense,” he stated. This appeared to reference Milley, who allegedly told his Chinese counterpart during the final days of Trump’s term that he would “warn” them of any potential U.S. military actions.

Barnett added, “A pardon only covers the crimes explicitly mentioned or implicitly understood to be covered by the pardon at the time it was granted. If the treason was committed or discovered after the pardon, it would not be protected by that pardon.”


Subscribe to Lib Fails

Don’t miss out on the latest issues. Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
jamie@example.com
Subscribe