Fauci’s diary displays how he and ‘idiot’ Rand Paul have been at each other’s throats for years 64%

By Max Grinstein86%

7/31/2026, 6:01:18 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Ambiguity (Equivocation), Anecdotal, and Recency Bias, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 19.1% saturation with 108 hits. Analysis detected 867 faulty-reasoning hits from 565 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 52.8% and a BS Rank of 64% (9,183 of 25,269 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 63.70% of the article peer group.

Anthony Fauci refused to speak up when Sen. 
Rand Paul (R-KY) subjected him to a pointed round of public questioning earlier this week. 
Yet Fauci’s recently released diary reveals that the COVID czar has had choice words for Paul in the past. 
“Had hostile interaction with Se. [sic] Rand Paul,” Fauci wrote in a September 2020 entry about a Senate hearing. 
“I really stuffed him as he spouted out bulls*** acting like he is a experienced epidemiologist.” 
The long-running feud between Paul and Fauci bubbled up again on Wednesday after Paul hauled Fauci in front of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. 
Fauci pled the Fifth over 100 times as Republicans subjected him to a heated round of questioning. 
In preparation for the hearing, Paul also released 1,141 pages of Fauci’s diary from his time during the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic. 
Fauci called Paul’s “publicly releasing my unredacted personal diary” an effort “at embarrassing and intimidating me.” 
Fauci’s diary references Paul’s name at least 84 times, both in direct commentary from the doctor and in press clippings and personal correspondence. 
The public portion of the diary spans from December 2019 to December 2022. 
Fauci first recorded a run-in with the Kentucky senator during a May 12, 2020, virtual hearing. 
“Had a little scuffle with Rand Paul who said that I am not the end all and be all to close down the country,” Fauci wrote. 
“I went back at him and tweets said I came out way on top.” 
Across Fauci’s diary, he refers to Paul as an “idiot,” a “fool,” and a “total nut cake.” 
He casts Paul’s inquiry into the origins of COVID-19 as a “publicity stunt” and a “total farse [sic].” 
Fauci frequently called Paul’s attacks baseless and complained of the negative attention they were bringing him. 
In a September 2022 entry, Fauci describes a dinner he had with Rep. 
Diana DeGette (D-CO), whom he considered a legislative ally. 
“Diana is the current Chair of the Energy and Commerce oversight committee and if the GOP wins the House, she will be the ranking minority member,” Fauci wrote. 
“This is very good for me but it doesn’t completely shield me from there [sic] attacks which I need to be prepared for that will come either in the House with Jim Jordan et al or in the Senate with Rand Paul et al. 
They will likely treat me like they treated Hillary Clinton during the Bengazi [sic] Hearings.” 
Yet Fauci also seemed to derive some pleasure from his combative relationship with the libertarian senator. 
HOW DID FAUCI’S DIARIES MAKE IT PUBLIC? 
NO ONE WILL SAY 
“When I walked into the Oval the POTUS put his hands on my shoulder, brought me close and said: ‘You did a great job in stuffing that horse’s a**’ referring to Rand Paul,” Fauci wrote of an interaction with then-President Joe Biden shortly after he had testified before the Senate. 
“He also said that 1st Lady Jill was ‘cheering for me’ as she watched it on TV.” 
After a call with British physicians several days later, Fauci beamed that he was now “held in extremely high regard in the UK by virtually everyone on the basis of my standing up to Rand Paul and his nonsense in the Senate.” 
Confirmation Bias
0%
Anchoring Bias
4.1%
Availability Heuristic
4.1%
Representativeness Heuristic
0%
Hindsight Bias
2.7%
Overconfidence Bias
0%
Framing Effect
9.6%
Loss Aversion
0%
Status Quo Bias
5%
Sunk Cost Effect
0%
Optimism Bias
0%
Pessimism Bias
8.5%
Negativity Bias
19.1%
Self-Serving Bias
2.5%
Fundamental Attribution Error
5.7%
Actor-Observer Bias
0%
In-Group Bias
0%
Out-Group Homogeneity Bias
0%
Halo Effect
0%
Horn Effect
0%
Dunning-Kruger Effect
0%
Recency Bias
12.2%
Primacy Effect
2.8%
Blind-Spot Bias
0%
Ad Hominem
5.8%
Straw Man
0%
Appeal to Authority
7.4%
False Dilemma
7.4%
Slippery Slope
0%
Circular Reasoning
0%
Hasty Generalization
4.1%
Red Herring
0%
Bandwagon
0%
Appeal to Emotion
2.8%
Begging the Question
3.2%
Post Hoc (False Cause)
2.7%
Tu Quoque
0%
Burden of Proof
0.7%
Appeal to Nature
0%
Composition/Division
0%
Anecdotal
16.3%
No True Scotsman
0%
Ambiguity (Equivocation)
16.6%
Gambler’s Fallacy
0%
Middle Ground
0%
Personal Incredulity
0%
Special Pleading
0%
Genetic Fallacy
0%
Unattributed Quote
4.1%
Quote-first Misdirection
3.5%
Biased Writer Voice
1.4%
Indoctrination
1.2%
Politically Left Leaning Bias
0%
Politically Right Leaning Bias
0%
Attempt to Sell a Product or Service
0%

565 words analyzed.

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.