From the earliest days of the pandemic, I have been reluctant to assume the worst of authorities who got things wrong about COVID-19. I gave them the benefit of the doubt that since it was a new and deadly disease, they were trying to give the public the best advice they could, given what they knew at the time while battling a steep learning curve.

However, the recent release of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s emails has revealed that on a number of vital issues, we weren’t always given the best data they had at the time. Sometimes we were given the data that served a preferred narrative, even when those giving it out knew that it was at the very least highly questionable, and when it could even lead to more misery and deaths (endless lockdowns, ever-shifting mask advice, silencing doctors who were having success with readily-available drugs, etc.

That’s why it was so irritating when Dr. Fauci tried to dismiss the perfectly justified criticism he’s receiving by claiming that any questioning of him is an attack on “science.” No matter what his fan club at MSNBC thinks, he is not the walking embodiment of science. Actual scientists have their statements challenged all the time. That’s why real science is never really “settled.”

As you might imagine, Fauci’s critics in the media and politics went to town on his hubristic “I am science” defense:

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/scottmorefield/2021/06/09/i-am-science-says-the-sun-king-tucker-carlson-megyn-kelly-others-scorch-fauci-claim-n2590775

But to be fair, they’re not scientists. So here’s an actual scientist, Stanford University medical professor and epidemiologist Dr. Jay Bhattachrya, offering his informed opinion on Dr. Fauci: his “credibility is entirely shot.”

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2021/06/09/what-a-stanford-epidemiologist-said-about-fauci-after-his-email-fiasco-couldnt-be-more-accurate-n2590713