Will we finally get the truth?

Tulsi Gabbard, a former Democratic congresswoman from Hawaii who switched to the Republican Party in 2024, was appointed DNI by President Donald Trump in November 2024 and confirmed by the Senate on February 11, 2025. Known for her skepticism of establishment narratives and her vocal criticism of U.S. foreign policy, Gabbard has positioned herself as a reformer within the intelligence community, emphasizing transparency and accountability. Her investigation into Fauci aligns with her broader mandate to address public distrust in government institutions, particularly regarding the handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Gabbard’s investigation, conducted in collaboration with NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., aims to establish a direct link between U.S.-funded gain-of-function research and the COVID-19 outbreak. Gain-of-function research involves modifying pathogens to enhance their transmissibility or virulence, often to study potential pandemic threats. Critics argue that such experiments, if poorly regulated, pose significant risks, including accidental releases.

During an interview with Megyn Kelly on April 30, 2025, Gabbard revealed that her team is “close to identifying the specific experiment” that may have led to the global spread of COVID-19. She suggested that the EcoHealth Alliance, a U.S.-based nonprofit that received NIH grants, may have funneled funds to the WIV for gain-of-function experiments. This claim echoes findings from the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, which determined that EcoHealth used NIH dollars for such research in Wuhan, contradicting Fauci’s 2021 testimony to Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) that “the NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”

A central focus of Gabbard’s probe is whether Fauci committed perjury during his exchanges with Senator Paul. Gabbard and others allege that Fauci repeatedly denied NIH involvement in gain-of-function research, despite evidence suggesting otherwise. This discrepancy has fueled speculation about why Fauci reportedly sought a preemptive pardon from President Biden before leaving office in January 2025. Gabbard remarked, “Is it any wonder that he sought a preemptive pardon for anything during a certain period of time by President Biden before he left office?”

The pardon, allegedly signed via autopen, has sparked debate about its legality. Some commentators argue that if Biden was unaware of the pardon’s issuance, it could be challenged, potentially exposing Fauci to federal perjury charges. However, others contend that proving Biden’s lack of approval would be nearly impossible, rendering the pardon ironclad. Regardless, the pardon’s existence has intensified scrutiny of Fauci’s actions, with Gabbard framing it as evidence of his awareness of potential wrongdoing.

Gabbard’s investigation extends beyond Fauci to examine U.S.-funded biolabs globally, including those in Ukraine. She has called for an end to gain-of-function research, arguing that it poses existential risks to global health security. Her focus on Ukraine biolabs, however, has drawn criticism from some quarters, with detractors pointing to her 2022 comments as amplifying Russian-backed conspiracy theories. A Forbes report from March 2022 noted that Gabbard’s claims about U.S.-funded biolabs in Ukraine lacked evidence and aligned with Kremlin narratives, though Gabbard insists her concerns are rooted in national security.

Gabbard’s investigation faces several hurdles. First, the scientific community remains divided on the lab-leak hypothesis. A 2021 World Health Organization study deemed it “extremely unlikely,” while a 2025 Chinese white paper accused the U.S. of shifting blame. Gabbard’s team must navigate these competing narratives to produce credible evidence. Second, her lack of intelligence experience and past controversies, including her 2017 meeting with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, have led some intelligence officials to question her judgment, potentially undermining the investigation’s credibility.

Moreover, Fauci’s defenders argue that he acted in good faith under immense pressure. They point to his decades of service, including his work on HIV/AIDS, and dismiss perjury allegations as politically motivated. The $5 million increase in Fauci’s net worth during the pandemic, largely from investments and awards, has been cited by critics as evidence of profiteering, but supporters argue it reflects standard financial growth for a high-profile figure.