About

An investigation of the record

Fauci's Lies is an independent, evidence-first project documenting the public record of the COVID-19 pandemic — its decisions, its communications, and the contemporaneous evidence behind them.

We exist for a narrow, demanding purpose: to put the primary record in front of readers and to report only what that record supports. We are not interested in adjectives. We are interested in dates, documents, and direct quotation.

What we cover

The conduct and communications of senior U.S. public-health leadership during the pandemic, and the institutional and scientific decisions around it — origins and gain-of-function research, the funding that flowed to it, the evolution of public-health guidance, congressional testimony, and the distance, where it exists, between what was said in public and what the contemporaneous record shows.

What we hold in the archive

The reporting rests on a working library of 78 documents totaling roughly 1,602 pages: a June 2026 ODNI declassification; the House Select Subcommittee's transcribed interviews of Dr. Fauci and its released exhibits; the relevant peer-reviewed papers; NIH grant records and correspondence; and official briefing transcripts. The library grows as we report, and every source we cite is held and re-verifiable.

78 documents · 1,602 pages
By source strength
A Govt / intel / grant 16 · 644 pp
B Oversight / whistleblower 6 · 682 pp
C Internal email 47 · 234 pp
D Scientific publication 6 · 28 pp
E Reproduced / press 3 · 14 pp
By type
Internal email
47
Scientific
8
Govt record
6
Intel assessment
4
Oversight
4
Testimony
3
Letter
2
State cable
2
Press
1
Grant record
1
Drawn from the 18 June 2026 ODNI declassification plus the wider congressional, scientific, and policy record. The reporting leans on the primary government, oversight, and testimony tiers; press clippings are context only — see Methodology.

We weight by source strength, not volume: the reporting leans on the primary government, oversight, and testimony tiers (A–B), uses internal email (C) as dated record, and treats scientific publications (D) and reproduced press (E) as evidence of what was said or published — never as proof of an underlying fact. The full scheme is on the Methodology page.

How we work

Our standards — sourcing tiers, attribution discipline, the fairness requirement, and our corrections policy — are set out in full on the Methodology & Corrections page. They are not aspirational; they gate what we publish.

On the name

The name is deliberately blunt; the journalism is deliberately not. We keep the documents to a neutral standard, publish them in full, and let readers reach their own conclusions. Accountability journalism earns its authority by being right and by being fair — not by being loud.

Contact & corrections

To report an error, submit a document, or respond to our reporting, contact the editors with the specific article and sentence at issue. Right-of-reply requests from named individuals and institutions are honored and represented in the piece.