Watchdog groups file suit over Fauci financials

OpenTheBooks.com has requested data from chief White House medical advisor Dr. Anthony Fauci about his financial and professional history, according to Fox News

According to the report, however, the public might only get to see some of Fauci’s disclosures submitted over the course of several years, according to group CEO Adam Andrzejewski.

Andrzejewski spoke to Fox News Digital about the ongoing legal battles that they’re fighting in an attempt to get Fauci’s records: 

“During the pandemic, Dr. Fauci has handsomely profited from his federal employment, royalties, travel perks, and investment gains,” Andrzejewski asserted. 

The group filed their first Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) on Jan. 28 2021 and while The National Institute for Health, which Fauci directs, acknowledged the request they were silent for months.

In May of last year, they received 51 of the pages they requested, a drop in the proverbial bucket compared to what they requested from the group. 

“Not included was Dr. Fauci’s current employment agreement including all addendums and modifications; current job description; and confidentiality and conflict of interest documents,” OpenTheBooks.com said.

According to Fox News Fauci’s disclosures are technically open to any member of the public who requests them, but they aren’t listed in the same searchable database like other federal officials record.

Additionally, any FOIA request and it can take months to be fulfilled, which has been the case with Fauci’s records. 

“Openthebooks.com continued pushing for more documents from the National Institute of Health and its related agencies,” Fox News reported. “Correspondence from the government became increasingly dismissive, pushing Andrzejewski to threaten a lawsuit.”

The watchdog group got enough pushback that they choose to partner with another legal activist group, Judicial Watch. According to Andrzejewski, the group resorted to filing suit on Oct. 25, 2021 and “that suit moved fast in federal court.”

“And the agency admitted they were holding 1,200 pages subject to our request,” he recalled. “So think about this, we got 51 pages – there were redactions – and there are 1,200 pages.”

“So they admitted to holding 1,200 pages that were subject to the request and 3,000 pages of line-by-line royalty payments,” Andrzejewski said. “Every line is a potential conflict of interest and there’s up to 1,000 NIH scientists receiving royalty payments. It’s legal, but it should be disclosed.”

Share on facebook
Share To Facebook

Welcome to our comments section. We want to hear from you!

Any comments with profanity, advocacy of violence, harassment, personally identifiable information or other violations will be removed. If you feel your comment has been removed in error please contact us!

Latest Posts