AMNA NAWAZ: For more on today's hearing, Dr.

Fauci and his legacy, we're joined by Katherine Wu, staff writer with "The Atlantic."

Her latest piece, "The Unmaking of Anthony Fauci," focuses on all of this and how Fauci's career brought him to this moment.

Katie, welcome back to the "News Hour."

Thanks for joining us.

KATHERINE J. WU, Staff Writer, "The Atlantic": Thanks so much for having me again.

AMNA NAWAZ: I want to start with this debate over the origins of COVID-19, which Dr.

Fauci was asked about repeatedly today, and I know that you have covered.

As Ali has just reported, there are now government agencies that support this lab leak theory, the idea that the virus originated from a lab in China.

But there's still a real divide, including scientists who don't agree with that theory.

So, in all your reporting, has that consensus changed over time?

And where does that leave us in the way of answers today?

KATHERINE J. WU: I'd say among scientists, especially virologists and evolutionary biologists, who are going to be among the most qualified to weigh in on this matter, the consensus has largely been the same for the past few years, that the preponderance of evidence that we have so far points to a natural origin, that this virus spilled over from a wild animal and to the human population, as so many other pathogens that we know about have.

That's not definitive, exactly as you point out.

There is still open debate on this and people will continue to litigate this for, I think, a very long time yet.

But at least among scientists, that's where the consensus stands.

AMNA NAWAZ: I know you were following along with today's hearing.

So what did you make of the fact that Dr.

Fauci invoked his Fifth Amendment rights over 100 times?

Did you expect that to happen?

KATHERINE J. WU: It always sounds strange to say this, but I think I did, largely because it really speaks to the amount of danger that he is under.

I mean, he has been threatened so repeatedly with prosecution.

It was ultimately a defense mechanism.

And that's what the Fifth Amendment is there for, right, to protect people from dubious claims and to protect them from undue harm.

He was doing that because he had been threatened with this very, very real and repeated attack from his political opponents at this point.

And so he is no longer covered by the presidential pardon that Joe Biden issued him at the start of 2025 and only covered him up until the date the pardon was issued, anything that he could have said in this testimony could have been construed as a lie, and someone might have gone after him in an attempt to make him perjure himself.

AMNA NAWAZ: You detail in your latest piece really well the arc of his entire career, what made him the public health leader that he is, but also the campaign, as you describe it, against him after President Trump retook office.

What was that campaign like?

What did that entail?

KATHERINE J. WU: I think a very apt word for it at this point is petty.

I mean, one of the first things that Trump did in his second term was to strip Fauci of his federally sponsored security detail, which he had had for, gosh, almost five years at that point for very legitimate reasons.

He and his family have continued to receive very serious, very detailed death threats from people who have been unhappy with him.

Trump's officials went on to tear down a mural with Fauci's face.

They went on to fire some of his closest colleagues at the National Institutes of Health.

They even ousted his wife, who was not even at the department that he ran.

I think there have just been some very targeted personal attacks, to the point where many of his colleagues and former colleagues have said it seems like essentially everything Tony Fauci touched, they have attempted to dismantle, destroy, or obliterate so that there is no legacy left.

AMNA NAWAZ: You also laid out in your piece how he was able to navigate over the course of his career both the scientific world and also the political world.

What did you hear from people who worked with him along the way and what they thought of him?

KATHERINE J. WU: Right.

I think Fauci is maybe the nation's most consummate nonpolitical scientist.

And he has described himself this way.

I think, for a very long time, for decades, even, starting especially in the '80s, as he came to widespread recognition for his work on HIV/AIDS, he was really using his allegiance to the facts, him speaking for science, really just sticking to the evidence as almost cover or a compass to navigate the sort of maze that is Washington politics.

If he stuck to the facts, he stuck to the science, who can argue with that?

Shouldn't that be kind of a bipartisan interest?

And it was for a very, very, very long time.

He served under half-a-dozen presidential administrations, and presidents from both sides of the aisle loved him.

He was incredibly successful.

I think it speaks to his shrewdness, his very clear political strategy of ironically remaining statedly unpolitical.

But that did start to break down once COVID hit under Trump's first administration.

AMNA NAWAZ: You also write about the man for whom legacy seems to be very important.

And, as we mentioned, your piece is titled "The Unmaking of Anthony Fauci."

So, what do the last few years and also today's hearing mean for his legacy?

KATHERINE J. WU: Right.

I think we're talking about two sides of the same coin here.

A man who became such a public fixation means that he was viewed by some as an undisputed hero and to others an undisputed villain.

There's been very little in between in recent years.

And so for all the praise that was heaped on him during the early days of the pandemic for kind of being our savior or the anti-Trump or the person who is speaking truth in the middle of chaos, there was also immense criticism for all of the pandemic policies that people considered controversial or worried were harmful.

And so blame has really been heaped on him.

He's become a scapegoat.

He's become not just the face of the pandemic response, but the face of the idea that COVID may have started as a lab leak.

People desperately want someone to blame.

They desperately want to hold someone culpable, and he has become that person.

AMNA NAWAZ: All right, that is Katherine Wu, staff writer with "The Atlantic," joining us tonight.

Katie, good to see you.

Thank you so much.

KATHERINE J. WU: Thank you so much for having me.