Do you support or oppose the recent increased congressional scrutiny of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s actions during the Covid pandemic?

Support (30%) – "Dr. Fauci worked for the citizens of the United States. He was well paid and received a tremendous pension for all his tenure in Government as the highest paid employee. I believe he has a moral and legal obligation to testify before the Congress and be accountable for his actions as an employee. His leadership propel this country into arguable the greatest abuse of a person's Constitutional rights. Congress has a duty to determine what exactly happened and why. The abuse of governmental power should never happen again."

• "We cannot allow government officials to be above the law and lie to the American people. This isn't just about COVID, it is about a long track record of obscuring the truth and recommending action and treatments that favored an officials pocketbook at the expense of people's health, livelihoods, and freedoms."

"I think I'm mostly support, though I do hope it's done with some respect of him as a person still. I think too many people are still unaware of just how insane some of the Covid policies were, and I hope that this will help bring light to that. However, that said, I also don't envy anyone the decisions they had to make during COVID, and I recognize that even the most well-intentioned people made mistakes. The implications here are that Fauci was maybe not 100% well intentioned, but I'm less interested in personal politics and more interested in the truth of the matter so we're better prepared for future crises."

Oppose (64%) – "Fauci is an American hero over decades. There is not evidence of any wrong doing on his part. I totally fail to understand why some people hate him and want him and his family to suffer after he saved us on multiple occassions, not just COVID."

• "The motives behind Senator Paul’s calling for Dr. Fauci’s work during the COVID crisis doesn’t appear to be about dissecting events to better prepare for another health crisis, but rather to point fingers and play politics."

"Pandemics are not an everyday thing. It appears that our country went through the same turmoil and angst during the Spanish flu epidemic. Each one is different we should look at each when they occur as what can we do better not attack the people who are trying to get us through those difficult times. Rand Paul has an agenda and no matter what Fauci said, he would try to morph it into lying so he could put him in prison as he has sworn to do. And by the way, I do not think that Fauci was in control of the agenda and protocols during those years. I really thought that he reported to different Presidents who we can also second guess their decisions now."

• "Even if Dr Fauci did mess up in some way, and I have no doubt that there are many things he could have done better, he ultimately handled the situation of COVID with a lot more urgency and care than the Trump Administration ever did. It is not a crime to plead the 5th Amendment, it’s why it exists in the first place."

"If this investigation was solely on an examination of what the science was evolving during the pandemic, I would have had no problems with it. But it wasn't....it was a witch hunt by Rand Paul and fellow Republicans on the committee to solely discredit Dr. Fauci and to push their pernicious program that the virus was leaked and that "cures" like horse dewormer were effective. It was never about the science, it was always about Paul's agenda, and that should be chilling to everyone in the US scientific community."

• "While I understand wanting to know the origins of the virus and to review our response, I do not agree with what feels like persecution of an individual for leading and navigating an unknown landscape. Nor do I agree with holding him in contempt for pleading his 5th amendment right in response to what is obviously an attempt to find him negligent or guilty."

Unsure/other (6%) – "On the one hand, public officials should face an accounting for what they have done in public office, especially when they made unique decisions in unique circumstances. I sure do like that precedent; I hope it continues into 2029. On the other hand, this, specifically, sure feels like a witch hunt. This guy made his decisions with the backing of the administration; they can't put the prior administration on trial (although they badly want to) and so they're going after the next big public figure who was part of it and who isn't one of their own."