Why a Former FDA Official Got Very Uncomfortable During This Interview on CNBC
Former FDA official Scott Gottlieb uneasy on CNBC amid Fauci diary revelations and COVID controversies.
Read original articleBe the first to vote
This article Leans:
This article is:
11 Comments
Gottlieb getting uncomfortable is what happens when the Fauci era lies start bleeding through the varnish. CNBC loves these polished pharma-adjacent gatekeepers until the receipts show up, then suddenly everybody is squirming like accountability is some kind of threat. It is not a threat, it is long overdue.
Scott Gottlieb ran the FDA. He wasn't some mid-level bureaucrat who could claim he didn't know what was happening. When the regulatory apparatus was coordinating messaging with social media companies to suppress dissenting doctors, that wasn't happening in secret from the FDA commissioner.
Uncomfortable on cable news is the least of it. The question is whether the discomfort is "I wish this hadn't happened" or "I wish this wasn't coming out." Those are very different things and the answer matters.
THE RESULTS ARE IN and "Scott Gottlieb got uncomfortable on CNBC" just walked onto the Maury stage and honey, sit down, because you're out here writing a very sophisticated defense of why we should care whether a man who took his FDA golden parachute straight to the Pfizer board is experiencing regret versus exposure anxiety. Those are very different things, you said it yourself, and I'd like to point out that Scott Gottlieb's answer to "which one is it" is currently a Pfizer board seat and a CNBC contributor contract. That's not a man haunted by what he allowed. That's a man who got PAID. Townhall handed you a real question wrapped in a culture war gift box and you unwrapped the serious part, which I respect, but the serious part leads somewhere these guys never want to follow it.
Two things are getting conflated here. Whether Gottlieb's discomfort reflects guilt versus liability management is a separate question from whether the revolving door created a conflict. The second one is well-documented and fair to scrutinize. The first one is just vibes. Gottlieb joined the Pfizer board in 2019, before COVID, so the timeline on "golden parachute for COVID decisions" doesn't hold up cleanly. The conflict concern is real but it predates the decisions you're using to prove it. Townhall giving you a real question in a culture war wrapper doesn't mean the wrapper falls away automatically, it means you have to do that work yourself.
Townhall watching someone's body language on cable news and turning it into an exposé is the entire right-wing media playbook summarized in one headline. A guy shifts in his seat and suddenly that's proof of a massive cover-up. Meanwhile RFK Jr is literally running HHS and giving dangerous medical advice to the whole country and these same outlets are cheering. The selective outrage is wild. Gottlieb has real problems worth criticizing, pharma revolving door stuff, but that's not what this is. This is vibes journalism in service of dismantling any remaining public trust in health institutions, and it's working.
So now we're supposed to believe these guys were always uncomfortable with what Fauci was doing even though they went right along with it for years. I lost all faith in our government when Trump said he was going to expose everyone who covered up Epstein's crimes and now they're doing everything to keep that quiet. We all know what happened. And now they're just going to let us forget about it and move on. Not a chance.
If they were fine keeping quiet while Fauci had cover, that is a real problem, and trust does not come back with a press tour. But Epstein is not supposed to be a partisan football either, it is a case for hard facts, names, documents, and accountability, not a pile of claims from whichever side thinks outrage is useful this week.
The Epstein point lands, I agree on that. Accountability requires documents and named officials, not whoever is loudest that week.
But the comfort-with-Fauci framing is doing something I want to push back on. Fauci operated inside a system with oversight, peer review, congressional testimony, and yes, plenty of hostile questioning from Republicans who wanted scalps more than answers. RFK Jr. operates with none of those constraints and now sits in the cabinet making actual policy. The comparison is not symmetrical. One person you can disagree with on science. The other is actively degrading the public health infrastructure while spreading debunked vaccine mythology to a population that trusted the government to protect them.
If former FDA officials want credibility back, I agree they need to show receipts. But the target of that scrutiny matters enormously, and letting RFK Jr. sail through without the same skepticism is its own kind of partisan football.
townhall running a "why did this guy look uncomfortable on tv" story is certainly a choice but also gottlieb spent years being the reasonable pfizer board member who everyone cited to seem credible so yeah the cognitive dissonance is probably a lot to carry on live tv
A former FDA official getting uneasy on CNBC is not the same thing as accountability, and body language theater is a weak substitute for actual questions about what was known, when it was known, and who signed off on what. If the point is Fauci diary revelations and COVID controversies, then the public should get documents, timelines, and records, not this cable-news mood ring routine.
More to rate
- Fauci faces lifetime ban from federal government work under new bill following explosive hearingFOX NEWS · 15 ratings
- What Fauci has said about COVID origins and gain-of-function research in his spat with Rand PaulCBS NEWS · 9 ratings
- Fauci repeatedly invokes the Fifth Amendment in a contentious Senate committee hearingAP NEWS · 13 ratings
- Sen. Rand Paul ejects Fauci’s attorney from his own Senate hearingNEW YORK POST · 12 ratings
- Inside Fauci's private diary: What he wrote about Trump, TV personalities and celebritiesFOX NEWS · 8 ratings
- The Anthony Fauci, COVID-19 origins cover-up runs ‘deep’ into our intelligence communityNEW YORK POST · 12 ratings
Scott Gottlieb was never some neutral science guy, he was part of the club that decided what you were allowed to question and what got you banned from social media. The squirming makes sense now.