Susan Walsh/Pool/CNP/Zuma

The coronavirus is a rapidly developing news story, so some of the content in this article might be out of date. Check out our most recent coverage of the coronavirus crisis, and subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.

At a Thursday Senate hearing on the nation’s coronavirus response, Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) once again suggested that he knew better than Dr. Anthony Fauci when it came to mask requirements.

Paul repeatedly pressed Fauci on the utility of wearing masks given that prior infection and vaccination confer immunity to the coronavirus. But he didn’t seem to want to hear Fauci’s response about the possibility of reinfection by emerging, contagious COVID variants.

“If we’re not spreading the infection, isn’t it just theater?” Paul said. “If you got the vaccine and you’re wearing two masks, isn’t that theater?”

“Here we go again, with the theater,” Fauci said. “Let’s get down to the facts.”

When Fauci again brought up the danger of variants against which vaccinated and previously infected people may not be immune, Paul accused him of “making policy based on conjecture.”

“You’ve been vaccinated and you parade around in two masks for show,” he said. “You want to get rid of vaccine hesitancy? Tell them they can quit wearing their masks after they get their vaccine.”

“I totally disagree with you,” Fauci said. “Let me just state, for the record, that masks are not theater. Masks are protective.”

This isn’t the first time Paul and Fauci have sparred at Senate hearings. Last May, Paul criticized Fauci for his recommendation that schools not open in the fall. Then, in September, he falsely suggested that New York City succeeded at flattening the curve in the early months of the pandemic not because of shutdowns and strict adherence to CDC guidelines, but because the initial devastating outbreak had allowed the population to reach herd immunity.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate