Disgusting, and divorced from reality
Musk tweeted "My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci," sparking White House rebuke of the billionaire's rhetoric as divorced from reality. Fauci, retiring in December after 50+ years advising seven presidents, became polarizing figure for his blunt Covid guidance on vaccines and masking.
- Musk tweeted "My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci" on the weekend of December 12, 2022
- Fauci served as adviser to seven U.S. presidents over 50+ years
- United States recorded over one million Covid-19 deaths
- Twitter dissolved its Trust and Safety Council of nearly 100 organizations via email minutes before a scheduled meeting
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre called Elon Musk's public attacks on Dr. Anthony Fauci "dangerous" and "disgusting," defending the retiring health official's pandemic response and decades of public service.
On a Monday in mid-December, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stood before reporters and used two words to describe Elon Musk's weekend attack on Dr. Anthony Fauci: disgusting and dangerous. Musk had tweeted "My pronouns are Prosecute/Fauci," a jab that went viral within hours. When the post gained traction, the Twitter and Tesla chief doubled down, replying to his own message with "Truth resonates." Jean-Pierre's response was unambiguous. The comments, she said, were divorced from reality, and the White House would continue to say so publicly and plainly.
Fauci, the nation's top infectious disease official and chief medical adviser to President Joe Biden, had announced plans to retire that same month after more than five decades in public service. His career spanned seven presidencies, beginning with Ronald Reagan. He had navigated Americans through HIV and AIDS, avian flu, Ebola—a résumé of public health emergencies that stretched back generations. But it was his role during the coronavirus pandemic that transformed him into something unusual for a career bureaucrat: a polarizing national figure.
During the Trump administration and beyond, Fauci delivered blunt assessments from White House podiums about what Americans needed to do to survive the pandemic. He advocated for vaccination, social distancing, and masking. To public health advocates, he became a hero. To segments of the political right, he became a villain. The United States had recorded more than one million Covid deaths—the highest toll in the world—and Fauci's name became inseparable from the nation's response to the crisis. He received death threats. He endured criticism not only from former President Trump but from various conservative figures who objected to the safeguards he promoted.
Republicans had threatened congressional investigations into Fauci's conduct if they gained control of the House in the midterm elections. They did win the House, though Democrats narrowly held the Senate. Now, as Fauci prepared to step down, Musk's public condemnation arrived as a reminder of the political temperature that had surrounded the doctor throughout the pandemic.
Jean-Pierre's defense of Fauci was sweeping. She praised his handling of public health crises and his decades of service across administrations of both parties. The White House would not let the attacks pass without response, she made clear.
The same week, Twitter announced it was dissolving its Trust and Safety Council, an advisory group of nearly one hundred independent civil rights organizations, human rights groups, and other civil society bodies. The company had formed the council in 2016 to address hate speech, child exploitation, suicide, self-harm, and other harms on the platform. The council members were scheduled to meet with Twitter representatives on Monday evening. Instead, shortly before the meeting was to begin, Twitter sent an email informing the group that it was being disbanded. The council members, speaking on condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation, shared images of the email. "Our work to make Twitter a safe, informative place will be moving faster and more aggressively than ever before," the message read, signed simply "Twitter." The timing and manner of the dissolution—an email minutes before a scheduled meeting—signaled a sharp departure from how the platform had previously engaged with outside voices on content moderation and platform safety.
Citas Notables
They are disgusting, and they are divorced from reality, and we will continue to call that out and be very clear about that.— Karine Jean-Pierre, White House press secretary
Our work to make Twitter a safe, informative place will be moving faster and more aggressively than ever before.— Twitter, in email dissolving the Trust and Safety Council
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did the White House feel compelled to respond to Musk's tweet at all? Couldn't they have simply ignored it?
Because silence would have been read as acceptance. Musk has enormous reach, and the tweet wasn't a stray comment—it was a call for prosecution of a sitting government official. The White House had to establish that this was not a reasonable position.
But Fauci is retiring anyway. Does the timing of Musk's attack matter?
It does, because it frames how Fauci leaves office. Instead of a farewell focused on his legacy, the conversation becomes about whether he should face legal consequences. That's a very different narrative.
The Trust and Safety Council dissolution seems almost deliberately timed. Was that intentional?
The email came minutes before a scheduled meeting. Whether that was calculated or just poor management, it sent a message: this advisory structure no longer exists. Musk had already fired most of Twitter's safety staff. Dissolving the council completed the picture.
What does dissolving the council actually change on the platform?
It removes an external check on Twitter's decisions about hate speech, exploitation, and harm. The council had no enforcement power, but it provided accountability and legitimacy. Without it, Twitter's safety decisions are now entirely internal.
Do you think Fauci's retirement was always going to be contentious?
Probably. He became a symbol of pandemic policy itself. For some people, he represented necessary caution. For others, he represented overreach. That polarization doesn't disappear just because he steps down.