Gabbard Releases Declassified COVID Documents on Her Final Day as DNI, Alleging Fauci Funded Wuhan Research and Lied to Congress

On Thursday, June 19, Tulsi Gabbard released a large batch of declassified documents on her final day as Director of National Intelligence, before handing the role to acting DNI Bill Pulte. The release followed a yearlong declassification review by the ODNI, according to Newsweek. The documents include internal government communications, whistleblower allegations, and intelligence-related material. Gabbard's office stated the Wuhan Institute of Virology is now assessed as the source of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Gabbard alleged in a statement that Fauci placed hand-picked scientists inside intelligence agencies to steer analysis toward a natural-origin conclusion, then publicly cited those same assessments as independent corroboration. According to Republic World's account of the documents, this created what the ODNI filing describes as a circular information loop that shaped public understanding globally.

She also alleged that Fauci "lied to Congress while under oath in 2024," according to Newsweek. The ODNI further alleged that some of Fauci's communications conflict with his 2024 congressional testimony. Newsweek said it attempted to contact Fauci through the Georgetown Global Health Institute late Thursday for comment and had not received a response at the time of publication.

No charges have been filed against Fauci. No federal investigation targeting him specifically has been publicly announced.

The Morens Indictment Is the One Concrete Legal Action So Far

The one piece of this story with confirmed legal standing involves Dr. David Morens, a 78-year-old senior NIAID adviser who worked alongside Fauci throughout the pandemic. According to Republic World, the Department of Justice criminally indicted Morens in April 2026, alleging he deliberately used a private email account to evade public records laws and conceal communications about coronavirus research. That is an active federal case. The allegations against Fauci himself remain, as of June 19, 2026, unproven and uncharged.

The Strongest Case for Skepticism

Critics of this document release have a legitimate point: Gabbard released these files on her last day in office, after announcing her departure, with no independent verification process and no simultaneous release of exculpatory material. That timing raises a fair question about whether this was a rigorous intelligence disclosure or a political closing statement. Intelligence assessments, even declassified ones, are not legal findings. Whistleblower allegations in a government filing are allegations. Some scientists who signed early natural-origin statements have maintained they did so based on their genuine reading of the evidence at the time, not under external pressure. The ODNI release does not, by itself, resolve that dispute.

Gabbard's tenure at DNI was itself contentious. Her departure has drawn criticism from members of Congress across party lines, according to the NY Post, partly over the Pulte appointment and partly over her management of the role.

What Was Already Known and What This Adds

The EcoHealth Alliance's NIAID grants funding bat coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were publicly known before this release. What Gabbard's documents purport to add is the internal communications showing that Fauci's office was directly aware of the nature of that research, that intelligence community analysts were influenced by outside scientists with institutional conflicts, and that whistleblowers inside the government were suppressed. According to Republic World, an official whistleblower filed a complaint in August 2021 under the Intelligence Community Whistleblower Protection Act alleging that Fauci gave false testimony to lawmakers about funding dangerous research in Wuhan.

Whether those internal communications say what Gabbard claims they say cannot be independently confirmed from the source summaries available as of this writing. The ODNI's own website, reviewed as part of this report, does not yet provide a direct public link to the full document set.

Republic World's framing, describing the files as proof of a "deep-state disinformation campaign," goes further than the documents themselves establish and should be read as advocacy. The NY Post's coverage similarly leads with Gabbard's conclusions rather than the underlying documents. Newsweek is more careful, noting that it sought comment from Fauci and flagged that the release represents allegations, not findings.

What Happens Next

The concrete open question is what Congress does with this material. The Senate Judiciary and HELP committees both have open COVID-origins investigations. Whether Gabbard's document dump produces subpoenas, hearings, or referrals to the Justice Department will determine whether these allegations move into an evidentiary process or remain a final-act press release from a departing official. The Morens trial, already underway in federal court, may surface some of the same underlying communications in a forum where they can actually be tested.