This goes back to the comment you replied to. The government can't give perfect hindsight advice at the beginning of any situation. it seems like your complaint here is "science isn't perfect"
It seems to me from this excerpt of his email to a colleague on February 5, 2020, Fauci really did not think masks were effective initially.
https://www.wired.com/story/the-teeny-tiny-scientific-screwu...
* I have not made and continue to not make any statements regarding mask communication, nor about reports on reasoning for that.
* I am not engaging in nor countering absurd conspiracy theories
* I am not broadcasting my feelings and thoughts on political purposes and what I do or do not see to you, so I don't know why you think you are capable of surmising what I can and cannot see.
* I do find hilarious how very angry you are that I pointed a logical inconsistency.
But pointing out the the messaging from the government has been, at best, muddled--and at worst, misleading, if not downright dishonest--you interpret as "anger"? I find that pretty disingenuous. You are again inferring that which is not implied.
Now, the reasoning for the former was that they were concerned about PPE supplies, but that doesn't change the fact they reversed themselves very shortly, and expected people to forget the earlier messaging.
The government didn't need to be an oracle with a perfect track record, but I don't think it's outrageous to suggest that they should have been honest. If you can't see how the pandemic was used for political purposes, I don't know what to say.