Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.1084 [SLACK_001298] · slack_pm:msg:11283

Date: 2022-02-03 07:42
Type: chat message · slack
mentioned: Andrew Rambaut
recipient: Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Kristian G. Andersen
Topics: Congressional oversight

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

As to the letter - @Andrew Rambaut you should pass this on to your university to respond. I assume you won't comply, but it's important to understand that further requests will come. Congress can subpoena foreign nationalsand while they can't do anything directly if you refuse to appear, it could/will have consequences for future travel tothe US.They can't subpoena any of us at the moment (unless they get bipartisan support - we have already looked into that and that seems unlikely), but all of that changes in November.

Extracted statements

Rule-extracted, not adjudicated. The grade says what may be done with each one; read the document above before relying on any of them.

Statement	Grade	Attribution	Stance
Congress can subpoena foreign nationalsand while they can't do anything directly if you refuse to appear, it could/will have consequences for future travel tothe US.They can't subpoena any of us at the moment (unless they get bipartisan support - we have already looked into that and that seems unlikely), but all of that changes in November.	needs context	uncertain explicit hedge	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

Congress can subpoena foreign nationalsand while they can't do anything directly if you refuse to appear, it could/will have consequences for future travel tothe US.They can't subpoena any of us at the moment (unless they get bipartisan support - we have already looked into that and that seems unlikely), but all of that changes in November.

needs context

uncertain explicit hedge

asserts

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2022-02-03 07:15 Andrew Rambaut open

Seems like they have also given Fox News the tip-off: ```Good morning, Could you please comment on the letter you were sent this morning by Republican members of the House of Representatives asking for clarification on why you originally suspected the COVID-19 virus was possibly man created before then suggesting otherwise in the Nature Medicine report entitled, "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2." Do you still hold the belief the virus was naturally occurring? Have you faced any pressure from Dr. Fauci and Dr. Collins to downplay the potential of a man-made virus, as the letter suggested? Thank you,Caitlin McFallPolitics Reporter Fox News```
2022-02-03 07:35 Kristian G. Andersen open

Got the same. Maybe worth answering "yes" and "no"?
2022-02-03 07:42 Kristian G. Andersen

As to the letter - @Andrew Rambaut you should pass this on to your university to respond. I assume you won't comply, but it's important to understand that further requests will come. Congress can subpoena foreign nationalsand while they can't do anything directly if you refuse to appear, it could/will have consequences for future travel tothe US.They can't subpoena any of us at the moment (unless they get bipartisan support - we have already looked into that and that seems unlikely), but all of that changes in November.
2022-02-03 08:27 Andrew Rambaut open

And I would answer 'I didn't', 'yes', 'no'
2022-02-03 08:29 Kristian G. Andersen open

Hah - simple!
2022-02-03 08:31 Kristian G. Andersen open

@Robert Garry - you do need to work with your press office to get this particular quote clarified (or at least have clear answers to it), because it's being brought up a lot and it's quite damaging:"In fact, Dr. Garry later stated the consensus on the teleconference was "1. Don't try to write a paper at all . . . or 2. Ifyou do write it[,] don't mention a lab origin as that will just add fuel to the conspiracists.""
2022-02-03 08:35 Kristian G. Andersen open

I'll get clarification from our outside council on the underlying meaning of some of the verbiage in the letters to us -especially "it is imperative you provide answers under oath" and everything under "to allow a full and complete record of these documents to be produced to the Committee in response to future document requests, please:". Putting these in the letter make me believe they're already thinking about next steps.

Full conversation →