Slack / Private Message Drop — page 1064

[2022-01-14 15:07:35] [Kristian Andersen] I don't think we should ever release the emails, unless we're forced to via legal proceedings (in this case, either lawsuits or subpoenas). The drafts are different - they show the linear logic of how we came to our conclusions after the call and why there's absolutely nothing to hide here. I get the sense that they're mostly after those at the moment, but we'll see. I agree that we should do _nothing_ right now, but let's set up a Zoom in a couple of weeks. [2022-01-14 15:12:25] [Eddie Holmes] I wouldn't release the drafts until it is absolutely necessary. I'm absolutely certain this will lead to a series of unintended consequences. [2022-01-14 15:15:47] [Andrew Rambaut] Agreed. Don't release anything. [2022-01-14 15:16:00] [Eddie Holmes] Plus it's a scientific paper FFS. If people don't like they can just write a response. [2022-01-14 15:23:53] [Robert Garry] or if you are Alina just tweet you f'ing brains out.... [2022-01-14 15:24:55] [Kristian Andersen] It's nothing to do with logic - the issue is that there's a DEMAND FOR TRANSPARENCY from the GOP, which includes things like the "Fauci Act" and other complete bullshit. It's all a conspiracy theory, but that matters little once they take over the House - that's when the subpoenas will start flying. As you may recall, I have already been summoned - however, the GOP is currently in the minority so they can't force me and the lawyers acting on my behalf responded to that request via a written response. But again, once they become the majority, they have full subpoena power and that changes everything - it's very important to control as much of the narrative as possible before that happens. [2022-01-14 15:28:58] [Eddie Holmes] I'm sorry, but I just don't agree. Releasing drafts of a paper will not control the narrative and very likely backfire. [2022-01-14 16:10:00] [Andrew Rambaut] I agree with Eddie - keep with line that it is all laid out in the published paper itself. We were just asked to look at the data and say what we thought. We published what we thought. [2022-01-16 08:15:39] [Robert Garry] Another day another attack by Broad's Science Advisor Alina Chan - this time going on about Deep Throat's revelations about the teleconference. Funny thing - neither Deep Throat or 4$ were on the teleconference. In another time this would be dismissed as hearsay...I'm curious as to whether she's in contact with Jon Cohen... [2022-01-16 08:26:31] [Kristian Andersen] Kinda hilarious to read that - she gets every single fact wrong and, of course, the "WHO Mission" was completely unrelated to what Jeremy was talking about back in February. She really is the Queen of Conspiracy Theories.