have. if they had gone fully into this by the fall of last year, that it risks getting to be background noise and people getting dulled to it. part of what they say is as we get into spring, you re going to hear more and more of it. by the summer, this will be bringing back things from trump s record and his time as president to say, look what he did when he was president. also look what he said he was going to do that he didn t do. and look at that record. if they had started doing it in september or october when a lot of the political chatter was talking about why aren t they doing it more, it just become part of what was in the ether. and we ll see if they are proved right on this, but that s their theory. we ll see if it works. it s probably the right theory, but this reminds me of when president biden said i need to get out of the country more and sell my plans more. presidents are always hemmed in. it s difficult for them to get out of their bubble as much.
and that has given ukraine a lot of support in a material sense, in a diplomatic sense, certainly in a military sense. and you it risks ukraine risks something very big here if it does something that does not impact the military objective directly. in other words, if they go into the civilian side of things. so they have to be careful to concentrate more on the military side, and yes even on the political side. but the one thing they have done very well is sow distrust, terror in the minds of the russian population. the white house has said clearly they would rather they not see ukraine striking inside of russia. jill, it is now very apparent to the russian citizens themselves that these strikes are taking place. you have these attacks against smaller border towns in the western part of russia, but you also have these recent drone attacks near moscow, including in and around a neighborhood that is where some of the elite live. so to what extent do you think
are reporting, that some of this information warfare that the u.s. government has been engaged in with declassified intelligence, there are some folks acknowledging, hey, some of this intelligence is maybe one source, right. it is not rock solid. it s and they re using it any way. that presents a bit of a risk. so far the intelligence has been pristine. and playing this game has worked. but the idea that they are using intel that isn t, say, rock solid, how risky is that and do officials acknowledge that their playing a little bit of a risky game here? right. and i mean that is something that i know sources and officials told my colleagues in that reporting. that it risks undercutting u.s. credibility if the u.s. comes out and they re wrong here. one of the things the administration officials said early on is in a way we hope you re wrong when it comes to timing. we hope necessarily that russia is not going to invade this week or we have some more time.
putting possible. therefore, why are we now putting young children into unknown risks? putting young children into unknown risks? a . ~ putting young children into unknown risks? 1, . ,, ., putting young children into unknown risks? . ,, ., ,~/ putting young children into unknown risks? ., ., risks? back to you, katherine, the ch risks? back to you, katherine, the jcvi sa s risks? back to you, katherine, the jcvi says it risks? back to you, katherine, the jcvi says it doesn t risks? back to you, katherine, the jcvi says it doesn t recommending vaccinating 12 to 15 year olds because of the marginal health gains. despite that, you still want yours vaccinated? i gains. despite that, you still want yours vaccinated? yours vaccinated? i do, i do feel very strongly- yours vaccinated? i do, i do feel very strongly. now yours vaccinated? i do, i do feel very strongly. now we yours vaccinated? i do, i do feel very strongly. now we are - yours vaccinated? i do, i do feel very stro
here, what are the restrictions that will be lifted more likely. we re talking about lifting any caps on the thumb of people who can meet both outdoors and indoors, we re talking about the fact that face coverings will no longer be a legal requirement, they will be a matter of public choice, including apparently on public transport and in enclosed spaces. we re talking about the fact that limits on social distancing will also be lifted. and become a matter of personal choice. so more than 100 doctors and scientists have signed a letter saying that this risks causing millions of infections, this is an unethical experiment being conducted by the british government, that it risks causing a generation beset by chronic health problems due to covid, and that it will create fertile drowned for the emergence of a vaccine resistant variant. so they say the government