you? let me just break it down into more general terms. so when i looked at this data, what we find an absolute risk of harm in general, when it s about serious adverse events. so this is includes things on my mind about this. but, you know, anything that causes disability, hospitalization, includes heart attacks and strokes, for example, that is at least one in eight hundred. and that data, interestingly, comes from pfizer s own trilemma that is on trial. this is published in the journal vaccine a few weeks ago, eminent scientists were able to reanalyze some of the original trial data and what they concluded. laurer, which is extraordinary, is one in a trial, one was more likely to suffer a serious adverse event from the vaccine than one was to be hospitalized with covid. well, i suggest that the original rollout, what led to the approval by the regulator, that data suggested at the time it was likely to cause more harm than good in most people. and that s the smoking gun. that s mo
concentration of software engineers and computer scientist in history, but these days, they are being dragged into ever more into political philosophy. where? by a curious quirk of history. a former leader of a liberal democrats. in weighing the potential harms against free speech for powerful people, nick and facebook are making the sorts ofjudgements that her stress really historicallyjournalists really historically journalists have really historicallyjournalists have made. they are the editors of the internet and therefore of our public domain. facebook s trilemma was sensitive and involves trade offs, and was guaranteed to be polarised. the world s biggest social network has denied access to its megaphone, to a person who has voted four by 7a million people. i suspect he s going to have to get used to some here in the us. earlier, i spoke to our reporter
without hearing from the president. so i think a subpoena is likely. but what if the president goes in and just says, i plead the fifth. regardless what he said in the media that pleading the fifth says you re guilty. what if he says that? the president is facing a wicked it s not a dilemma, it s a trilemma, if he goes in and tells the truth, he runs an enormous risk of incriminating himself with obstruction, possible conspiracy, the actual other crimes that the president is referring to when he says collusion. right. if he doesn t testify, he runs the risk of getting subpoenaed. he has to take the fifth amendment. that disqualifies him as our chief law enforcement officer. so that s not a good solution for him. and then the president is stuck whichever which way he turns. all right. so, harry, what is the likelihood of the president that he actually sits down for this