Mostly to be a pedantic devil's advocate here, I'm going to argue with something you're not saying. I've heard a _lot_ of people argue that the visit is _proof_ of corruption. You're just pointing out the possibility and I'm hoping to head off a bad path.

Anyway, if a company is being declared the source of a multi-state outbreak, that company _should_ be talking to the WH. And it's possible that some of those discussions would present evidence that _should_ result in a retraction.

For example, during heartbleed my grand-boss was in on calls with the WH (I don't work on openssl, at the time I worked on a product that _used_ openssl a couple of layers down). AIUI, official guidance changed because of those calls.

If we want to find proof of corruption, this is a place to start looking, not a place to stop.

It's sad that this was heavily downvoted on HN but times really have changed in this community. What you said is just straight up true and not derogatory or misleading.

Seems the usual HN MAGA types can't handle the truth. Keep downvoting me. Only shows how pathetic you are. Everything I state is easily verifiable from respectable public sources.

Thanks.