Judge dismisses AstraZeneca fraud case over Covid vaccine disclosures

From [HERE] A federal judge threw out securities fraud claims against AstraZeneca over statements it made during clinical trials of its Covid-19 vaccine, saying the plaintiffs failed to identify any false information or fraudulent intent to support their case.

“Read generously, the amended complaint does not state a claim because it does not identify any statement made misleading by any alleged omission,” concluded U.S. District Judge J. Paul Oetken in New York. 

The ruling was a loss for lawyers at Robbins Geller and Vanoverbeke Michaud, who hoped to assemble a class action with Monroe County, Mich., as lead plaintiff. 

During Operation Warp Speed, the federal government offered AstraZeneca as much as $1.2 billion for 300 million doses of its experimental vaccine, although the company said it would manufacture the drug at no profit during the epidemic and only hope to make money on the technology later. [MORE]

Petition for Grand Jury says 86% of COVID Deaths Weren’t Caused by COVID; Fed Authorities “Hyperinflated” Deaths/Cases/Hospitalizations by Changing Death Certificate Rules and Incentivizing Hospitals

PLANDEMIC. From [HERE] A petition for a grand jury filed in a federal court in Oregon by 2 Oregon state senators and a doctor claims federal authorities defrauded taxpayers over 3 trillion dollars and caused various harms by “hyperinflating” the number of COVID deaths, cases and hospitalizations. The suit seeks to empanel a citizens federal grand jury to indict federal authorities from the Trump and Biden administrations.

The petition was filed on March 7, 2022. The government filed a motion to dismiss on August 28, 2022 and petitioners filed their response on September 12, 2022.

The grand jury petition names the following defendants: Rochelle Walensky (CDC Director), Xavier Becerra (HHS Secretary), Brian Moyer (NVSS Director), Alex Azar (former HHS Secretary), and Robert Redfield (former CDC Director).

The petitioners are Dr. Henry Ealy, Senator Dennis Lithicum and Senator Kim Thatcher.

Court filings explain that “Respondents altered the instructions for the completion of death certificates without going through a lawful process with mandatory public comment and federal oversight. This change caused COVID-19 to be identified as the cause of death when the actual cause of death was from a pre-existing comorbidity. The result was that 88.6% to 94.0% of deaths reported as COVID-19 were not, in fact, caused solely by COVID-19.” Supporting documentation to the filing estimates that the actual death count from COVID-19 is 54,000 people not 890,000.

The petition also documents various ways the federal government manipulated case counts with useless PCR testing and manipulating guidelines. According to the petition, under manipulated guidelines “a single cough of undetermined origin [is] sufficient to diagnose a patient as COVID-19 positive. Even without confirmatory symptoms or lab testing, a patient with a single cough can be included in data collection such as for cases, hospitalizations, and even as a COVID death….”

The petitioner’s response motion states;

“Respondents illegally created a system of diagnosis that inflated the number of COVID-19 cases that counted as unique “new” cases, multiple positive tests from same person. Respondents simultaneously proscribed the PCR test for diagnosis with fundamental defects that resulted in high rates of false positive results were additionally counted as unique “new” cases.

Further, Respondents created financial incentives for medical facilities inflate the number of COVID cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.

Federal data collection is subject to exacting controls for accurate data collection, analyses and publication. Respondents flouted these rules to create a system that inaccurately inflated COVID cases, hospitalizations, and deaths. These intentional acts of data fraud were used to panic the public into going along with unprecedented government seizure of power via emergency declarations based upon the fraudulently inflated data.”

Specifically, the petition explains the following;

Summary of Facts

The Petitioners allege that the Defendants violated federal law with respect to data integrity for COVID-19. The Petitioners allege that the Defendants failed to ensure, and/or willfully manipulated data being collected, analyzed, and published.

The Petitioners allege the Defendants’ violation of federal law led to a significant hyperinflation of COVID-19 case, hospitalization, and death counts, which was subsequently used to defraud the US Taxpayer out of at least $3.5 Trillion dollars in misappropriation of public funds between 2020 to 2022. For comparison, the US federal government typically allocates a maximum of $25.3 Billion annually in response to infectious disease with similar hospitalization and death rates. (Please refer to Exhibit M for detail and citations of COVID economic impact).

The Petitioners further allege that the Defendants:

• utilized the Medicare/Medicaid insurance reimbursement systems to

  financially incentivize compliance by hospital administrators, medical

  insurance billing specialists, and medical professionals

• that the publication of inaccurate data constitutes willful misconduct by public officials to intentionally defraud the American people and misappropriate US Taxpayer dollars, and

• that the actions of the Defendants constitute fraud, reckless and negligent misrepresentation, and breach of fiduciary duty and public trust.
  

Public officials have the implicit duty to tell the truth, and that duty is only more magnified during a time of crisis.

Violation of Federal Laws

The Defendants Redfield, Azar and subordinates, without notification to the Federal Register or initiating oversight and public comment, as required by the Administrative Procedures Act (“APA”) and Paperwork Reduction Act (“PRA”), unilaterally changed how data was defined, collected, analyzed, and published exclusively for COVID. In doing so, the Defendants compromised the accuracy and integrity of all COVID data including cases, hospitalizations, and deaths leading to significant hyperinflation of all COVID data in clear violation of the Information Quality Act (“IQA”). (Please refer to Section 1 below for detail)

Acts of Criminal and Willful Misconduct

The Defendants Redfield, Azar, Moyer, and subordinates allegedly committed acts of willful misconduct by instructing medical professionals to emphasize COVID as the primary cause of death and simultaneously deemphasize comorbidities and other relevant causes of death data beginning on March 24, 2020, and again in April 2020. Further, the HHS financially incentivized hospitals to comply with the CDC’s and NVSS’s instruction by offering a greater financial reimbursement to hospitals for patients with Medicare/Medicaid health insurance coverage. According to the HHS, from April through July 2020, Medicare/Medicaid patients made up 274,000 of the 294,770 patients hospitalized due to COVID when compared against the CDC’s COVID-Net hospitalization database.14,15 With an estimated 92.9% of COVID hospitalizations in the age 50 and older demographic relying on Medicare/Medicaid for coverage, this makes accurate diagnosis essential for recovery and insurance reimbursement. Additionally, decisions to provide significant bonus compensation to hospitals appears to be an attempt to coerce hospitals into compliance and participation in the for-profit insurance fraud scheme authored by the HHS, CDC, and NVSS. (Please refer to Section 1 below for detail)

Communication of Fraudulent Data that Adversely Influenced and Continues to Influence Public Health Policy at National, State, & County Levels

The HHS, CDC and NVSS significantly hyperinflated COVID data which has had a demonstrably harmful impact upon citizens in each state. National, state, and county COVID public health policies have been based on published CDC COVID data and the complicity of state level public health directors, who by and large failed in their duty to ensure that requests made by the CDC and NVSS for COVID data collection would not lead to significantly inaccurate case, hospitalization, and death data. The root cause of the COVID plague that has gripped this country for more than two years can be best understood in how data has been illegally manipulated by the Defendants, now spanning two administrations. A lie told for years is no less a lie, even if that lie has been unfortunately accepted as truth. Defendants Walensky, Becerra, and Moyer have elected to continue to collect and publish fraudulent COVID data based upon the illegal practices of their predecessors Defendants Redfield and Azar. Additionally, Defendants Walensky and Becerra, in an effort to coverup the failures of the experimental COVID inoculations to prevent infection, intentionally terminated all publication of surveillance data for ‘vaccine breakthrough’ (aka ‘vaccine failure’) on October 30, 2021, one month prior to the beginning of exponential rises in ‘vaccine breakthrough’ cases, hospitalizations, and deaths nationwide. ‘Vaccine breakthrough’ occurs when a ‘fully vaccinated’ person contracts COVID despite being ‘fully vaccinated’. This is key data used to assess the efficacy of the experimental COVID inoculations. In the place of real numbers of confirmed ‘vaccine breakthrough’ cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, Defendants Walensky and Becerra have promoted a new fraudulent metric termed ‘vaccine efficacy’ that groups partially vaccinated individuals with unvaccinated individuals and refers to the group collectively and misleadingly as ‘unvaccinated’, which again constitutes data fraud. That the COVID data being published has been defined and collected in violation of federal law and that a new administration has continued to perpetuate these violations, we allege this constitutes acts of willful misconduct that has harmed millions of citizens across our great nation physically, emotionally, and economically.

The image above displays 5 columns of COVID data published through February 6, 2022.

Looking left to right, column one displays that COVID death count published by the CDC. This is the total number of deaths published using the March 24th, 2020 COVID Alert No. 2.

The 2nd column displays a projected value assuming that soft audits of all death certificates would be similar to what occurred in Santa Clara & Alameda Counties and produce a 25% reduction in death counts.

The middle column displays the projected maximum reduction in death counts if a full audit of all records was based upon the 2003 death certificate reporting handbooks published by the CDC and still in use for all causes of death except COVID. It is important to note that the CDC states as of February 6, 2022 that, “For over 5% of these deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned on the death certificate. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 4.0 additional conditions or causes per death.” This statement has remained unchanged since at least July 2021.

The 4th column is the total number of deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) as of February 4, 2022.

The 5th column is the estimated number of actual deaths based upon the case filing filed by attorney Tom Renz in the US District Court of Alabama on July 19, 2021, which asserts under penalty of perjury that data being reported to VAERS is significantly under reported by a factor of 5 at the very minimum.

Collectively, this graphic contends that a full audit of all COVID death certificates could reveal that more people have died in connection with the experimental COVID inoculations than due to complications from the SARS-CoV-2 infection had federal laws not been violated, hyper-inflating COVID data published by the CDC. [MORE]

Harvard University Professor and Two Chinese Nationals Charged in Three Separate China Related Cases

From [HERE] The Department of Justice announced today that the Chair of Harvard University’s Chemistry and Chemical Biology Department and two Chinese nationals have been charged in connection with aiding the People’s Republic of China.  

Dr. Charles Lieber, 60, Chair of the Department of Chemistry and Chemical Biology at Harvard University, was arrested this morning and charged by criminal complaint with one count of making a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statement. 

Yanqing Ye, 29, a Chinese national, was charged in an indictment today with one count each of visa fraud, making false statements, acting as an agent of a foreign government and conspiracy. Ye is currently in China. 

Zaosong Zheng, 30, a Chinese national, was arrested on Dec. 10, 2019, at Boston’s Logan International Airport and charged by criminal complaint with attempting to smuggle 21 vials of biological research to China.  On Jan. 21, 2020, Zheng was indicted on one count of smuggling goods from the United States and one count of making false, fictitious or fraudulent statements.  He has been detained since Dec. 30, 2019.

Dr. Charles Lieber

According to court documents, since 2008, Dr. Lieber who has served as the Principal Investigator of the Lieber Research Group at Harvard University, which specialized in the area of nanoscience, has received more than $15,000,000 in grant funding from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Department of Defense (DOD).  These grants require the disclosure of significant foreign financial conflicts of interest, including financial support from foreign governments or foreign entities. Unbeknownst to Harvard University beginning in 2011, Lieber became a “Strategic Scientist” at Wuhan University of Technology (WUT) in China and was a contractual participant in China’s Thousand Talents Plan from in or about 2012 to 2017.  China’s Thousand Talents Plan is one of the most prominent Chinese Talent recruit plans that are designed to attract, recruit, and cultivate high-level scientific talent in furtherance of China’s scientific development, economic prosperity and national security.  These talent programs seek to lure Chinese overseas talent and foreign experts to bring their knowledge and experience to China and reward individuals for stealing proprietary information.  Under the terms of Lieber’s three-year Thousand Talents contract, WUT paid Lieber $50,000 USD per month, living expenses of up to 1,000,000 Chinese Yuan (approximately $158,000 USD at the time) and awarded him more than $1.5 million to establish a research lab at WUT.  In return, Lieber was obligated to work for WUT “not less than nine months a year” by “declaring international cooperation projects, cultivating young teachers and Ph.D. students, organizing international conference[s], applying for patents and publishing articles in the name of” WUT.

The complaint alleges that in 2018 and 2019, Lieber lied about his involvement in the Thousand Talents Plan and affiliation with WUT.  On or about, April 24, 2018, during an interview with investigators, Lieber stated that he was never asked to participate in the Thousand Talents Program, but he “wasn’t sure” how China categorized him.  In November 2018, NIH inquired of Harvard whether Lieber had failed to disclose his then-suspected relationship with WUT and China’s Thousand Talents Plan.  Lieber caused Harvard to falsely tell NIH that Lieber “had no formal association with WUT” after 2012, that “WUT continued to falsely exaggerate” his involvement with WUT in subsequent years, and that Lieber “is not and has never been a participant in” China’s Thousand Talents Plan. 

Yanqing Ye

According to the indictment, Ye is a Lieutenant of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), the armed forces of the People’s Republic of China and member of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).  On her J-1 visa application, Ye falsely identified herself as a “student” and lied about her ongoing military service at the National University of Defense Technology (NUDT), a top military academy directed by the CCP.  It is further alleged that while studying at Boston University’s (BU) Department of Physics, Chemistry and Biomedical Engineering from October 2017 to April 2019, Ye continued to work as a PLA Lieutenant completing numerous assignments from PLA officers such as conducting research, assessing U.S. military websites and sending U.S. documents and information to China.

According to court documents, on April 20, 2019, federal officers interviewed Ye at Boston’s Logan International Airport. During the interview, it is alleged that Ye falsely claimed that she had minimal contact with two NUDT professors who were high-ranking PLA officers.  However, a search of Ye’s electronic devices demonstrated that at the direction of one NUDT professor, who was a PLA Colonel, Ye had accessed U.S. military websites, researched U.S. military projects and compiled information for the PLA on two U.S. scientists with expertise in robotics and computer science.  Furthermore, a review of a WeChat conversation revealed that Ye and the other PLA official from NUDT were collaborating on a research paper about a risk assessment model designed to decipher data for military applications.  During the interview, Ye admitted that she held the rank of Lieutenant in the PLA and admitted she was a member of the CCP.

Zaosong Zheng

In August 2018, Zheng entered the United States on a J-1 visa and conducted cancer-cell research at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston from Sept. 4, 2018, to Dec. 9, 2019. It is alleged that on Dec. 9, 2019, Zheng stole 21 vials of biological research and attempted to smuggle them out of the United States aboard a flight destined for China.  Federal officers at Logan Airport discovered the vials hidden in a sock inside one of Zheng’s bags, and not properly packaged.  It is alleged that initially, Zheng lied to officers about the contents of his luggage, but later admitted he had stolen the vials from a lab at Beth Israel.  Zheng stated that he intended to bring the vials to China to use them to conduct research in his own laboratory and publish the results under his own name.

The charge of making false, fictitious and fraudulent statements provides for a sentence of up to five years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000.  The charge of visa fraud provides for a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000.  The charge of acting as an agent of a foreign government provides for a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000. The charge of conspiracy provides for a sentence of up to five years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000.  The charge of smuggling goods from the United States provides for a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, three years of supervised release and a fine of $250,000.  Sentences are imposed by a federal district court judge based upon the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers, United States Attorney Andrew E. Lelling; Special Agent in Charge of the FBI Boston Field Division Joseph R. Bonavolonta; Michael Denning, Director of Field Operations, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Boston Field Office; Leigh-Alistair Barzey, Special Agent in Charge of the Defense Criminal Investigative Service, Northeast Field Office; Philip Coyne, Special Agent in Charge of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General; and William Higgins, Special Agent in Charge of the U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Export Enforcement, Boston Field Office made the announcement. Assistant U.S. Attorneys B. Stephanie Siegmann, Jason Casey and Benjamin Tolkoff of Lelling’s National Security Unit are prosecuting these cases with the assistance of trial attorneys William Mackie and David Aaron at the National Security Division’s Counterintelligence and Export Control Section.

The details contained in the charging documents are allegations. The defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

These case are part of the Department of Justice’s China Initiative, which reflects the strategic priority of countering Chinese national security threats and reinforces the President’s overall national security strategy. In addition to identifying and prosecuting those engaged in trade secret theft, hacking and economic espionage, the initiative will increase efforts to protect our critical infrastructure against external threats including foreign direct investment, supply chain threats and the foreign agents seeking to influence the American public and policymakers without proper registration.

UK Government Documents Prove Bill Gates is Primary Funder of UK Medicine Regulator Despite Owning Major Shares in Pfizer & BioNTech

From [HERE] An investigation has revealed that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is the primary funder of the UK’s Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, and the Foundation also owns major shares in both Pfizer and BioNTech.

The Medicine & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) extended the emergency authorisation of the Pfizer / BioNTech mRNA jab in the UK to allow it to be given to children between the ages of 12 – 15 on the 4th June 2021.

At the time, the Chief Executive of the MHRA, Dr June Raine said the MHRA had “carefully reviewed clinical trial data in children aged 12 to 15 years and have concluded that the Pfizer vaccine is safe and effective in this age group and that the benefits outweigh any risk”.

We are left wondering if Dr June Raine and the MHRA have even read the results of the extremely short and small study. If they have then they would have seen that 86% of children in the study suffered an adverse reaction ranging from mild to extremely serious.

Just 1,127 children took part in the trial, however, only 1,097 children completed the trial, with 30 of them not participating after being given the first dose of the Pfizer jab. The results do not state why the 30 children did not go on to complete the trial.

The information is publicly available and contained within an FDA fact sheet which can be viewed here (see page 25, table 5 on-wards).

There was never any doubt that the MHRA would give emergency authorisation for the Pfizer / BioNTech vaccine to be used in children when you consider that a certain Mr Bill Gates owns shares in both Pfizer and BioNTech and is the primary funder of the MHRA. [MORE]

[in The Spectacle (a constructed reality) elites pretend that over 1 Million People Injured by COVID Shots Don't Exist] Fakebook and BBC Shut Down "Vaccine" Injured Groups by Labelling Them "Anti-Vax"

From [HERE] A major media member of the Trusted News Initiative (TNI) has warned a primary tech member about vaccine injury groups gaming the system to avoid algorithm detection and thus scrutiny. In what could be described as a dangerous move, the BBC collaborates with Facebook to shut down vaccine injury support groups by universally referring to them as “anti-vaccine” or “anti-vaxxers” and calling out the ways that they use carrot emojis to hide from Facebook their true identity. Members of the TNI are collaborating to purge social media participants that are part of vaccine-injured groups. Even if some of them, or even many of them, are in fact vaccine injured, the policies of the BBC and Facebook, as well as other media and social tech companies assume that there are absolutely no vaccine-injured persons and that such persons have no rights whatsoever to share their stories. 

The BBC reports that a number of purported vaccine injury groups involving hundreds if not thousands of members used the emoji in place of the word “vaccine” in a bid to avoid Facebook algorithms.

The BBC reports that “several groups, one with hundreds of thousands of members, in which the emoji appears in place of the word ‘vaccine.’” The BBC’s Zoe Kleinman wrote that Facebook parent company Meta was alerted, and the groups were removed.

According to a statement from Facebook:

“We have removed this group for violating our harmful misinformation policies and will review any other similar content in line with this policy. We continue to work closely with public health experts and the UK government to further tackle Covid vaccine misinformation.”

Yet the BBC’s Kleinman reports that the groups are back even though they were taken down from Facebook.  According to Kleinman, the groups the BBC and Facebook label as anti-vax groups sought to rebrand themselves as places where people can share vaccine stories, for example sharing “banter, bets and funny video.”

But behind the scenes, the groups were using code words for communication purposes. For example, “Do not use the c word, v word or b word ever” (covid, vaccine booster). The particular group has 250,000 members.

Marc Owen-Jones, a misinformation specialist at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Qatar,shared that instead of using words such as “Covid-19” or “Vaccine,” the group was instructed to use emojis of carrots as an example apparently to evade the fake news detection algorithms reports Ms. Kleinman.

In the BBC piece, it’s identified that an Online Safety Bill could come into law which would lead to “steep penalties for failing to identify removing harmful material on their platforms.”

What if there are actually vaccine-injured persons? Currently, the BBC doesn’t recognize that there are actually adverse events and some deaths, albeit rare, that occur with the COVID-19 vaccines. In fact, even at a rare rate of one-tenth of one percent hundreds, this would translate into hundreds of thousands of vaccines injured in the United States alone.

TrialSite has been chronicling dozens of deaths from COVID-19 vaccines involving governments making compensatory payouts. Is it not allowed by the Trusted News Initiative to speak the truth about this situation? In the United States, over 224 million people have received at least a primary series vaccine in the USA. Estimates of vaccine injury in the USA vary from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands and possibly even over one million. [MORE]

Study by Top Scientists says COVID Shots are Unethical and up to 98X Worse than COVID: Mandated Injections Cause Injury w/No Legal Remedy and Infringe on Freedom of Association and Occupational Choice

From [HERE] Reported by The Epoch Times, a 50-page study, co-authored by: 

1. Dr. Stefan Baral, an epidemiology professor at Johns Hopkins University; 

2. surgeon Martin Adel Makary, M.D., a professor at Johns Hopkins University; 

3. Dr. Vinayak Prasad, a haematologist-oncologist professor at UCSF; 

4. Salmaan Keshavjee, M.D., Ph.D., current Director of the Harvard Medical School Center for Global Health Delivery, and professor of Global Health and Social Medicine at Harvard Medical School; 

concludes that mandates for COVID-19 boosters for young people may cause up to 98 actual serious adverse events for each COVID-19 infection-related hospitalization theoretically prevented.

The authors provide five reasons why the “vaccines” are unethical and should not be mandated:

1) Lack of policymaking transparency. The scientists pointed out that no formal and scientifically rigorous risk-benefit analysis of whether boosters are helpful in preventing severe infections and hospitalizations exists for young adults.

2) Expected harm. A look at the currently available data shows that mandates will result in what the authors call a “net expected harm” to young people. This expected harm will exceed the potential benefit from the boosters.

3) Lack of efficacy. The vaccines have not effectively prevented transmission of COVID-19. Given how poorly they work—the authors call this “modest and transient effectiveness” — the expected harms caused by the boosters likely outweigh any benefits to public health.

4) No recourse for vaccine-injured young adults. Forcing vaccination as a prerequisite to attend college is especially problematic because young people injured by these vaccines will likely not be able to receive compensation for these injuries.

5) Harm to society. Mandates, the authors insisted, ostracize unvaccinated young adults, excluding them from education and university employment opportunities. Coerced vaccination entails “major infringements to free choice of occupation and freedom of association,” the scientists wrote, especially when “mandates are not supported by compelling public health justification.”

Woman’s Brain Inflammation Caused by Moderna COVID Vaccine, Authors of Case Study Conclude

From [HERE] A healthy 35-year-old woman who experienced a seizure two days after her second dose of Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine was diagnosed with limbic encephalitis, a rare form of brain inflammation.

The authors of a recent case study on the patient stated:

“We believe that this episode of limbic encephalitis, which occurred quickly after COVID-19 vaccination, is an uncommon side effect of the [Moderna] vaccine.”

Limbic encephalitis is an acute condition of noninfectious inflammation of the brain that affects the limbic system.

The limbic system is a group of structures involved in processing emotion and memory. It includes the hippocampus, medial temporal lobe, cingulate cortex and frontonasal cortex.

The symptoms of limbic encephalitis include amnesia (memory loss), behavioral changes, psychiatric symptoms, seizures and a disturbed level of consciousness.

The pathophysiology (functional changes that accompany a particular syndrome or disease) of limbic encephalitis is known to be mediated (indirectly caused) by an antigen that stimulates an antibody-mediated host immune response that inadvertently targets cells in the limbic area.

There are two causes of limbic encephalitis: paraneoplastic and autoimmune.

“Paraneoplastic” means “caused by or resulting from the presence of cancer in the body but not the physical presence of cancerous tissue in the part or organ affected.”

The patient was screened for tumors, and cancer was ruled out as the cause in this patient’s case.

Case report

According to the case report, when the woman arrived at the hospital she had a fever, followed by generalized tonic-clonic seizures (formerly known as grand mal seizures) that lasted for approximately five minutes and a postictal (post-seizure) phase of confusion that lasted approximately 30 minutes.

During her stay in the emergency department, she had two more generalized seizures, which were controlled with medication, each one lasting less than two minutes after intervention.

The patient, who did not have any other neurological symptoms and was stable, was admitted to the hospital.

The authors wrote, “Apart from looking tired, she was oriented to time, place and person. Her neck was supported, and she had full power and sensation with normal higher functions. Cranial nerves were intact.”

The patient had a full basic blood workup, which was normal. Her COVID-19 PCR test was negative. There was nothing unusual about her contrast MRI, performed upon her admission.

A lumbar puncture was performed, and her cerebrospinal fluid did have significant lymphocytosis— an abnormal increase in the number of lymphocytes (white blood cells), usually resulting from infection or inflammation. [MORE]

47 Members of Congress Claim the Military’s COVID Injection Mandate Affects the Ability to Sustain Combat Formations and Recruit Talent; Urge the Pentagon to Revoke It

From [CHD] Nearly 50 Republican lawmakers, led by Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.), have called on the U.S. Department of Defense to withdraw its COVID-19 vaccine mandate for military members, citing concerns over the mandate’s impact on the readiness of the U.S. armed forces.

In a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin dated Sept. 15, the lawmakers, including Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), expressed their “grave concerns” over the impact of the mandate, particularly with regard to the U.S. Army.

“As a result of your mandate, 8% of the Army’s approximately 1 million soldiers face expulsion, Army recruiters cannot meet their FY22 target and the Army has cut its projected FY23 end strength by 12,000 soldiers,” they wrote.

Referring to Russia’s ongoing invasion of Ukraine, the lawmakers noted that the U.S. military currently faces “a self-imposed readiness crisis.”

Citing “sparse” data from the Department of the Army, they noted that “at least 40,000 National Guardsmen, 20,000 Army Reservists and at least 15,000 Active Army Soldiers” haven’t yet received a COVID-19 vaccine and subsequently face being discharged from service.

“The Department of Defense’s own COVID response page indicates that approximately 900,000 soldiers are fully vaccinated out of the 1 million soldiers in the Army, Army Reserve and Army National Guard,” the letter reads.

The lawmakers pointed to testimony delivered in July by Vice Chief of Staff of the Army Gen. Joseph Martin before the House Armed Services Committee.

During that testimony, Martin said that “less than 20,000” people were facing discharge for refusing to take the COVID-19 vaccine, much less than the initial figures that officials had provided.

"What the White House Expects from Us:" Fakebook Executive Admits Working with US Government to Censor Users, Silence Speech about the Danger of COVID Injections

Massa’ Media Complicit in COVID Vax Genocide: Dr Robert Malone Files $50M Defamation Lawsuit Against Washington Post, Other Liars who Concealed the Dangers of COVID Shots by Calling it Misinformation

From [HERE] and [PDF] Dr. Robert Malone has unintentionally become a public figure for speaking out about the risks and ineffectiveness of COVID-19 shots; he’s subsequently become the target of media attacks

• Malone’s attorneys sent cease-and-desist letters to the corporate media outlets that were most egregious in their attacks against him; this included The Washington Post, The New York Times, Atlantic Monthly, Rolling Stone and The Scientist

• Even after the cease-and-desist letter, The Washington Post put out another attack article repeating the same defamatory statements against Malone

• Now Malone is fighting back, as he’s filed a $50 million lawsuit against The Washington Post

Dr. Robert Malone, the inventor of the mRNA and DNA vaccine core platform technology,1 has unintentionally become a public figure for speaking out about the risks and ineffectiveness of COVID-19 shots. He's been deplatformed by LinkedIn and Twitter in the process, but that's only the beginning.

Malone is now earning most of his income from continuing to speak out via Substack, functioning not only as a scientist but as a citizen reporter. "To shut me down is basically anticompetitive," Malone said, speaking with WND in the video above.2

Malone Files Defamation Lawsuit Against WaPo

Yet, corporate media outlets are attempting to do just that, as they continue to publish defamatory hit pieces against Malone, as they have done to yours truly and many others who have shared information that's not in line with the official narrative. Now Malone is fighting back, as he's filed a $50 million lawsuit3 against The Washington Post (WaPo).4

If you've heard of Malone, it may be because his mention of the term "mass formation psychosis" on an episode of "The Joe Rogan Experience" December 31, 2021, which was viewed by more than 50 million people,5 went viral.

Those under the spell of mass formation psychosis obsessively focus on a failure of the normal world or a particular event or person who becomes the focus of the attention and can effectively control the masses.

Mass formation can occur in a society with feelings of social isolation and free-floating anxiety among a large number of people, and provides a coherent explanation of why so many people have fallen victim to the unbelievable lies and propaganda of the mainstream COVID-19 narrative.

Malone is also dedicated to speaking out because he wants to protect future generations. He's concerned about the pandemic response's effects on children, stating that public policies have had a particularly strong adverse effect on the young, and calling COVID-19 injection mandates "completely unjustified" for children.6 He also told WND:7

"I am of the opinion that a product that does not prevent infection, replication or spread of a pathogen to any substantial degree is not a vaccine.

And the fallback, of course, has been by the government that the genetic inoculations prevent severe disease and death, but unfortunately for all of us, the data are now showing internationally, and increasingly within the U.S., that the risk of severe disease or death is at a minimum equivalent between the unvaccinated and those who have received at least two inoculations.

And the data from most countries that are reporting this, like in Northern Europe, suggest the multiple inoculations — four or more injections, and even three injections to some extent — are associated with a higher risk of hospitalization and death."

It doesn't matter if what he's saying is true; if it creates "vaccine hesitancy," it will be censored. Toward that end, Malone has been targeted by the media and labeled an "anti-vaxxer," which is ironic since he's received COVID-19 shots.

Malone Attorneys File Cease-and-Desist Letters

Malone's attorneys sent cease-and-desist letters to the corporate media outlets that were most egregious in their attacks against him. This included The Washington Post, The New York Times, Atlantic Monthly, Rolling Stone and The Scientist, which published an inflammatory article against Malone and his response when a physician from Maui alerted the Maryland state medical board that Malone was promoting "COVID-19 misinformation."8

The reason he's suing The Washington Post, in particular, is because after his attorneys sent the media outlet a cease-and-desist letter, it put out another attack article repeating the same defamatory statements. "So that appears to show malice," Malone said, "and there's a number of other aspects in the words that they've used that appear to meet the criteria for malice."9

The Washington Post has continued to publish hit pieces against Malone, "accusing him of spreading 'dangerous lies' and 'leading his followers on a journey to illness, suffering and possible death,'" WND noted, adding, "Significantly, Post staff writer Timothy Bella labeled as "misinformation" Malone's statement that the vaccines 'are not working,' citing studies published by the CDC's sponsored journal as a counterpoint."10

Writing on Substack, Malone further explained that he had a gut feeling The Washington Post was up to no good when Bella first contacted him, asking to shadow him at the Defeat the Mandates rally in Washington, D.C., held in January 2022, where Malone was speaking:11

"Having been defamed and slandered by state-sponsored media before, I had learned enough about how these reporters approach their targets to politely turn down the offer to 'profile' me by a WaPo reported who has 'respect for you and your body of work' ...

In retrospect, my gut instinct was right. I felt like I was being set up (I can't get into the head or Mr. Bella and speak to his motives — maybe others can). Can you only imagine what would have been written and published IF I had agreed to have Mr. Bella shadow me — as he requested? Let my experience be a lesson to all concerned."

Malone is seeking more than $50 million in damages for injury to his reputation (past and future), insult, pain and mental suffering, lost income, career damage and impairment of future earnings.12The lawsuit alleges:13

"WaPo falsely accused Dr. Malone of fraud, disinformation, dishonesty, deception, lying to the American public, lack of integrity, immorality and ethical improprieties. The gist of the Article is that Dr. Malone is unfit to be a medical doctor and scientist. WaPo exposed Dr. Malone to public ridicule, scorn, and contempt, and severely prejudiced Dr. Malone in his employment."

The New York Times Also Attacked Malone

Malone told WND that he was also "ground into sausage" by The New York Times, after one of their reporters, who he welcomed to his farm for what he thought would be a good faith interview, published another attack piece. He now says he's gotten to the point where he tells others who are speaking words that are not endorsed by the government or the current narrative to "just say no" if they're approached by the media.14

Indeed, The New York Times has also published repeated hit pieces against me, making multiple blatantly false claims and labeling me a "superspreader" of misinformation. Twitter has banned anyone from sharing any link to my website, YouTube banned my account with over 15 years of content, while Facebook and Google have done everything possible to make me disappear.

It certainly would be much easier to cave under the pressure, but if we don't stand up for our rights and freedom now — when will it be too late? I will continue 'superspreading' truth and health until my last days, and I suspect Malone will as well.

"The lesson learned by so many is that the likes of Business Insider, Atlantic Monthly, Rolling Stone, The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN," Malone said, "these are media outlets which are paid by pharma and paid by the government ... more and more is coming out ... that the government has been actively promoting these forms of attack, cancelling and defamation."15

New York Times Paradox Explained?

Malone also spoke about the seeming paradox of the corporate-sponsored, narrative-aligned New York Times publishing an exposé in February 2022 that revealed the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention had been collecting data on COVID-19 hospitalizations according to age, race and injection status throughout the pandemic but didn't release most of it to the public.16

Such data certainly would have been of interest to a large portion of the U.S. population, but according to CDC spokeswoman Kristen Nordlund, the CDC hadn't released all of the data "because basically, at the end of the day, it's not yet ready for prime time."17 The Times reported, "Another reason is fear that the information might be misinterpreted, Ms. Nordlund said."18

Malone said he believes that the CDC withholding evidence about COVID-19 shot safety is scientific fraud19 and, beyond that, the outcome of the Times exposé and other public criticism of the CDC may have been revealed by CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky's recent calls for sweeping changes at the CDC.20 Among them, Malone says, is the establishment of a committee:21

"The outcome of all of this is that a committee has been established — you know what that means in D.C., it means that nobody has to take a hit for any bad decisions ... responsibility is all diffused — to advise and provide oversite for operations at the CDC."

Another outcome is to make the CDC less academic and give them more money and more power. "They need the power to extract data from the states," Malone said, explaining:22

"Since the practice of medicine is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution as a federal mandate," — the regulation of the practice of medicine is done at the state level — "she wants to basically circumvent the Constitution and be able to demand data from the states, because apparently they don't have enough data at the CDC, even though there are multiple stories out that they haven't analyzed and reported the data that they do have, and they need more money to hire more people in order to do this. 

They need to refocus their workforce on rapid response rather than putting out academic papers. The whole thing, to me, reeks to high heaven."

Turning an Attack Into a Badge of Honor

While being targeted by the media has ruined many reputations, it's possible to turn the attack into a badge of honor. One way to do this is to not back down under these signs of oppression and continue to fight for the truth, no matter the cost. Malone's lawsuit will not be the last that seeks to expose the true intentions behind the COVID spin.

And remember, in your own search for the truth — and in your journey to protect and maintain your health and that of your family — understand that the media intentionally uses Orwellian doublespeak, a weapon of tyranny in which words are twisted, reversing their meaning.

Analysis of Documents Reveal Pfizer Knew COVID Injections Cause Injuries to the Penis; through Blood Clots, Lesions and General Penile Infection

MOTHERFUCKING LIARS LYING ABOUT COVID INJECTIONS ON TV.

Dr Judy Mikovits: Shedding From Persons who Got COVID Shots is Real, Especially if They're Sick and Had More Than 1 Shot. The Spike Protein is a Transmissible Infectious Agent and Can Make You Sick

‘Good Morning CHD’ Episode 126: Spike Shedding - How To Protect Your Family With Judy Mikovits, Ph.D.

https://live.childrenshealthdefense.org/shows/good-morning-chd/c10WU0PCG2

Guest Judy Mikovits, Ph.D., joins host Polly Tommey for an eye-opening conversation on the symptoms of vaccine injury in the unvaccinated. In this episode of “Good Morning CHD,” Dr. Mikovits shares with viewers not only why this phenomenon is taking place but also what to do about it. She speaks to parents and pregnant mothers, explaining why it is critical for us to be protected, informed, and have faith in these times.

Excerpt:

Polly Tommy: "If you are a pregnant woman would you stay away from gatherings where you know people have been recently vaccinated? If you had a newborn baby, or a toddler, or anything like that, would you let them go to the playgroups..."

Judy Mikovitis: "If I were pregnant, I probably would not go in concentrated spaces with people who had been recently vaccinated, especially with more than one shot. But do understand: If they are not sick, they're not likely shedding large amounts. So those simple procedures I just told you in nutritional support, Paximune, and healthy essential oils on your skin, is likely going to be a way that it's not a problem. For children's playgroups, assuming they are three and four -- playgroups, often; newborns not. No vaccines for newborns. No vaccines for those children under three because those vaccines are compromising immune systems that haven't developed..."

US Govt Pretends There's a COVID Emergency, Approves New COVID Boosters Without Human Testing. Despite Millions Harmed, Thousands Dead from COVID Clot Shots, CDC/FDA Claim Injections “Proven Safe"

From [MERCOLA]

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• August 31, 2022, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized Pfizer’s and Moderna’s bivalent boosters, which will be available to those who have received the primary two-dose series

• Pfizer is releasing a bivalent injection targeting Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5, which are the two currently in circulation. Moderna’s bivalent booster targets the already extinct Wuhan strain and Omicron subvariant BA.1

• The reformulated COVID boosters will be rolled out without safety or effectiveness data from human trials. They’re being green-lighted based on antibody data from mice alone, even though antibody levels tell us nothing about effectiveness

• According to the FDA, the reactogenicity profile of Pfizer’s reformulated shot is “overall similar to prototype BNT162b2 vaccine,” and VAERS data prove that’s hardly a selling point

• This fall, health agencies will also push the seasonal flu shot, and all flu vaccines will be quadrivalent this year, meaning they contain antigens against four influenza strains. Seniors may be at greatest risk for vaccine injury, as they will get a high-dose quadrivalent flu vaccine

As the U.S., U.K. and other countries around the world prepare for a fall vaccination campaign against both the flu and COVID, it’s worth taking note of some basic facts. In “Untested Bivalent COVID Jab Being Rolled Out,” I reviewed potential problems with Moderna’s new bivalent COVID shot for adults, authorized by the U.K. in mid-August 2022.

August 23, 2022, Pfizer and Moderna submitted their respective authorization requests to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.1 Pfizer is releasing a bivalent injection targeting Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5, which are the two currently in circulation, while Moderna’s shot targets the already extinct Wuhan strain and Omicron subvariant BA.1.2

August 31, the FDA authorized both.3 The bivalent boosters will only be available to those who have already received the primary two-dose series and/or a monovalent booster at least two months ago. Per the FDA:4

“The Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent, is authorized for use as a single booster dose in individuals 18 years of age and older. The Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent, is authorized for use as a single booster dose in individuals 12 years of age and older ...

With today’s authorization, the monovalent mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are not authorized as booster doses for individuals 12 years of age and older ... These monovalent vaccines continue to be authorized for use for administration of a primary series for individuals 6 months of age and older ...

Individuals 18 years of age and older are eligible for a single booster dose of the Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent if it has been at least two months since they have completed primary vaccination or have received the most recent booster dose with any authorized or approved monovalent COVID-19 vaccine. 

Individuals 12 years of age and older are eligible for a single booster dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine, Bivalent if it has been at least two months since they have completed primary vaccination or have received the most recent booster dose with any authorized or approved monovalent COVID-19 vaccine.”

The reformulated boosters will be available as soon as the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gives its OK.5 6 For the record, all boosters, including these, are still under emergency use authorization (EUA) only, so manufacturers have no liability for injuries, and the reformulated shots are being released based on antibody levels in mice alone.

Vaccine Performance Is Not Dependent on Frequency of Use

It remains to be seen how government and media intend to bully people into continuing with this clearly failed strategy, but if The Atlantic is any indication, we can expect Orwellian double-speak and irrational emotionalism to prevail.

According to The Atlantic,12 “Vaccine performance ... depends on how and how often the shots are used. The more people take the doses, the better they will work.” This is merely blatant and outrageous propaganda whose sole purpose is to increase COVID jab adoption. As noted by one Twitter user,13 that’s complete rubbish, as “The performance of a ‘vaccine’ should have NOTHING to do with everyone ELSE taking it.”

The statement that vaccine performance depends on “how often” they’re taken is also clearly misleading if not outright false. No vaccine in history has depended on boosters several times a year, indefinitely. That’s not how real vaccines work. Historically, vaccine booster doses are spaced years apart, if they’re required at all.

New Formulation Is Only Tested on Mice

As mentioned earlier, the reformulated shots will be rolled out long before any data from human trials become available.14 As reported by The Atlantic,15 they’re being green-lighted based on antibody data from mice alone.16 While this has, for years, been the approval protocol for influenza vaccines, these mRNA shots are hardly run-of-the-mill vaccines.

We have no long-term data on them whatsoever, but in the short-term, the original COVID shots have between them resulted in 1,390,594 adverse event reports being logged with the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS, data as of August 19, 202217).

That includes 134,245 urgent care visits, 174,371 hospitalizations and 30,479 deaths, and due to widespread underreporting, you have to multiply those numbers by underreporting factor of 41 (or more) to get an idea of the true impact. If you do the math, you will quickly discover that the COVID jabs have been the No. 1 cause of death the past two years, far exceeding heart attacks and cancers that were unrelated to the jab.

“According to the FDA, the reactogenicity profile of the reformulated shot is ‘overall similar to prototype BNT162b2 vaccine,’ and as you can see from the VAERS data, that’s hardly a selling point.”

All of these effects have been swept under the rug and dismissed as unrelated to the jabs, and now they’re going to release reformulated mRNA shots based on nothing but mouse antibody data! It’s been said before, but it’s worth stating again, that antibody levels tell us nothing about effectiveness.

Recall: Antibody tests have been discouraged throughout the pandemic as a means to determine whether the COVID shot is providing protection.18 Why? Because your antibody level cannot tell you whether you’re protected against infection, symptomatic illness and serious illness.

It’s the same here. Antibody levels in response to the COVID shot tell us nothing about its ability to protect against infection and severe illness or death. In classic Orwellian double-speak, they claim that if antibody levels are high after the injection in a trial setting, it’s proof of effectiveness. But don’t waste your time measuring your antibody level, because that won’t tell you anything about your immune protection.

In the "Friday Roundtable" video above, Dr. Meryl Nass, Toby Rogers, Ph.D., and Brian Hooker, Ph.D., expose the injuries and deaths occurring from these jabs, while health officials and media continue to ignore and silence concerns. They review and critique the most recent COVID jab recommendations, the new nontesting framework, various data, and resources for those who want to get involved in the continued fight against medical tyranny.

Bivalent Booster Will Be at Least as Reactive as the Original

So many things can go wrong at this point, I shudder to make predictions. According to the FDA, the reactogenicity profile of the reformulated shot is “overall similar to prototype BNT162b2 vaccine,”19 and as you can see from the VAERS data, that’s hardly a selling point.

The Atlantic, however, downplays the situation by focusing only on the fact that we won’t have any data on effectiveness with which to entice and cajole the public into taking more of these devastating experimental gene therapy shots:20

“... the shortcut does introduce a snag: ‘We know nothing yet about the efficacy or effectiveness of these Omicron-focused vaccines,’ [Mayo Clinic vaccinologist Gregory] Poland said. Researchers can’t be sure of the degree to which the shots will improve upon the original recipe.

And public-health officials won’t be able to leverage the concrete, comforting numbers that have been attached to nearly every other shot that’s been doled out.

Instead, communications will hinge on ‘how much trust you have in the information you’re getting from the government,’ UNC’s [public health researcher Deshira] Wallace told me. ‘And that is very tricky right now.’”

How Pfizer Hid Severe Side Effects

With regard to safety, health authorities claim the original COVID shots have already been “proven” safe, hence the CDC and FDA tell us they don’t need human trial data in order to authorize the reformulated boosters.

Not only do VAERS data negate such statements, we also don’t even have all the data from the original trials yet, and what we do have is beyond terrifying. As reported by Children’s Health Defense (CHD) back in June 2022, court-ordered released FOIA documents reveal Pfizer classified nearly all severe reactions in its trials as unrelated to the shot:21

“The latest release by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine documents22 reveals numerous instances of participants who sustained severe adverse events during Phase 3 trials. Some of these participants withdrew from the trials, some were dropped and some died ...

The CRFs [case report forms] included in this month’s documents contain often vague explanations of the specific symptoms experienced by the trial participants. They also reveal a trend of classifying almost all adverse events — and in particular severe adverse events (SAEs) — as being ‘not related’ to the vaccine ...

The many serious adverse events — and several deaths — recorded during the Phase 3 trials are also apparent in a separate, massive document,23 exceeding 2,500 pages, cataloging such adverse events.

This document lists a wide range of adverse events suffered by trial participants classified as toxicity level 4 — the highest and most serious such level. However, not one of the level 4 (most severe) adverse events listed in this particular document is classified as being related to the vaccination.”

The CHD goes on to list a number of examples from Pfizer’s case reports where participants suffered now well-recognized and common side effects of the jab, such as a teen girl who was diagnosed with right lower extremity deep vein thrombosis, November 15, 2020.

Her condition was still “ongoing” as of March 29, 2021, the date of the CRF. She was hospitalized and her condition listed as “serious.” Still, the CRF indicated the condition was “not related” to the vaccine, but rather due to a “fracture,” which occurred before her injection on September 11, 2020.

Release of Patient Data From COVID Shot Trials Delayed

Some of the most important data — the raw patient data from the initial trials — also won’t be available for release until years in the future. As noted in a recent BMJ article:24 [MORE]

In Lawsuit Latino Mom Claims LA School Authorities Tricked Her 13 Yr Old Son Into Getting a COVID Shot by Offering Pizza and Forging Her Signature. Teen Now Suffers from Bleeding and Breathing Issues

From [HERE] A local mother claims her 13-year-old son was given a COVID-19 vaccination at school without her consent, according to a lawsuit filed against the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Maribel Duarte says her son Moises, who is a student at Barack Obama Global Preparation Academy, was offered a piece of pizza for receiving the vaccine. And not only was he vaccinated without her consent, she says Moises was made to forge her name on a consent form.

An image of a vaccine record released during a news conference shows two doses of the Pfizer vaccine were administered in October and November of last year.

Duarte says her son, whom she describes as having had breathing problems and asthma since he was a baby, has suffered side effects from the vaccination. Moises doesn't sleep as well and is no longer physically able to exercise the way he used to, she said.

Her attorney accused the operators of the vaccine clinic of bribery, coercion, assault, battery, and medical negligence. However, they would not provide a copy of the allegedly forged consent form.

Leaked Video Suggests Israeli Health Authorities Covered Up Serious Safety Problems with Pfizer COVID Shots

From [HERE] A leaked video recording reveals researchers in June shared data with the Israeli Ministry of Health (MOH) showing serious and long-term side effects associated with Pfizer’s COVID-19vaccine.

However, the MOH did not disclose the researchers’ findings to the expert committee that met later that month to decide on recommending the vaccine for children under age 5, or with leaders of Israel’s COVID-19 vaccine booster program.

Additionally, the MOH on Aug. 2 issued a report — on adverse events following the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine from Dec. 9, 2021, to May 31, 2022 — that contradicted the data presented during the early-June meeting.

“In fact, the report completely contradicts what was said in this discussion,” Retsef Levi, Ph.D., a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the Israeli Public Emergency Council for the Covid19 Crisis, told GB News in an Aug. 21 interview.

Yaffa Shir-Raz, Ph.D., health communication and pharmaceutical companies public relations strategy researcher at Reichman University in Herzliya, Israel, translated the June meeting from Hebrew into English.

The English translation shows the research team warned MOH officials they should think carefully about how to present the researchers’ findings to the public because they posed a potential legal risk, as the findings contradicted MOH’s claims that serious side effects are rare and short-term. [MORE]

Court Orders Fauci, Blight House Authorities to Turn Over Emails w/Social Media Giants in COVID Myth-Information Lawsuit. Government Censored Info About COVID Shots by Calling It “Misinformation”

From [HERE] A federal judge on Tuesday ordered top-ranking Biden administration officials — including Dr. Anthony Fauci and White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre — to hand over their communications with five social media giants within 21 days.

The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed earlier this year by Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt and Louisiana Attorney General Jeffrey Landry alleging the Biden administration colluded with Big Tech firms Twitter, Meta (Facebook’s parent company), Youtube, Instagram and LinkedIn to censor certain viewpoints under the guise of preventing the circulation of “misinformation” or “disinformation.”

U.S. District Judge Terry Doughty in July ordered the Biden administration to swiftly produce records requested by the plaintiffs as part of the discovery process.

On Aug. 2, Schmitt and Landry filed discovery requests seeking documents and information from the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and its director, Fauci; White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre; Surgeon General Dr. Vivek Murthy; and formerDisinformation Governance Board executive director Nina Jankowicz.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs also sent discovery requests to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and its director, Jen Easterly; the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS); and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

The requests resulted in a cache of documents revealing more than 50 Biden administration workers and 12 U.S. agencies had been involved in a censorship push over social media.

However, some government officials — including Fauci — refused to provide records or answer any questions posed by the plaintiffs, claiming the communications were protected under executive privilege.

The government claimed Fauci should not be required to answer the plaintiff’s questions or provide records related to his capacity as NIAID director or related to his capacity as Biden’s chief medical officer. Additionally, the government sought to withhold records and responses from Jean-Pierre.

Judge Doughty on Tuesday broke the stalemate by ruling that both Fauci and Jean-Pierre must comply with the interrogatories and hand over the requested records.

“First,” Judge Doughty said in the ruling, “the requested information is obviously very relevant to Plaintiffs’ claims. Dr. Fauci’s communications would be relevant to Plaintiffs’ allegations in reference to alleged suppression of speech relating to the lab-leak theory of COVID-19’s origin, and to alleged suppression of speech about the efficiency of masks and COVID-19 lockdowns. Jean-Pierre’s communications as White House Press Secretary could be relevant to all of Plaintiffs’ examples.”

According to Judge Doughty:

“Government Defendants are making a blanket assertion of all communications to social media platforms by Dr. Fauci, and Jean-Pierre based upon executive privilege and presidential communications privilege.

“Plaintiffs concede they are not asking for any internal White House communications, but only external communications between Dr. Fauci and/or Jean-Pierre and third-party social media platforms.

“This Court believes Plaintiffs are entitled to external communications by Jean-Pierre and Dr. Fauci in their capacities as White House Press Secretary and Chief Medical Advisor to the President to third-party social media platforms.”

Judge Doughty ordered Fauci and Jean-Pierre to comply within 21 days, and said Fauci must provide complete answers to questions about his role as NIAID director.

In response to the ruling, a Biden administration official defended the administration’s actions, telling Fox News, “As we have said over and over again since the beginning of the administration in our battle against COVID-19, it has been critical for the American people to have access to factual, accurate, science-based information.”

“We believe in and we support freedom of speech, and we also believe it is important for all media platforms, including social media, to represent factual scientific information and combat misinformation and disinformation that can cost lives,” the official concluded.

However, Mary Holland, president and general counsel of Children’s Health Defense, told The Defender the ruling is “really good news.”

Holland said:

“Up until now, Dr. Fauci has operated under this cloak of ‘untouchableness,’ thinking he has been above the law. He likely didn’t expect his emails to be made public.

“We can only imagine what this tranche of emails will likely reveal about Dr. Fauci’s bare-knuckled censorship — it won’t be pretty.”

Holland said Judge Doughty’s ruling was “even-handed” because he “granted some of the Plaintiff Attorney Generals’ discovery requests and denied others.”

For instance, Doughty denied the Plaintiffs’ request that the HHS conduct a search for relevant records among its 80,000 employees because it would be “unduly burdensome.” However, he said the HHS employees identified in the documents from Meta needed to respond to the discovery requests.

Holland added:

“Most importantly, the court ordered that Dr. Fauci’s and Karine Jean-Pierre’s external emails to social media platforms must be produced by September 27, within 21 days of the ruling.

“Stay tuned and get the popcorn. Those emails likely will reveal how the censorship has worked — and the path to ending it now.”

Jenin Younes, litigation counsel for the New Civil Liberties Alliance and a lawyer for some of the Plaintiffs, told The Epoch Times:

“We know from the previous round of discovery that efforts to censor the speech of those who disagree with the government on covid policy have come from the top.

“Americans deserve to know Anthony Fauci’s participation in this enterprise, especially since he has publicly demanded that specific individuals, including two of our clients, Jay Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, be censored on social media.”

“It is time for Dr. Fauci to answer for his flagrant disregard for Americans’ constitutional rights and civil liberties,” Younes added.

New Civil Liberties Alliance in August joined the lawsuit, stating in its case summary that the suit also represents epidemiologists and co-authors of the Great Barrington Declaration, Drs. Jayanta Bhattacharya and Martin Kulldorff, as well as Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Jill Hines.

Plaintiffs push to interrogate other Biden officials, file amended complaint

As part of Tuesday’s ruling, Judge Doughty also granted the plaintiffs’ request to question additional government officials based on their review of the records obtained from their previous discovery request.

Although Fauci and Jean-Pierre did not comply with the initial discovery request, the government records that were obtained “unveiled an army of federal censorship bureaucrats, including officials arrayed at the White House, HHS, DHS, CISA, the CDC, NIAID, the Office of the Surgeon General, the Census Bureau, the FDA, the FBI, the State Department, the Treasury Department, and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission,” the NCLA said in a Sept. 1 press release.

“Communications show these federal officials are fully aware that the pressure they exert is an effective and necessary way to induce social-media platforms to increase censorship. The head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency even griped about the need to overcome social-media companies’ ‘hesitation’ to work with the government,” NCLA said.

The defendants identified 45 officials across five federal agencies as the officials who communicated with social media companies about misinformation and censorship.

However, email and other documents provided by Meta, Twitter and Google showed several other officials — including officials at other federal agencies and the White House — were involved in the effort.

Moreover, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg recently disclosed that the FBI contacted him about disinformation before the 2020 election — and that Facebook suppressed the circulation of the first Hunder Biden laptop story.

“With each of these new revelations, Plaintiffs have approached Defendants and requested that they supplement their discovery responses to include responsive communications from the newly disclosed federal officials,” the Plaintiffs said in a recent filing.

“Defendants have refused to do so, on the grounds that none of these newly discovered officials have been sued or served with discovery as yet, and that it would be unduly burdensome to identify and produce their communications.”

The plaintiffs asked to file an amended complaint, allowing them to name all the additional officials as defendants to address the issues.

The amended complaint, they said, will allow them to request records and information from each of the officials who were not initially disclosed by the Biden administration.

Judge Doughty on Tuesday gave the plaintiffs 30 days to file an amended complaint with the additional agencies and/or individuals. [MORE]

Analysis by German Professors Suggests COVID Injections are Causing Excess Deaths in Germany and Elsewhere. Nevertheless, Government Authorities Continue with Slow Motion Extermination

From [HERE] Truth was the first casualty in the war on COVID-19.

Trusted sources of medical information became propaganda outlets and when that wasn’t enough, governments that controlled the raw data on which medical analysis was based withheldand even falsified that data.

All along, we have been piecing together indirect evidence. It paints a picture of a devastating toll from vaccine injuries in the past year.

No drug product in the past has come close to causing injuries on this scale. Injuries from the worst vaccines occurred at a rate of about 1/90th of the mRNA vaccines.

Thalidomide maimed tens of thousands of European babies, but the U.S. Food and Drug Administration was still protecting us in 1961. Compare this to 1.4 million vaccine injuries and 30,000 deaths in the last year-and-a-half, counting only those that were reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, or VAERS.

The only comparable drug disaster was oxycontin, which led to about 20,000 overdose deaths in its worst year.

The evidence is radioactive. No one in government wants to count up the deaths and injuries because of the political ramifications. Most medical researchers, even at universities, depend on money from the National Institutes of Health and the drug industry.

Hence, it’s refreshing to see an honest analysis of apparently honest government data. Theanalysis comes from Christof Kuhbandner and Matthias Reitzner, professors of sociology and mathematics, respectively, at two German universities.

The data is from the German Federal Statistical Office (Bundesamt für Statistik). I’m grateful to a fellow Substacker who writes under the pseudonym Eugyppius for calling my attention to this article and placing it in context.

Of course, what we would like to have is a count of deaths and hospitalizations due to COVID-19 and corresponding counts for deaths and hospitalizations due to the vaccines. This data has been disguised or deleted by governments around the world. The very definition of causality has been gamed for these two cases.

Draw your own conclusions.

But data on all-cause mortality are more difficult to disguise or reinterpret, as our two authors are quick to point out. This is a simple list of people who died, together with their age and sex, and with no overlaid story about how they met their demise.

The point is that we can find patterns in this data that hold implications for COVID-19 epidemiology and policy.

The data: Whatever started killing young, healthy people in Germany began in April 2021 

Here’s the bottom line: In 2020, we see a slight excess of death in the oldest age group, too small to be significant. In 2021, we see a large excess of death in young and middle-aged people.

Figure 5 (above) from the paper shows that even though COVID-19 was ravaging the globe in 2020, and COVID-19 deaths were heavily concentrated in the elderly, we can barely detect a (statistically insignificant) rise in mortality in 2020, for the oldest of the old.

This suggests that in 2020, COVID-19 deaths were largely confined to people who were old and sick, and would probably have died of something else if the virus had not hit them first.

But look at mortality in 2021. We see excess mortality in all the younger age groups. Yet once again, for the second year of COVID-19, there was nothing significant in people over 80.

If we think of 2021 as “the year of the vaccine,” our first impression is that the vaccine was a wash for people over 80 — the vaccine cost about as many lives as it saved.

But for people younger than 80, the costs outweighed the benefits.

Governments and their mouthpieces in the media would like to attribute the 2021 excess deaths to COVID-19 and lockdown measures. But this theory has two major issues.

First, why would there be more deaths from lockdown measures in 2021, if the measures were more restrictive in 2020?

Second, why would COVID-19 be more lethal in 2021, if Germans were protected by a vaccine?

Is it possible the lockdowns took nine months before their effect was felt? If so, why were the young disproportionately affected?

The authors of the academic paper stick to “just the facts, ma’am.” Except for one understated paragraph, they never use the word “vaccine.”

But they demonstrate that whatever it was that started killing young, healthy people, it began in April 2021.