Link to the Citizens Petition on the FDA site - this is an excellently written document discussing the applicable law, legislative history, the wrongful actions committed by the FDA, HHS and DOD during the faked c…

Read more

Video available on YouTube (but probably hidden in search):

Read more

Read more

Recently, Robert Malone, in his usual fashion, realized that he can no longer deny that the PREP Act is a fundamental problem, and published a misleading article, full of contradictions and plainly wrong statements - such as claiming that if the PREP Act covid declaration is terminated, covid shots won’t be covered by NVICP! They were never covered by NVICP in the first place. They belong to a different unfunded black hole - Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP). It appears Malone’s article was written largely by AI and nobody checked its hallucinations. Malone also pretends that my colleagues and I do not understand the difference between the PREP Act itself (requires Congressional repeal) and the emergency declarations made by the HHS Scy under PREP Act. Rest assured, we do. It’s Malone who is misrepresenting the facts here. This post by Katherine Watt explains the true facts with respect to this law and what HHS Scy can and cannot do.

Bailiwick News

Repealing PREP Act and terminating HHS Secretary determinations and declarations issued under PREP Act are two different things.

Responding to some questions posted under Sasha Latypova’s Meltdown at the FDA while 23 States, 2 Governors +DC Sue HHS/Sec Kennedy. In the meantime, the PREP Act declaration for covid pandemic remains in place... about the difference between repealing the PREP Act and terminating PREP Act determinations and declarations issued by HHS Secretaries throu…

Read more

a year ago · 156 likes · Katherine Watt

Bottom line, friends don’t let friends read nonsense from the likes of Malone.

End of PSA.

Hogan Petition to SCOTUS

My focus today is the petition to the Supreme Court filed by plaintiffs in the case that was dismissed by the Supreme Court of Maine ruling that injecting a child with an EUA Countermeasure (covid shot) against parental consent did not break the law, siding with the pre-emption of the state law by PREP Act. This ruling directly contradicted that of the Supreme Court of North Carolina, in a very similar case. I have written about both cases:

For background about PREP Act and why I consider it unconstitutional see this article:

Legal briefing about federally-declared Countermeasures under PREP Act emergency declaration:

Hogan SCOTUS petition challenges a ruling by the Maine Supreme Court, which held that 42 U.S.C. § 247d-6d (the PREP Act) preempts state common-law claims, including battery and constitutional injuries, when a federally declared "countermeasure" (such as a vaccine) is administered to minors without parental consent. The Petitioners argue that the PREP Act's immunity provisions, as interpreted by the Maine court, are unconstitutional.

Broad Preemption and Immunity under the PREP Act (as interpreted by Maine):

The Maine Supreme Court's core finding was that "42 U.S.C. § 247d-6d preempts state actions asserting battery and constitutional injuries resulting from injections of minors without parental consent when a federally declared 'countermeasure' is the injection at issue." The court held that even a provider's "failure to obtain parental consent in this individual instance does not make the administered vaccine... any less of a 'covered countermeasure' under § 247d-6d(i)(1)(C)."

Summary of the Petitioners' argument:

1. Exceeding Enumerated Powers: Congress lacks the constitutional authority to regulate health matters (like vaccine administration) or the practice of medicine within states, as these fall under the Tenth Amendment's reserved police powers.

2. Lack of Interstate Commerce Connection: The PREP Act, particularly concerning intrastate vaccine administration, has no substantial effect on interstate commerce, which is the primary basis for federal legislative power in this area. The Petitioners argue that "the act of giving an unwanted vaccine to a student in an elementary school in Maine simply has no substantial effect on interstate commerce." Drawing parallels to United States v. Lopez (1995) and Jones v. United States (2000), they assert that intrastate activities like a student vaccination at a local school do not fall under the Commerce Clause.

3. Deprivation of Due Process and Right to Jury Trial: The PREP Act, by granting broad immunity, effectively denies injured parties access to state courts and the right to a jury trial for common-law torts, violating the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments. Petitioners argue that Maine law recognizes a common-law battery claim with a right to a jury trial (Maine Constitution, Art. I, § 20). The PREP Act, as applied, "unconstitutionally deprives parties injured by the... unwanted vaccine" of their right to sue in state court and to a jury trial. Under the PREP Act, claims are limited to "death or serious injury" based on "willful misconduct" and must be filed in Washington, D.C. (§ 247d-6d(e)(1)), or an administrative claim through the "Covered Countermeasure Process Fund" (§ 247d-6e), which is dependent on Congressional appropriations. This scheme, they argue, leaves "injured parties without a real remedy or access to the courts in their own state, and without the right to a jury trial there, is violative of both substantive and procedural due process."

4. Violation of Parental Control and Bodily Integrity: Administering a vaccine to a minor without parental consent, and then granting immunity for such an act, abridges the fundamental constitutional rights to bodily integrity (of the child) and parental control (of the parents) under the Fourteenth Amendment. Parental rights are described as a "fundamental liberty interest" under the Fourteenth Amendment (Santosky v. Kramer, 1982), and are "inextricably linked with the parents’ interest in and obligation for the welfare and health of the child" (Parham v. J.R., 1979).

5. Unconstitutional "Commandeering" of State Courts: The PREP Act compels state courts to dismiss otherwise valid state-law claims, thereby "commandeering" state judicial processes in violation of the Tenth Amendment and established Supreme Court precedent. The Petitioners argue that the PREP Act, by compelling state courts to dismiss valid state-law claims, "commandeers" the state judicial apparatus, which is unconstitutional. They refer to the "anticommandeering doctrine" established in New York v. United States (1992) and reinforced in Printz v. United States (1997) and Murphy v. NCAA (2018).

6. Abnormal Legislative Adoption: The PREP Act was inserted into an appropriations bill at the last minute, bypassing normal legislative deliberation and debate, raising concerns about its legitimacy and scope.

7. Conflict in State Courts: There is a "confusion and conflict in state courts" regarding the application and scope of the PREP Act's immunity provisions, warranting Supreme Court review.

Additionally, the petition points out that the PREP Act's provisions were "inserted into an appropriations bill at the last minute… without undergoing the open deliberations and debate that are fundamental to the democratic process." This violates House Rule XXI and Senate Rule XVI, which "prohibit ‘legislation’ from being added to an appropriation bill." This "abnormal adoption" means "no Congressional or Committee Reports related to the PREP Act provisions in the legislative history of this act," and thus "no Congressional review or debate was held concerning the meaning and constitutional import of the provisions therein."

The passage of this legislation was described in detail in these posts by :

Bailiwick News

Senators Kennedy, Biden, Clinton, Byrd, denouncing PREP Act on Dec. 21, 2005, and then committing treason by voting for it the same day.

Orientation for new readers; American Domestic Bioterrorism Program; Tools for dismantling kill box anti-law…

Read more

a year ago · 166 likes · Katherine Watt

Bailiwick News

Erwin Chemerinsky letter to Senate, Dec. 20, 2005, on unconstitutional PREP Act.

Erwin Chemerinsky submitted a letter, dated Dec. 20, 2005, to Senator Patrick Leahy, which was entered into the Congressional Record dated Dec. 21, 2005…

Read more

a year ago · 107 likes · Katherine Watt

Question Presented for Certiorari

Since the North Carolina Supreme Court recently concluded that the PREP Act did not provide immunity against constitutional torts, in direct contradiction to the ruling of the Maine Supreme Court, the Petitioners emphasize a confusion and conflict in state courts regarding the application of the PREP Act.

Is 42 U.S.C. § 247d-6d, when read to grant immunity against all state-law claims in favor of parties who administer a vaccine to a child when the parents of that child have not consented thereto, constitutional?

This is a GREAT question! We await the answer.

Art for today: Purple Irises, oil on panel, 9x12 in.

Read more

My prediction was that the KS case would be dismissed like the TX case, but so far, i…

Read more

Letters from the Underworld - Part 1

Letters from the Underworld - Part 2

Letters from the Underworld - Part 3

Read more

Interview video link

Read more

Link to video on Rumble

Brief: The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act.

1. Purpose - liability shield for those who cause death and injury during arbitrarily declared “public health emergencies”:

• The PREP Act (2005) is federal legislation designed to provide immunity from liability for certain individuals and entities involved in the development, manufacture, distribution, and administration of "covered countermeasures" during a declared public health emergency. [Wiki]

• The Act is activated upon the declaration of a Public Health Emergency (PHE) by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS). Such declaration is entirely arbitrary, based solely on the HHS Scy opinion that requires no justification and is non-reviewable by the judiciary branch, nor by Congress.

  • Nothing to declare

  • Pandemics are arbitrary declarations by HHS Secretary, requiring no evidence

  • Declaration of a pandemic sets up a legal cage

  • “Weaponized pathogens” cannot cause pandemics, and Ralph Baric explains

  • Fraudulent “science” of weaponized viruses

  • Pfizer failed to make animals sick from SARS-Cov-2

  • Pandemics are faked: the DOD script and Dutch/Erasmus script

  • Pandemics are a government-pharma racket - Col Matt Hepburn (DARPA)

  • Biodefense is a global pandemic racketeering enterprise

  • Natural epidemics are explained by lack of sanitation and anaphylaxis by animal/insect bites

  • Why are they doing it - eugenics documentary

• The PREP Act is currently invoked for countermeasures related to COVID-19, Marburg virus, Ebola, Zika, avian flu, RSV, monkeypox, anthrax, and smallpox. There are no pandemics or epidemics of these diseases in the United States, therefore, these declaration have no basis in reality, nor do they serve any public health interests:

  • Covid emergency extended to Dec 2029

  • Marburg and Ebola

    

    These are fake “emergencies” currently declared by HHS. There are no pandemics or epidemics of any of these diseases in the US. These declarations are in place solely to spend taxpayers’ money on purchasing unregulated and falsely labeled poisons, force them on duped civilians and military servicemembers, and then avoid any liability for death and injuries caused.

2. Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for deploying “Covered Countermeasures”:

• The PREP Act enables the “non-investigational” (outside of the law, regulations and liability-free) Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) pathway for drugs, vaccines and other medical products:

  • Section 564 of FD&CA

• EUA pathway allows for the bypassing of ALL regulatory requirements for clinical trials, manufacturing quality, safety, and labeling due to non-enforcement of those laws for countermeasures under arbitrarily-declared pandemic emergency:

  • FDA Guidance on EUA Countermeasures

  • Pharmaceutical law/regs do not apply to EUA Countermeasures

  • Nobody knows what is in the vials

• Under 21 USC 360bbb-3(k), the "use" of EUA products "shall not constitute clinical investigation," making informed consent inapplicable/meaningless:

  • EUA Countermeasures are non-investigational

  • FDA and DOD removed informed consent for covid shots

  • Peter Marks testifies that FDA removed informed consent for covid shots

  • Q&A re EUA Countermeasures

• The definition of "covered countermeasures" is vague and includes vaccines, therapeutics, diagnostics, treatments, and other items. This definition can even extend to targeting technologies (mandates for false-positive PCR or lateral flow tests), as well as sophisticated informational weaponry, such as coordinated media lies, propaganda and censorship.

  • Memo re EUA Countermeasures, applicable law

  • PREP Act shields hospital murder protocols as long as HHS orders are followed

3. Liability Protection:

• “Covered Persons”: the PREP Act provides a significant liability shield to a wide range of individuals and entities, including manufacturers, distributors, program planners, qualified persons (like pharmacists and pharmacy technicians), and healthcare providers.

• As long as these "covered persons" follow the orders of HHS/DOD and comply with protocols, they are generally exempt from civil liability for injuries or deaths resulting from the administration or use of covered countermeasures.

• This liability shield applies regardless of the place of employment, and covered persons may be "deemed US Government employees for purposes of this work".

• This protection is even described as potentially covering "bribery, coercion, assault and murder" if they occur within the context of a PREP Act declared emergency and related activities.

• While criminal liability is technically not shielded by the PREP Act, the criminal pathway is available only if the state brings criminal charges first and wins:

  • Analysis of possible state-level criminal action under PREP

  • Criminal statutes relevant to covid crimes by state

• Products authorized under EUA during a PHE and any products used to treat the injury resulting from use of EUA countermeasures can be considered "countermeasures" under the PREP Act, removing liability and enabling further injuries to the public:

  • All vaccines can be deemed liability-free “countermeasures” while any declaration of emergency is extended

4. Department of Defense (DOD) Involvement:

• Operation Warp Speed was a public-private partnership under military command (DOD was the Chief Operating Officer) reporting to the National Security Council. The decisions about covid response policy were made in secret and remain classified to date.

  • Covid Dossier

  • Intent to Harm

  • The hidden hand - NSC and the Military

  • DOD/CIA linked Resilience manufactures mRNA vaccines

  • Why DOD partnered with HHS

  • The role of DOD and their co-investors in covid countermeasures

  • Catherine Austin Fitts on DOD

• Information from a leaked audio recording from AstraZeneca shows that the DOD declared COVID-19 a "national security threat" as early as February 4, 2020, without any factual justification. This timing aligns with the retroactive declaration of the emergency under PREP Act for COVID-19.

  • DOD pushed pandemic actions/money ahead of POTUS (Tump 1.0)

• Contracts for these countermeasures are managed by the DOD and may describe the products as having "civil and military application".

  • DOD contracts for covid countermeasures and here, here, and here

  • Moderna DOD contracts and here

  • State pharmacy distribution laws do not apply to EUA Countermeasures

5. No Legal Recourse for the Injured:

• The PREP Act severely limits the ability of individuals injured or the families of those who died after using a covered countermeasure to seek legal remedies.

• Lawsuits can only be filed in a three-judge court in the District of Columbia.

• Plaintiffs must prove direct causality between the countermeasure and the injury or death AND demonstrate "willful misconduct" on the part of the defendant.

• Even if causality and willful misconduct are proven, the defendant is not liable if they followed HHS/DOD orders and reported the injury or death to these agencies within seven days.

• To date, covid shot manufacturers, hospitals and doctors participating in murder protocols, the DOD and other defendants successfully invoked "sovereign immunity" as a defense against lawsuits related to PREP Act countermeasures. Only one court, NC Supreme Court found that some state constitutional rights are not preempted by PREP Act.

6. No Oversight:

• The PREP Act strips Congress of its authority to oversee or terminate emergency declarations made unilaterally by the HHS Secretary.

• It also removes the authority of federal courts to review or nullify these declarations and pre-empts the jurisdiction of the states.

7. Relevant Litigation Discussed on this Substack:

• North Carolina Supreme Court finds PREP Act does not preempt constitutional claims

• Maine Supreme Court finds PREP Act shields those who inject children against parental consent

• DOD/pharmas use claims of “sovereign immunity” to dismiss wrongful death lawsuits (Watts v DOD)

• Brook Jackson v Pfizer, whistleblower lawsuit under False Claims Act and here

• DOJ confirms that fraud and resulting deaths and injuries from covid shots are part of the US public health policy (Brook Jackson case)

• TX v Pfizer - dismissed affirming state law preemption by PREP Act

• KS v Pfizer

• Dressen v AZ - contractual claims not preempted by PREP, and here

• Analysis of constitutional issues of PREP Act by attorney Ray Flores

8. What can you do to dismantle PREP Act and help the victims:

• Pray.

• Share this information widely, attribution is nice but not necessary.

• States can nullify PREP Act as it violates the rights of states and their citizens - please talk to your legislators.

• US Congress can repeal the PREP Act as unconstitutional [Chemerinsky opinion], [Biden Clinton quotes], [other ref]
  

  Sign Petition to Repeal Prep Act

  is organizing the work on this petition. Please make sure to include your congressional district (for US residents). You can sign the petition even if you are not a US resident. We appreciate your support!

• Please join me calling on HHS Secretary RFK Jr to terminate the contrived emergency declarations, closing the window for lethal/damaging products and acts of deception on the public:

• Do not comply, become vaccine-hostile, do not take any countermeasures nor any PCR tests. Avoid establishment healthcare as much as possible (they track your vaccination status), shield your children from from pediatricians that push poison:

  • Katherine Watt on habeas corpus and communicable disease control

  • Katherine Watt - comprehensive set of tools to dismantle evil law including PREP Act

In conclusion:

Katherine Watt refers to the framework created by the PREP Act and related legislation as the "American Domestic Bioterrorism Program", arguing that it legalized actions that were previously illegal under the guise of public health. This constitutes an overthrow of the U.S. Constitution.

• Memo prepared for Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) in December 2022

PREP Act creates a "license to kill" with covered weaponry/”countermeasures” by covered persons, as long as the perpetrators claim they are acting in an emergency in the interests of public health and HHS’ orders are followed.

PREP Act must be repealed. Yet, not a single Congress person speaks about it. I don’t know when/if material progress toward this goal will be made. In the meantime, we must educate everyone around us about this atrocity. The problem is that most people, even those who are now awake to the vaccine and hospital murders still think that “if fraud can be proven” than the perps can be prosecuted. The fraud has not only been definitively proven, it hasn’t been really hidden to begin with and it is a key feature of weaponized “public health”. Fraud and resulting deaths have been acknowledged by the Department of Justice who stated in court that they are part of the US public health policy.

For further reading:

In-depth analysis of the PREP Act and Countermeasures Law by (see Book 2, also liked in the article below):

Bailiwick News

Bailiwick reporting organized by subject

Orientation for new readers; American Domestic Bioterrorism Program; Tools for dismantling kill box anti-law…

Read more

a year ago · 90 likes · Katherine Watt

For a one time donation:

Buy me a kofi

Art for today: Still life with a terracotta warrior, oil on panel 12x24 in.

Media Contact: Rachel Rodriguez, Esq.

Vires Law Group

Phone: (561) 370-7383

rrodriguez@vireslaw.group

www.vireslaw.group

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

The Vires Law Group (VLG), with the support of the Former Feds Group Freedom Foundation, announces the filing of a request to Arizona Attorney General, Kris Mayes, for a criminal investigation of Dr. Anthony Fauci and other officials for alleged crimes committed against citizens of Arizona prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. The filing is specific to Arizona state criminal statutes and contains information of thirty-six (36) victims to include letters from nine (9) of the families of these victims. Similar filings have been submitted on behalf of their respective constituents to the Attorneys General and District Attorneys of Florida, Louisiana, Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania.

This effort to investigate Dr. Fauci and other accused persons is supported by donations from individuals and organizations such as the Diamond Mind Foundation and the Fight Like A Flynn PAC run by former National Security Advisor, retired Lieutenant General Mike Flynn.

Families of the victims request investigation into the deaths of their loved ones under Covid hospital protocols, intentional COVID-19 infection mismanagement, and suppression and denial of life-saving treatments in Arizona hospitals, nursing homes, and other facilities. Thanks to the efforts of victims around the country, there are currently two open criminal investigations by county prosecutors in two states at the time of this press release. Some of the alleged violations of Arizona criminal statues include:

- Murder and/or Involuntary Manslaughter and/or Negligent Homicide

- Assault and/or Aggravated Assault

- Vulnerable Adult Abuse and/or Emotional Abuse

- AZ Anti-Racketeering

- Terrorism

- Trafficking of Persons for Forced Labor or Services

- Kidnapping

In addition to Anthony Fauci, the following individuals and officers are subjects of the requested investigation:

Cliff Lane, Deputy Director, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases

Francis Collins, ex-Director, National Institutes of Health

Deborah Birx, ex-White House COVID Response Coordinator & former Director of DOD HIV Research at Walter Reed Army Institute of Research

Rochelle Walensky, ex-Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Stephen Hahn, ex-Commissioner, Federal Drug Administration

Janet Woodcock, Principal Deputy Commissioner, Federal Drug Administration

Peter Hotez, Dean for the National School of Tropical Medicine & Professor of Pediatrics and Molecular Virology and Microbiology, Baylor College of Medicine

Robert Redfield, ex-Director, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Peter Daszak, President, Eco-Health Alliance

Ralph Baric, Professor, University of North Carolina

Rick Bright, Former Director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority

The Administrators and Healthcare Providers of several hospital systems and facilities providing care to patients in Arizona

The VLG attorneys who extensively researched and compiled the filing, along with many other concerned citizens, believe that it is essential that the Arizona Attorney General and her staff conduct a thorough investigation to determine if the evidence contained in the submission, together with further evidence to be uncovered, substantiates indictment and prosecution of the identified suspects for the alleged crimes. If the evidence provides probable cause that crimes have been committed, then it is expected that the State of Arizona will prosecute the accused to the fullest extent of the law.

Calls for accountability are coming from all over the nation and even the halls of Congress as expressed by Senators Ron Johnson, Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and many others. Based on the current legal landscape, if these culpable federal officers and former officers are ever to be held accountable and punished for their COVID-related crimes, such justice must be delivered by a state or county level criminal process. We urge the people of Arizona to stand with these victims and their families and support the District Attorneys and Attorney General in bringing to light the truth of the victims' suffering and death, and the suffering of their families, and in bringing justice against these egregious crimes.

If you would like to donate to support this effort, you may make a tax-deductible gift at https://formerfedsgroup.org/donate/ and designate it for "AG Action".

© 2025, Vires Law Group, PLLC

My previous post with the information on criminal statutes by state applicable to the covid cartel crimes:

Short bios:

Rachel L.T. Rodriguez, Esq.

Rachel calls West Palm Beach, Florida home, though she is from Atlanta, Georgia and pursued her education through Wheaton College in Illinois and Rutgers University, School of Law in New Jersey. Prior to opening Vires Law Group, Rachel was a founding partner of the Florida office of Toikka Law Group. She is also privileged to work with Thomas More Society as special counsel on matters pertaining to religious liberty.

In 2021, Rachel was drawn to fight the egregious abuses of law and violations of civil rights in the handling of the Covid-19 pandemic by representing firefighters and first responders against Orange County, Florida against the county's vaccination mandate. She also sued the county on behalf of parents to challenge the public school board's mask mandate. Since then, she has challenged these legal abuses by employers at the Washington Nationals Baseball Club, Disney, Orange County, Amgen, Morgan & Morgan, and other employers.

Additionally, Rachel is working with a national coalition of advocates to expose the abject failure of care for hospitalized Covid patients and to bring justice to their families and criminal penalties for those responsible.

As a mother of three young children, Rachel feels called to use her skills as an attorney to fight for our God-given rights and freedoms for the generations to come.

Mimi Miller, Esq.

Mimi received an undergraduate degree from George Fox University and a J.D. from Penn State Dickinson Law School. While in law school, Mimi published multiple articles in legal journals covering topics such as international human rights law violations, cyber law, healthcare law, and criminal law. She also worked on projects and internships involving elder abuse education and legislation, defense of individual’s First Amendment Rights with the Pacific Justice Institute, and information warfare with U.S. Army Cyber Command. After graduating law school, Mimi worked as a criminal prosecutor before moving to Florida and joining Vires Law Group as a Litigation Consultant.

Mimi believes that we must fight to uphold the rule of law, for the truth to be made known, and for justice to prevail.

Art for today: Roses and Lilies, oil on panel, 9x12 in.

I was invited to present at the summit by . The summit was very well organized and well attended, and during live streaming reached approx 70K viewers. The format was a panel discussion with 20 min initial presentations (no-slides) by the speakers. The first panel of the day focused on “technocracy” and the se…

Read more

I hate to do this on the New Year’s eve - bring you disappointing news, and yet another “I told you so”, but I feel this is important information which may be overlooked during the holiday time. The AG Paxton’s (TX) case against Pfizer for deceptive marketing practices under TX law has been dismissed. The judge cited PREP Act as the reason for dismissal as it pre-empts state law and regulatory authority.

Link to court filing.

The AG of Kansas filed a very similar lawsuit in the summer of 2024, which I am certain will be dismissed, too.

Both and I have written extensively about Prep Act and EUA law, describing them as the wall of the legal kill box that must be dismantled before any justice and accountability can begin for the covid crimes. As HHS Scy, RFK Jr can terminate the PREP Act declarations for covid and other fake “pandemic” emergencies (now active until end of 2029), but the PREP Act itself must be nullified by legislators. States can nullify the federal law, and the US Congress can act, too. AGs of states have authority to bring criminal charges, instead of filing pointless civil complaints.

Here are key materials from Katherine every attorney and plaintiff should know by heart now:

Orientation for new readers; American Domestic Bioterrorism Program; Tools for dismantling kill box anti-law

Here I am re-posting previous articles with mine and Katherine Wat’s analyses of the lawsuits by AGs of TX and KS, published in 2023-2024.

AG of Kansas suing Pfizer! Justice almost here... It's happening...

I was asked by many readers to comment on the recent lawsuit by the Attorney General of Kansas against Pfizer for violating state’s deceptive marketing laws and injuring consumers.

Just a reminder, friends, I told you so many months ago:

For the brief answer to the current case by AG of KS, I am going to quote Katherine here, because I completely agree with her.

KS AG lawsuit v Pfizer:

In my view, it’s another nothingburger/distraction from public health emergency kill box laws and contracts (federal, state, local, international) and the criminal cabal comprised of DoD, HHS, FDA and pharma manufacturers, jointly engaged (with many other government agencies, and NGOs) in intentional worldwide poisoning campaigns.

Like Texas/AG Paxton v. Pfizer, the Kansas case is being brought under state consumer product/consumer protection laws.

Covid vaccines are not consumer products.

They’re not subject to consumer protection or deceptive marketing laws.

Pfizer is not a private company.

In the PREP/EUA/DPA context, under PREP Act and Defense Production Act, Pfizer is a branch of the US government, and therefore immune from suit.

Pfizer never had any legal obligation to conduct valid clinical trials or report valid, truthful safety and efficacy data to FDA or to the public.

FDA is not a regulatory agency.

FDA is a regulatory-simulation agency, with a mission to deceive the public into believing the lies that regulation of unregulated and unregulatable, undefined and undefinable biological products has occurred in the past, is occurring in the present and will occur in the future.

FDA has never had any legal obligation to supervise valid clinical trials for biological products, vaccines or EUA products, ensure the validity of safety and efficacy claims, or apply or enforce cGMP manufacturing rules to ensure safety, efficacy and purity of products to be distributed and used.

Prior reporting on TX v Pfizer lawsuit:

Here is a more detailed analysis of this lawsuit, and the spin narratives around it being hastily proposed on social media for lazy audiences.

Responding to journalists’ questions on why he is suing Pfizer and not other covid vax manufacturers, AG Kobach produced this spin narrative (he actually lied, because he cannot claim incompetence in this). AG Kobach said he is suing Pfizer and not other pharmas because, according to him, Pfizer wasn’t part of the Operation Warp Speed, and did not have enough government supervision! Therefore, they were able to lie and hide the adverse events data from the government.

You can view the video of AG Kobach in this post, where Karen Kingston promotes the same false narrative:

These statements by the AG are not true. That’s a shame. Let’s review. He is lying when he says Pfizer wasn’t part of the Operation Warp Speed:

1. Pfizer was working for the DOD/”whole of government” Operation Warp Speed from the very beginning:

OWS powerpoint slide from an FDA meeting in October 2020:

2. Pfizer was contracted by the DOD and OWS using Other Transactions Authority and Defense Production Authority (both used for secretive weapons purchasing) in contracts totaling up to $10B. The DOD contract with Pfizer clearly states that it is part of the Operation Warp Speed. It also famously orders a “prototype”, i.e. fraud to be delivered from Pfizer:

   

   This method of contracting during declared national emergency (i.e. state of war), and under DPA also makes Pfizer acting not as a private pharma company but as a subsidiary of the US Government. By this legal mechanism, the USG extended sovereign immunity to Pfizer. Pfizer has already invoked this in their legal defense, claiming “derivative sovereign immunity” in Brook Jackson’s case. The US Government, via DOJ also sided with Pfizer, submitting a motion asking the court to dismiss Brook Jackson’s case.

Analysis of the DOD-Pfizer contracts:

3. Federal courts agree that Pfizer was part of the Operation Warp Speed. Here is Judge Truncale’s decision to dismiss Brook Jackson’s case on March 31, 2023:

4. President Trump was super jazzed at the prospect of spending billions from taxpayers on OWS making hi-tech poison shots that nobody needed with Pfizer and other Big Pharmas. Pfizer execs present in this meeting were likewise thrilled to be part of this corporate feeding frenzy and mass murdering exercise masquerading as “public health”:

"President Trump and Members of the Coronavirus Task Force Meet with Pharmaceutical Executives" - 3 March 2020

At 25:00 min:

Mr. President, Mr. Vice President, I'm chief scientist for Pfizer. We are very pleased to be here and for us it's been always important when our major public health threats to come together across the industry with biotechs and federal agencies. So we were highly appreciative of the initiative that you've taken in this powerful way to have all of us around this table.....

5. Pfizer to date insists (correctly) they were, indeed, part of the Operation Warp Speed, here is an article from CNN:

In response, Pfizer spokesperson Sharon Castillo provided a statement that said the company is indeed part of Operation Warp Speed.

6. Numerous press events from Operation Warp Speed/Pentagon mention Pfizer as a key participant of OWS, and often praise Pfizer for providing data early. Nobody EVER accuses Pfizer of hiding any data from the government in these press events.

So, what does AG Kobach mean when he says Pfizer wasn’t part of OWS?

He is excusing his selective prosecution by misrepresenting the fact that Pfizer had their own data safety monitoring board (DSMB) during OWS clinical trials, while the rest of the OWS participants went with the government-run DSMB. This had been, of course, agreed upon with OWS, the US Government and the DOD! Pfizer, as is normal for pharma companies, wanted to be able to access their own data during a clinical trial. The rest of OWS participants agreed to go through the government-run board. Janssen ended up having to file a FOIA to get their own safety data! (I strongly suspect this was the result of Dr. Mike Yeadon pestering Mathai Mammen, at the time head of Janssen vaccine, about adverse events). I met Mathai many years ago when he worked at Theravance, IMO he is not an evil guy, and he quit Janssen leaving potentially millions on the table shortly after this incident. Thereafter, Janssen was punished for their attempt at gaining control of their own data by the FDA suddenly finding some manufacturing problems and associating a few serious adverse events/deaths with their product.

AG Kobach says that the government-operated DSMB would have been a “good” oversight mechanism (and that’s why he is not suing Moderna).

Let’s look at the OWS DSMB that AG Kobach claims would have protected the consumers in Kansas from Pfizer’s lies:

Operation Warp Speed established a single Data Safety Monitoring Board, controlled by the NIH and BARDA.  This is unusual for clinical development where each pharmaceutical sponsor is responsible for establishing their own safety monitoring board and represents a highly significant degree of control as well as a potential for undue influence over the process. As noted above, it is the norm for each pharma clinical trial to establish their own separate DSMB. That is also a more transparent practice, as it is much harder for several DSMBs to collude and hide adverse events. Yet, OWS wanted to control all trials with one secret group of people, and this is “good supervision” in the eyes of AG Kobach.

The NIH/BARDA safety board was overseeing trials in the U.S. from Moderna, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca, but not Pfizer, which was fully funding its clinical trial work and established its own five-member safety panel.  The identities of the 10-15 experts on the OWS safety monitoring board were kept secret. 

This is illustrated by the NIH presentation at the Vaccines and Related Biologicals Advisory Committee Meeting, October 22, 2020:

See the footnote - that’s where Pfizer was “separate”:

This tightly controlled single structure also meant that one board had an outsize influence to dictate which coronavirus vaccines eventually succeeded or came to a halt, all while most of their identities remained secret. The NIH declined to name them, saying they were "confidential" and could be identified only once a study was complete. That has not happened yet. Maybe time for some journalists to ask who these people were?

The identity of the DSMB chair Dr. Richard Whitley, an expert in pediatric infectious diseases at the University of Alabama-Birmingham was the only one publicly disclosed, press article. Do you know how he got that job?

He was appointed as the chair of OWS DSMB by the illustrious Dr. Anthony Fauci!

Govern me harder, daddy, says AG Kobach. If only Pfizer trial had been governed by a secret group headed by a Fauci protégé, there would have been no need for his lawsuit. Pfizer would have been properly supervised!

For the sake of completeness, I reviewed the Moderna - DOD contracts, too. There were some differences in how the DOD/USG contracted with Moderna vs how Pfizer contract was structured, but let’s remember, the DOD agreed with Pfizer about the terms and were happy to award $10B based on those terms. Moderna had 2 types of contracts with the DOD: an R&D contract and a manufacturing supply agreement (the latter very analogous to Pfizer contract). I reviewed Moderna contracts here:

The scope can be summarized as a “contract R&D services for the US Government”. The Government is ordering and paying for pre-clinical, Phase 2 and 3 clinical studies and related CMC (Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls) development. This is different from Pfizer contract which specifically excluded preclinical, clinical trials and CMC part from the scope of the DOD contract. Some of the studies in Moderna contract - most of the animal experiments as well as the human Phase 1 trial, were to be performed by the Vaccine Research Center at the NIH. Why? I suppose, because the government is nice and routinely performs work for private corporations. That’s a joke, of course, the NIH co-own the product, get payouts from Moderna ($400M recently, split with Dartmouth), and then the government buys the product at inflated prices and forces it on all of us.

Yes you read this correctly - Moderna product is a shared property with NIH! The same NIH that set up the data safety monitoring board for the OWS fake clinical trials. Nothing to see here! No conflict! The government properly supervised their own product from which government employees make personal profit! Move along…

You can read more here:

And, lest you think that the US Government ordering and paying for pharmaceutical studies amounts to “good supervision” - Moderna’s animal studies demonstrated fetal deaths and malformations, which Moderna reported to the US Government. The US Government then lied on behalf of Modernal to consumers, pushing shots on young people and especially pregnant women. The FDA label to date states that there are no vaccine-related fetal abnormalities. To date, I am the only person in the world who has read Moderna preclinical package in full and reported on this.

Robert Kennedy Jr thought it was newsworthy at the time. But then he started running to be the head of the executive branch of the US Government…

Next, let’s see whether Pfizer actually hid any data from the US Government, as asserted by AG Kobach.

Turns out no. The US Government agencies have always had access to nearly real-time data from Pfizer trials and all adverse events and deaths data immediately after the mass injections started in December 2020. The US Government has had access to over 11+ various databases that we, mere mortals do not have access to. The US government has always had access to Pfizer clinical trial data. It’s the public and independent researchers like me that got access to it only after a lengthy FOIA and lawsuits. For example, here is a well-publicized “Postmarketing Experience” report that Pfizer provided to HHS/FDA in February 2021, showing over 1200 deaths after vaccination and a sheer mountain of adverse events (this is just a couple of months of the vax rollout).

Was DOD/HHS/FDA/CDC concerned about this awful death and injury toll? Nope! The HHS (CDC, FDA) continued “safe and effective” propaganda, and prosecuted any hint of “vaccine hesitancy” with zeal. Yours truly was cancelled everywhere by the US Government contractors squashing dissent from the official narrative. These were not Pfizer people. Numerous “cybersecurity consultants” and “internet researchers” were hired by government agencies (in this case NYC health department), not Pfizer:

They continue to do so to this day.

Pfizer disclosed data to the regulators and the government. It’s the government that wanted you dead, hired Pfizer for the job, and they continue to lie about these products together with Pfizer, of course. AG Kobach wants to pretend it’s not the case, he wants you to think the government is the good guys, and there should have been more government supervision…

Now, let’s assume AG Kobach is not misrepresenting the rationale behind his selective prosecution. In fact, I agree Pfizer lied. I just vehemently disagree with AG Kobach in regard to whom Pfizer lied to! Let’s go with the narrative that they lied and hid awful things, their vaccine is super deadly and they all deserve to be in jail (true!) However, it appears that Kobach is excusing other participants of OWS (and mRNA tech in general) and says he doesn’t have evidence of harm to the consumers in Kansas in case of those other entities. Does this lame excuse stand up to known vaccine death and injury data scrutiny?

Kansas VAERS data:

Pfizer deaths = 42;

Moderna deaths = 42! But you see, those are GOOD deaths, from the product that was properly supervised by the government! By a Fauci’s appointee. We have no evidence that they are bad deaths…

US VAERS data:

Doses administered:

Given the administered doses, Pfizer is actually relatively safer than Moderna and Janssen.

I hope you can see the AG of Kansas case for what it is - a political stunt, and a fundraising exercise, whitewashing the crimes of the Operation Warp Speed and aiming to preserve the government’s ability to repeat this crime over and over again.

And finally, in case you didn’t know: PREP Act preempts civil lawsuits like this one, but does not in theory preempt criminal prosecution. We, the citizens, cannot bring a criminal case. An Attorney General can. So, given this power, why is AG Kobach brining an empty civil complaint that he cannot win?

In case anyone wants to accuse me of not seeing some clever strategic plan, please don’t bother. It is not possible to arrive at the truth or justice by lying. This toothless case is going nowhere except protecting the US Government, the government company Moderna, the poisonous mRNA tech, OWS and Trump (who endorsed Kobach when he ran for the office of AG of Kansas).

Please do not fall for this.

For a one-time donation

Buy me a ko-fi

Art for today: Rider, pastel and chalk on paper.

In the opening statement, John…

Read more

Link to declaration document.

The HHS Secretary issues this amendment pursuant to section 319F–3 of the Public Health Service Act to extend the duration of the Declaration to December 31, 2029:

Both and I have written about this numerous times. Here is a recent post describing what the incoming HHS Scy should do immediately - terminate the PREP Act protections to the crime cartel and start nullifying the atrocious laws that enable the pandemic preparedness enterprise:

Bailiwick News

Robert F. Kennedy Jr., as HHS Secretary, could withdraw public health emergency, PREP Act and EUA declarations and determinations.

Orientation for new readers; American Domestic Bioterrorism Program; Tools for dismantling kill box anti-law…

Read more

a year ago · 200 likes · Katherine Watt

Art for today: watercolor from my sketchbook.

Read more

I am not commenting on the proposed bill yet as the text of the bill has not been released. The pr…

Read more

Reasons for this collapse are numerous and include:

-Bloated HQ: 331k employees for 13k stores

-Squeezed by pharmacy benefits managers (PBMs)

-Online pharmacies taking share (including pharma companies going to direct Rx)

-Retail theft…

Read more

I congratulated RFK Jr. yesterday and we exchanged text messages. I am reposting this interview from over a year ago, this was recorded before he announced his run for the presidency.

Podcast on Spotify here

Video on Rumble here

Transcript of the interview here

Art for today: Daniel in the Lions’ Den

The original of this painting was sold. There are limited edition prints available, 19x26 in on fine art paper. RFK Jr owns a print of the Daniel.

Just a reminder, friends, I told you so many months ago:

For the brief answer to the current case by AG of KS, I am going to quote Katherine here, because I completely agree with her.

KS AG lawsuit v Pfizer:

In my view, it’s another nothingburger/distraction from public health emergency kill box laws and contracts (federal, state, local, international) and the criminal cabal comprised of DoD, HHS, FDA and pharma manufacturers, jointly engaged (with many other government agencies, and NGOs) in intentional worldwide poisoning campaigns.

Like Texas/AG Paxton v. Pfizer, the Kansas case is being brought under state consumer product/consumer protection laws.

Covid vaccines are not consumer products.

They’re not subject to consumer protection or deceptive marketing laws.

Pfizer is not a private company.

In the PREP/EUA/DPA context, under PREP Act and Defense Production Act, Pfizer is a branch of the US government, and therefore immune from suit.

Pfizer never had any legal obligation to conduct valid clinical trials or report valid, truthful safety and efficacy data to FDA or to the public.

FDA is not a regulatory agency.

FDA is a regulatory-simulation agency, with a mission to deceive the public into believing the lies that regulation of unregulated and unregulatable, undefined and undefinable biological products has occurred in the past, is occurring in the present and will occur in the future.

FDA has never had any legal obligation to supervise valid clinical trials for biological products, vaccines or EUA products, ensure the validity of safety and efficacy claims, or apply or enforce cGMP manufacturing rules to ensure safety, efficacy and purity of products to be distributed and used.

Prior reporting on TX v Pfizer lawsuit:

Here is a more detailed analysis of this lawsuit, and the spin narratives around it being hastily proposed on social media for lazy audiences.

Responding to journalists’ questions on why he is suing Pfizer and not other covid vax manufacturers, AG Kobach produced this spin narrative (he actually lied, because he cannot claim incompetence in this). AG Kobach said he is suing Pfizer and not other pharmas because, according to him, Pfizer wasn’t part of the Operation Warp Speed, and did not have enough government supervision! Therefore, they were able to lie and hide the adverse events data from the government.

You can view the video of AG Kobach in this post, where Karen Kingston promotes the same false narrative:

These statements by the AG are not true. That’s a shame. Let’s review. He is lying when he says Pfizer wasn’t part of the Operation Warp Speed:

1. Pfizer was working for the DOD/”whole of government” Operation Warp Speed from the very beginning:

OWS powerpoint slide from an FDA meeting in October 2020:

2. Pfizer was contracted by the DOD and OWS using Other Transactions Authority and Defense Production Authority (both used for secretive weapons purchasing) in contracts totaling up to $10B. The DOD contract with Pfizer clearly states that it is part of the Operation Warp Speed. It also famously orders a “prototype”, i.e. fraud to be delivered from Pfizer:

   

   This method of contracting during declared national emergency (i.e. state of war), and under DPA also makes Pfizer acting not as a private pharma company but as a subsidiary of the US Government. By this legal mechanism, the USG extended sovereign immunity to Pfizer. Pfizer has already invoked this in their legal defense, claiming “derivative sovereign immunity” in Brook Jackson’s case. The US Government, via DOJ also sided with Pfizer, submitting a motion asking the court to dismiss Brook Jackson’s case.

Analysis of the DOD-Pfizer contracts:

3. Federal courts agree that Pfizer was part of the Operation Warp Speed. Here is Judge Truncale’s decision to dismiss Brook Jackson’s case on March 31, 2023:

4. President Trump was super jazzed at the prospect of spending billions from taxpayers on OWS making hi-tech poison shots that nobody needed with Pfizer and other Big Pharmas. Pfizer execs present in this meeting were likewise thrilled to be part of this corporate feeding frenzy and mass murdering exercise masquerading as “public health”:

"President Trump and Members of the Coronavirus Task Force Meet with Pharmaceutical Executives" - 3 March 2020

At 25:00 min:

Mr. President, Mr. Vice President, I'm chief scientist for Pfizer. We are very pleased to be here and for us it's been always important when our major public health threats to come together across the industry with biotechs and federal agencies. So we were highly appreciative of the initiative that you've taken in this powerful way to have all of us around this table.....

5. Pfizer to date insists (correctly) they were, indeed, part of the Operation Warp Speed, here is an article from CNN:

In response, Pfizer spokesperson Sharon Castillo provided a statement that said the company is indeed part of Operation Warp Speed.

6. Numerous press events from Operation Warp Speed/Pentagon mention Pfizer as a key participant of OWS, and often praise Pfizer for providing data early. Nobody EVER accuses Pfizer of hiding any data from the government in these press events.

So, what does AG Kobach mean when he says Pfizer wasn’t part of OWS?

He is excusing his selective prosecution by misrepresenting the fact that Pfizer had their own data safety monitoring board (DSMB) during OWS clinical trials, while the rest of the OWS participants went with the government-run DSMB. This had been, of course, agreed upon with OWS, the US Government and the DOD! Pfizer, as is normal for pharma companies, wanted to be able to access their own data during a clinical trial. The rest of OWS participants agreed to go through the government-run board. Janssen ended up having to file a FOIA to get their own safety data! (I strongly suspect this was the result of Dr. Mike Yeadon pestering Mathai Mammen, at the time head of Janssen vaccine, about adverse events). I met Mathai many years ago when he worked at Theravance, IMO he is not an evil guy, and he quit Janssen leaving potentially millions on the table shortly after this incident. Thereafter, Janssen was punished for their attempt at gaining control of their own data by the FDA suddenly finding some manufacturing problems and associating a few serious adverse events/deaths with their product.

AG Kobach says that the government-operated DSMB would have been a “good” oversight mechanism (and that’s why he is not suing Moderna).

Let’s look at the OWS DSMB that AG Kobach claims would have protected the consumers in Kansas from Pfizer’s lies:

Operation Warp Speed established a single Data Safety Monitoring Board, controlled by the NIH and BARDA.  This is unusual for clinical development where each pharmaceutical sponsor is responsible for establishing their own safety monitoring board and represents a highly significant degree of control as well as a potential for undue influence over the process. As noted above, it is the norm for each pharma clinical trial to establish their own separate DSMB. That is also a more transparent practice, as it is much harder for several DSMBs to collude and hide adverse events. Yet, OWS wanted to control all trials with one secret group of people, and this is “good supervision” in the eyes of AG Kobach.

The NIH/BARDA safety board was overseeing trials in the U.S. from Moderna, Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca, but not Pfizer, which was fully funding its clinical trial work and established its own five-member safety panel.  The identities of the 10-15 experts on the OWS safety monitoring board were kept secret. 

This is illustrated by the NIH presentation at the Vaccines and Related Biologicals Advisory Committee Meeting, October 22, 2020:

See the footnote - that’s where Pfizer was “separate”:

This tightly controlled single structure also meant that one board had an outsize influence to dictate which coronavirus vaccines eventually succeeded or came to a halt, all while most of their identities remained secret. The NIH declined to name them, saying they were "confidential" and could be identified only once a study was complete. That has not happened yet. Maybe time for some journalists to ask who these people were?

The identity of the DSMB chair Dr. Richard Whitley, an expert in pediatric infectious diseases at the University of Alabama-Birmingham was the only one publicly disclosed, press article. Do you know how he got that job?

He was appointed as the chair of OWS DSMB by the illustrious Dr. Anthony Fauci!

Govern me harder, daddy, says AG Kobach. If only Pfizer trial had been governed by a secret group headed by a Fauci protégé, there would have been no need for his lawsuit. Pfizer would have been properly supervised!

For the sake of completeness, I reviewed the Moderna - DOD contracts, too. There were some differences in how the DOD/USG contracted with Moderna vs how Pfizer contract was structured, but let’s remember, the DOD agreed with Pfizer about the terms and were happy to award $10B based on those terms. Moderna had 2 types of contracts with the DOD: an R&D contract and a manufacturing supply agreement (the latter very analogous to Pfizer contract). I reviewed Moderna contracts here:

The scope can be summarized as a “contract R&D services for the US Government”. The Government is ordering and paying for pre-clinical, Phase 2 and 3 clinical studies and related CMC (Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls) development. This is different from Pfizer contract which specifically excluded preclinical, clinical trials and CMC part from the scope of the DOD contract. Some of the studies in Moderna contract - most of the animal experiments as well as the human Phase 1 trial, were to be performed by the Vaccine Research Center at the NIH. Why? I suppose, because the government is nice and routinely performs work for private corporations. That’s a joke, of course, the NIH co-own the product, get payouts from Moderna ($400M recently, split with Dartmouth), and then the government buys the product at inflated prices and forces it on all of us.

Yes you read this correctly - Moderna product is a shared property with NIH! The same NIH that set up the data safety monitoring board for the OWS fake clinical trials. Nothing to see here! No conflict! The government properly supervised their own product from which government employees make personal profit! Move along…

You can read more here:

And, lest you think that the US Government ordering and paying for pharmaceutical studies amounts to “good supervision” - Moderna’s animal studies demonstrated fetal deaths and malformations, which Moderna reported to the US Government. The US Government then lied on behalf of Modernal to consumers, pushing shots on young people and especially pregnant women. The FDA label to date states that there are no vaccine-related fetal abnormalities. To date, I am the only person in the world who has read Moderna preclinical package in full and reported on this.

Robert Kennedy Jr thought it was newsworthy at the time. But then he started running to be the head of the executive branch of the US Government…

Next, let’s see whether Pfizer actually hid any data from the US Government, as asserted by AG Kobach.

Turns out no. The US Government agencies have always had access to nearly real-time data from Pfizer trials and all adverse events and deaths data immediately after the mass injections started in December 2020. The US Government has had access to over 11+ various databases that we, mere mortals do not have access to. The US government has always had access to Pfizer clinical trial data. It’s the public and independent researchers like me that got access to it only after a lengthy FOIA and lawsuits. For example, here is a well-publicized “Postmarketing Experience” report that Pfizer provided to HHS/FDA in February 2021, showing over 1200 deaths after vaccination and a sheer mountain of adverse events (this is just a couple of months of the vax rollout).

Was DOD/HHS/FDA/CDC concerned about this awful death and injury toll? Nope! The HHS (CDC, FDA) continued “safe and effective” propaganda, and prosecuted any hint of “vaccine hesitancy” with zeal. Yours truly was cancelled everywhere by the US Government contractors squashing dissent from the official narrative. These were not Pfizer people. Numerous “cybersecurity consultants” and “internet researchers” were hired by government agencies (in this case NYC health department), not Pfizer:

They continue to do so to this day.

Pfizer disclosed data to the regulators and the government. It’s the government that wanted you dead, hired Pfizer for the job, and they continue to lie about these products together with Pfizer, of course. AG Kobach wants to pretend it’s not the case, he wants you to think the government is the good guys, and there should have been more government supervision…

Now, let’s assume AG Kobach is not misrepresenting the rationale behind his selective prosecution. In fact, I agree Pfizer lied. I just vehemently disagree with AG Kobach in regard to whom Pfizer lied to! Let’s go with the narrative that they lied and hid awful things, their vaccine is super deadly and they all deserve to be in jail (true!) However, it appears that Kobach is excusing other participants of OWS (and mRNA tech in general) and says he doesn’t have evidence of harm to the consumers in Kansas in case of those other entities. Does this lame excuse stand up to known vaccine death and injury data scrutiny?

Kansas VAERS data:

Pfizer deaths = 42;

Moderna deaths = 42! But you see, those are GOOD deaths, from the product that was properly supervised by the government! By a Fauci’s appointee. We have no evidence that they are bad deaths…

US VAERS data:

Doses administered:

Given the administered doses, Pfizer is actually relatively safer than Moderna and Janssen.

I hope you can see the AG of Kansas case for what it is - a political stunt, and a fundraising exercise, whitewashing the crimes of the Operation Warp Speed and aiming to preserve the government’s ability to repeat this crime over and over again.

And finally, in case you didn’t know: PREP Act preempts civil lawsuits like this one, but does not in theory preempt criminal prosecution. We, the citizens, cannot bring a criminal case. An Attorney General can. So, given this power, why is AG Kobach brining an empty civil complaint that he cannot win?

In case anyone wants to accuse me of not seeing some clever strategic plan, please don’t bother. It is not possible to arrive at the truth or justice by lying. This toothless case is going nowhere except protecting the US Government, the government company Moderna, the poisonous mRNA tech, OWS and Trump (who endorsed Kobach when he ran for the office of AG of Kansas).

Please do not fall for this.

For a one-time donation

Buy me a ko-fi

Art for today: Rabbit, watercolor. Made this for a friend…

The case states that when signing up as a clinical trial participant, she was promised that in case of injury, medical expenses will be covered by AstraZeneca. Bri was 39 yo at the time, completely healthy, athletic, and a mother of 2 young children. She received the injection on November 4, 2020. She had an immediate adverse reaction, and she is now severely injured to the point of being disabled with debilitating demyelination condition, requiring very expensive medical care. She was offered $1200 by AZ as compensation for her injuries, on condition that she releases them from any further financial obligations. The legal complaint states that:

The contractual breach in this case is not that Bri suffered a vaccine reaction on November 4, 2020. The breach is that, once this reaction occurred, Defendants refused to honor their contractual obligations to provide medical care/referrals and cover the costs of the injury.

A question was raised by an attorney (not affiliated with the case): “So far, PREP [Act] has protected against negligence and battery, but will it protect against a breach of Contract (or possibly even fraud)?”

I had an email exchange with on this topic which I am going to summarize here, with some predictions about the legal provisions that the defendants will likely utilize. Our guess is that it’s not going to be so much about PREP Act, it’s going to be about the Defense Production Act.

First, let’s recall that AstraZeneca’s CEO, Pascal Soirot has known since February 4, 2020 that covid was deemed a bioweapon (CBRN agent) attack by the US Government. This was not known to the prospective “clinical trial” participants, and it is still not generally known to the public. It is known to my subscribers (yes, you are special people). Note, this was mostly a faked “bioweapon” and a psychological operation deployed by the US government/DOD, and I will discuss this more fully in future posts. For purposes of this article, it doesn’t matter whether it was a deadly poison or a faked one. What is important - on February 4, 2020 AZ knew that the product they would be testing as “covid vaccine” was subject to a completely different set of laws vs. normal pharmaceutical products - the EUA Countermeasures under Public Health Emergency are not subject to pharmaceutical regulation. They knew the clinical trial regulations did not apply to what they would be representing as a “clinical trial” to people like Brianna. Specifically, no human subject protection laws would be applicable, and that the US Government had obligated itself to throw its full weight to shield them (AZ) from any future liability claims by people like Brianna. AZ received a phone call from DARPA informing them that covid was designated a “national security threat” by the US Government on that day.

Second, let’s recall that the Defense Production Act (DPA) was invoked by President Trump in early 2020, as a consequence of him announcing the National Emergency, and HHS announcing the Public Health Emergency. These announcements were based on no objective criteria whatsoever, as there were practically no cases or deaths in the US or worldwide but, very conveniently, the current US laws do not require any objective evidence of a pandemic for it to be declared! A random PCR sequence of a computer model uploaded to Genbank is sufficient.

Finally, let’s recall that by October 20, 2020, the Operation Warp Speed had officially switched from the pharmaceutical investigational status for their products to the non-investigational EUA Countermeasure status - allowing them to avoid complying with legal protections of human subjects in clinical research. Bri was not informed about this switch, making her signed informed consent document a meaningless piece of paper, but her legal case does not mention this at all.

One thing pharmaceutical companies do extremely well - they know with precision their liability exposure for any action that they take on any day. They employ armies of the best lawyers money can buy for this singular objective. That’s why there is a snowball’s chance in hell that Pascal Soirot or any person that matters did not know their legal “exposure” to this inevitable future lawsuit by a clinical trial participant who was lied to and injected with poison. And I venture to guess that’s why they brazenly offered her an insulting $1200 as a “compensation”.

Once the DPA has been invoked, public-private partnerships and government takeovers of private manufacturing facilities can be conducted through the adoption of “voluntary agreements” and “plans of action”.

Those legal instruments specifically exempt the participants from antitrust laws and contract laws, giving them recourse to the relevant DPA sections in any civil suit or criminal prosecution.

The relevant sections are mostly under 50 USC 4558, including:

• 50 USC 4558(a) - exemption from antitrust laws;

• 50 USC 4558(c)(1) - prerequisite for voluntary agreements and plans of action as substitute for contracts is Presidential finding of a national security threat or emergency

• 50 USC 4558(j) - defenses available in civil and criminal actions

• 50 USC 4558 (o) - preemption of contract law in emergencies

50 USC 4511(a) is also relevant, authorizes government takeover of production facilities.

50 USC 4558(o)

(o)Preemption of contract law in emergencies

“In any action in any Federal or State court for breach of contract, there shall be available as a defense that the alleged breach of contract was caused predominantly by action taken during an emergency to carry out a voluntary agreement or plan of action authorized and approved in accordance with this section. Such defense shall not release the party asserting it from any obligation under applicable law to mitigate damages to the greatest extent possible”.

Bailiwick News

Covid-19 bioweapons and the Defense Production Act of 1950

Reader comment: Karen Kingston just put up another piece about the contract and it's getting weird because it seems like we're talking about two different things entirely. My reply, expanded: I think the divergence lies in the difference between a pharmaceutical corporation operating as a private, commercial business, and a pharmaceutical corporation that …

Read more

3 years ago · 136 likes · 83 comments · Katherine Watt

AstraZeneca knew starting on February 4, 2020, i.e. full 9 months before Bri was injected:

• that Pandemic Preparedness Plan is a DARPA-concocted horseshit a “science fiction, not science” (Mark Esser, AstraZeneca, on tape);

• that their product is a toxic brew and will kill and injure people;

• that the US Government/DOD wants to buy it and will pay a lot of money;

• that the US Government has invoked military laws for this purpose, including the PREP Act and the DPA;

• that the laws and regulations safeguarding human subjects in clinical research do not apply to EUA Countermeasures and would not apply to their “clinical trials”;

• that they will face no liability for killing and injuring people with their toxic product because the US Government/DOD will defend them and provide immunity via numerous mechanisms, including the PREP Act and the DPA.

The evidence that AstraZeneca knew all of the above is in the [completely meaningless] “informed consent” document that Bri signed. It contains the following statement:

Bri’s case is an important one. Just as it happened in Brook Jackson’s case, it may force the military-pharma cartel to fess up about the true nature of the unannounced war they are waging on all of us. Our prediction is that AstraZeneca may produce, in its motion to dismiss or other defense, the DPA contract (“voluntary agreement” or “plan of action”) with the US Government for emergency production of the AZ vaccine. In their motion they will claim that the DPA exempts them from the customary contract law.

Art for today: Skyline Park, 7x7 watercolor.