Asking Microsoft Bing AI about suing Pharma under False Claims Act vs Comments from a Reader
Asking Microsoft Bing AI about suing Pharma under False Claims Act vs Comments from a Reader
AI is smart, but humans make much more intelligent comments
Asking Microsoft Bing AI about suing Pharma under False Claims Act vs Comments from a Reader
I asked Microsoft's Bing artificial intelligence bot about suing pharma under False Claims Act for making a dangerous product.
Me: I'm trying to sue a large pharmaceutical company under the False Claims acts for making a dangerous medicine. The defendant says that because the product was purchased by the government under Other Transaction Authority, the pharmaceutical company did not need to make a safe product. What are my options?
Bing AI knew right away what I was asking about:
Bing AI: Sorry, it looks like I need to chat about something else. Click “New topic,” please!
Smart little bugger...
I got comments from a reader instead, these are from my post on DOD-MCDC-ATI-Pfizer Base Agreement, discussed here:
I'm not totally convinced that ANY lawyer could argue that DOD, as commissioning the contracts, is not ultimately responsible for the safety and efficacy of the products that they commissioned to be developed and manufactured?
The first question I would be asking anyone and everyone now is this one: 'when the Covid19 vaccine was being sold in the USA and around the world, who was the owner of the product? Was the ownership granted to Pfizer, or were they merely a contract manufacturer providing a service to the DOD? Was it owned by the DOD, or was ownership transferred to ATI or yet another third party?'
This is a great question for investigation. As far as I am aware, the facts are these:
BioNTech, a German company, seems to be the owner of the Investigational New Drug Exemption (IND 19736), and Pfizer is their licensee (exclusive rep) in the US. Note IND Exemption “exempts” the investigational product and allows its distribution for the purposes of tightly controlled and regulated clinical trials in humans.
In pharma space, the owner of the IND and its regulatory dossier is ultimately the owner of the product. Pfizer technically is an exclusive licensee, manufacturer and seller in designated territories (all countries, except China where a Chinese company Fosun is the exclusive manufacturer and seller). Both Pfizer and Fosun may be considered co-owners with BioNTech.
But, Toto, we are not in pharma anymore:
DOD ordered “large scale manufacturing demonstration” of a “prototype countermeasure” in the quantity of up to “500M vials” from Pfizer in a parallel universe of OTA+NDAA Authority, where the the IND number, references to products, variants, fast track designations, etc., etc. - all are simply irrelevant! They have no legal meaning. I explained how this works in my previous article.
The DOD is also very touchy and protective of the vials they receive from the pharma and go to great lengths of warning everyone off their “property”, all the way until the needle goes into the arm.
So, can the court please try to establish the following:
Who is the owner?
What exactly do they own?
The second question I would be asking anyone and everyone would be this one: 'As DOD is part of the US Federal Government, how can it be acting in the interests of the US people if it injects hundreds of millions of people with completely untested, inappropriately licensed materials? Was that very act not an act of treason?'
My opinion - it is an act of treason by those actors within the DOD who have orchestrated this crime. They were hired by parties hostile to the United States and its people and are working on behalf of those parties when executing this order.
The third question is: 'Who within DOD carries primary responsibility for the commissioning of these contractual agreements? Who was it who authorised the development of 'Covid19 vaccines' and who determined that the product developed was fit to be injected en masse into hundreds of millions of people in the USA alone?'
This is an excellent line of inquiry, which is, if seriously undertaken, will produce lots of finger pointing and lots of claims of “I was just doing my job, trying to save everyone from covid and working long ours! I am a good person!” I believe the masterminds can be found in the general vicinity of DARPA, DTRA, BARDA, DOD Emerging Technologies, MCDC consortium and ATI and similar related areas. There are some names we already know well.
The fourth question is: 'Which military and/or medical professionals provided clear guidance to President Biden that these vaccines were suitable for use despite their lack of clinical testing?'
That one is easy - 100% of everyone interacting with Biden on that matter assured him these are miracles of vaccine science and make one immortal. He forgot what they said 5 minutes later.
The fifth question is: 'Which legal professionals did not do their duty to the people of the USA by advising the President that the advice just given by those military/medical professionals was sound?'
Don’t be silly! The legal professionals (members of the bar) do not have duty to the people as far as I am aware. As noted in my contract review, the legal professionals who wrote the DOD contracts definitely did not behave like they had any duty other then screw the taxpayer and give the government even more awesome powers.
The sixth question is: 'Just what is the point of Congress and the Senate if they do not consider it their sacred duty to demand absolute oversight over such decision making when the health and lives of 300+ million people is at stake?'
Simple answer - Congress and Senate gave up their power to do anything about this specific matter long ago. They didn’t have the power to give up their power (as they cannot dissolve themselves), but they did it anyway. They made and exception to the Constitution which does not have exceptions for national emergencies or epidemics (having been created during both), but they decided it was ok to do anyhow. So, here we are.
The seventh question is: 'Who gave the orders to the MSM to broadcast such unashamed propaganda about Covid19, vaccines etc?'
My guess would be the alphabet agencies who own them. Smith-Mundt Modernization Act from 2013 legalized using government propaganda (including war propaganda) on Americans, and with the Internet, on the global population. This was the start of the globally harmonized information warfare we are experiencing today.
The eighth question is: 'Why was the opinion of Bill Gates, a totally unqualified person in medical matters, considered significant when decisions of such consequence and weight were being mulled over? Was it because he was one of the big insider traders benefitting from the scam?'
Absolutely. Bill Gates is also a co-owner, together with BioNTech and Pfizer, and Chinese CCP and the DOD of this awesome venture, having had invested into it in 2018, but probably much earlier than that too.
There are times when, despite something being 'legal', that humanity dictates that actions must be taken against perpetrators, conspirators and low level nazi-like orderlies.
This is going to be one of those moments in USA history, I suspect.....
I suspect that too. Slavery was legal… Nazi atrocities were legal…. There is a long list of historical examples I can think of.
Art for today: Golden Hills, plein air sketch, oil on panel 9x12 in
My personal and totally non-legal opinion is that Congress may not divest itself of it's authority and responsibilities, nor may the Commander in Chief, no matter how many "extra curricular" agreements signed, that patents will prove ultimate "ownership" of both bio-weapons, Sars-cov-2 and the modified Spike inside the toxic lipid nano particles, and that the "authorities" who deployed it and mandated on Americans all committed Treason.
Members of our Government and Military have all sworn an oath to the US Constitution, and sworn to protect the United States from enemies both foreign and domestic.
And our Constitution does NOT have an exception for "pandemics."
And those who endlessly repeated "safe and effective," "safe and effective," "safe and effective," are guilty of negligent homicide at a minimum, and mass murder, with malice aforethought at worst.
You cannot make these acts: Treason, Murder and Crimes against Humanity "legal," no matter how hard you try.
Of course getting the Court system to face this very awful set of facts will be an uphill battle, one which the future existence of the United States depends upon, inmho.
I have a bit of experience getting the chat bots to cooperate. In this case, I am using the EvolveAI Telegram bot:
Your posted question:
/ask I'm trying to sue a large pharmaceutical company under the False Claims acts for making a dangerous medicine. The defendant says that because the product was purchased by the government under Other Transaction Authority, the pharmaceutical company did not need to make a safe product. What are my options?
"Unfortunately, it is unlikely that you will have any success in suing the pharmaceutical company under the False Claims Act, as claims filed under this Act require a false statement or fraudulent course of conduct to successfully assert a claim. If the pharmaceutical company purchased their product using Other Transaction Authority and complied with all relevant terms and conditions, there was no false statement or fraudulent course of conduct involved in the transaction. Therefore, your best option would be to write to local, state and federal agencies that regulate and oversee such transactions to ensure that all other transactions authorities are properly being complied with by pharmaceutical companies in order to protect consumers from dangerous products. You may also want to contact an attorney who specializes in false claims cases for further advice on how best to proceed with your complaint against the pharmaceutical company."
My more directed "assignment" and role-play exercise (caution: word salad ahead!):
/ask as the attorney general of the united states, write a lawsuit leveraging the "False Claims Act" against a fictitious pharmaceutical giant, Diezer, for knowingly manufacturing a dangerous medical product (an experimental vaccine) and falsifying results in clinical trials, resulting in the deaths of over 500,000 Americans who were forced to take it. Additionally, the product resulted in over 2 million newly disabled people with a wide variety of symptoms and ailments.
"Plaintiff, the United States of America, by and through its Attorney General, brings this False Claims Act Suit against Defendant Diezer (“Diezer”), a fictitious pharmaceutical giant. This action is brought to protect the public because Diezer has knowingly manufactured, marketed and sold a dangerous medical product - an experimental vaccine - and falsified clinical trial results resulting in the deaths of over 500,000 Americans who were forced to take it. Additionally, the product caused 2 million newly disabled people with a wide variety of symptoms and ailments.
COUNT ONE: FRAUD
1. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference all other paragraphs in the complaint as if fully set forth herein.
2. The False Claims Act imposes civil penalties on companies that submit false claims or false statements to obtain money from the government. 31 U.S.C §§ 3729-3733; See U.S. ex rel Hill v Avandia Mktg., No 09-cv-1948 (GK) (NHP), 2011 WL 5438703 (DDC Aug 15, 2011). Herein, Plaintiff should be awarded penalties for each “false claim” submitted for payment for Diezer's experimental vaccines when Defendants knew full well that it was dangerous and produced false information about it through their clinical trials and marketing campaigns to reap profits for their product without regard for the safety of others who would be harmed due to Diezer's scheme .
3. By way of their fraudulent activities under 31 U.S.C Section 3729(a)(1)(A), numerous false claims have been submitted by Diezer as they consciously produced misleading promotional materials designed to deceive healthcare providers into believing that these drugs were safe based on fabricated testing reports associated with these drugs produced by Defendants in support this fraudulently fabricated illusion of safety , despite knowing these products weren’t safe at all beforehand . Such reports resulted in them receiving reimbursements from Medicare and Medicaid programs that they never should have received given their conscious decision to create such a scam leading up to production in order to maximize company revenues while leaving consumers liable for health consequences unknowingly inflicted upon them due to reliance on Defendants intentionally misrepresentations contained within those very same documents meant only to mislead parties into achieving desired outcomes within purchase decision making factors for intended uses which was effectively enabled via creative methods of persuasion incorporated throughout design phase involving production methodology of influence only meant one thing – namely endangerment towards unwitting victims forced into taking part within prescribed protocols using known harmful substances derived from defective industrial practices responsible for putting consumers lives at risk .
4. As shown by findings from investigative team comprised mostly up attorneys experienced within white collar crimes committed amidst several federal districts distributed through out America , criminal culpability should absolutely not be escaped due corporate negligence exercised during manufacturing processes leading up to actual sale regarding placement throughout market place with known falsified identifiers created deliberately so instructed ensure financial dividends are realized endangering unsuspecting customers whom makes voting purchase decisions burdened greatly due unfair qualifications put insurance policies affected thusly whereby corporate figure heads prioritizing ..."