New Documents Show Clear Big Tech-Government Collusion: Lawyer
By Zachary Stieber
September 2, 2022Updated: September 2, 2022
Newly disclosed documents showing Big Tech companies repeatedly took action after being pressured by White House and other Biden administration officials prove the U.S. government colluded with the companies, according to a lawyer with the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA).
“It’s clear that the government was telling Facebook and Twitter and other social media companies what to do and that they were responding and they were doing that, deleting accounts, taking down posts, etc., which really corroborates our state action theory,” the lawyer, Jenin Younes, told The Epoch Times.
The documents were made public this week as part of an ongoing case against the government, brought by two attorneys general, over alleged violations of the First Amendment.
They showed that officials with the White House, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Department of Homeland Security, and other agencies were in communications with Facebook, Twitter, Google, and other companies regarding content moderation, repeatedly urging the companies to punish users who were promoting alleged COVID-19 misinformation of disinformation.
For example, Rob Flaherty, a White House official, pressured Facebook to take action against “mis- and -disinformation” as well as “hesitancy-inducing content,” one email showed.
After Facebook and White House officials met, a Facebook executive asked the White House to “partner on” plans to address “new misinformation claims” following the expected authorization of a COVID-19 vaccine for children aged 5 to 11 years.
Flaherty later signaled he wasn’t satisfied, sharing a link to a story about supposed misinformation on Facebook and writing, “not even sure what to say at this point.”
Another administration official, whose name was redacted, reached out to Twitter to offer an expert to brief Twitter on people “citing CDC VAERS data incorrectly,” which it said “is a major source of misinformation.”
VAERS, or the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System, is a system to which people can report adverse events following vaccination.
Twitter accepted the invitation.
Administration officials held at least 45 meetings on misinformation or related topics with Big Tech companies since early 2021, the documents showed.
These included meetings between the Office of the Surgeon General and Google, meetings between the CDC and Twitter, and meetings between the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and Facebook.
The CDC repeatedly held “Be on the Lookout meetings” in which it offered specific examples of what officials designated as misinformation, according to the documents and others that were previously released. The Department of Homeland Security met with Microsoft to discuss disinformation and the White House met with Facebook multiple times.
After one of the meetings, Facebook told HHS officials that it was taking “historic actions” in four areas put forth by the White House in recommendations to social media platforms in July, including taking action on misinformation.
“These contacts are not sporadic in any way. They’re almost daily if you look at everything,” John Vecchione, NCLA’s senior litigator in the case, told The Epoch Times.
First Amendment Violations
The original complaint noted the public calls from Biden administration officials for social media companies to crack down, saying that companies acting on those calls were violations of the First Amendment.
“A private entity violates the First Amendment ‘if the government coerces or induces it to take action the government itself would not be permitted to do, such as censor expression of a lawful viewpoint,’” the complaint stated, quoting from a previous U.S. Supreme Court decision.
“This is exactly what has occurred over the past several years, beginning with express and implied threats from government officials and culminating in the Biden Administration’s open and explicit censorship programs. Having threatened and cajoled social media platforms for years to censor viewpoints and speakers disfavored by the Left, senior government officials in the Executive Branch have moved into a phase of open collusion with social media companies to suppress disfavored speakers, viewpoints, and content on social media platforms under the Orwellian guise of halting so-called ‘disinformation,’ ‘misinformation’, and ‘malinformation,’” the complaint added.
Even the attorneys general and other lawyers involved in the case were stunned when the first tranche of discovery—the documents made public this week—were delivered, Vecchione said.
The lawyers “are shocked by the amount of inland pressure and information going back and forth between the ostensibly private entities and the federal government on what you can say and not say in America.
The plaintiffs have asked the judge to compel the government to produce more documents.
“It was almost 75 years ago that the city of Nuremberg was the place of a historic declaration. When the judges of the military tribunal against leading medical officers in the Nazi administration passed their verdict, they issued what would become known as the Nuremberg Code.
On August 20, a compelling line-up of international speakers will travel to Nuremberg to commemorate the 75th Anniversary of The Nuremberg Code. Now of all times, in its jubilee year, this achievement of mankind is facing the greatest hardship since it was written. WATCH the historical event LIVE at 7am EST | 1pm CET | 4am PST or catch the replay at: 75th Annual Commemoration of the Nuremberg Code
It is with great pleasure that I introduce you and your respective organisations to the Australian Medical Professionals Society. This email deals with several issues which are of concern to our membership and, we hope, yours. At the top of the list is the issue of medical free speech and its ramifications for true dialogue, debate, and informative patient interaction in Australia. Also, this email and the report of Dr Phillip Altman, makes available to you and your members a cutting edge update on the COVID-19 vaccinations and a comprehensive analysis of associated Adverse Events, together with implications for Australian practice. Finally, we draw your attention to our Health Reform Declaration, a statement which is gaining support as it highlights critical issues and potential solutions, within the complex environment of Australian Health Law.
Australian Health Professionals and Scientists have been actively discussing and contemplating the profound health measures undertaken within Australia over the last 2&1/2 years. However, we believe the current range of medical, medicolegal and medicopolitical issues brought about by the pandemic requires a greater breadth of discussion – not less – within and between our respective organisations and memberships.
One of the chief concerns of our membership is that of medical free speech. Contingent to a joint statement received from AHPRA and the National Boards on 9 March 20211, Australian Health Professionals numbering over 825,000 were essentially forbidden from publicly questioning the science underlying the emerging COVID-19 injectables, let alone questioning any government messaging urging Australians to be vaccinated because these products were deemed ‘safe and effective’. The effect of this unilateral action was to undermine professional independence and, in so doing, strip away years of training, academic achievements, qualifications, awards and expertise. However well intentioned, this gagging by bureaucratic decree inserted AHPRA and the National Boards between the Clinician and their Patient, in addition to counteracting normal robust interprofessional dialogue, as more data emerged.
Indeed, now 17 months later and after numerous forms of pressure to take up the COVID-19 injectables in various age categories, a tremendous amount of data is available to more fully and accurately inform clinicians about these products. This literature includes over one thousand2 peer reviewed studies reporting of the harms being seen around the world, up to December 2021. In addition, it has become clear that the risk of serious illness and death attributable to COVID-19 disease is heavily weighted to the elderly and those with known co-morbidities, while in contrast, younger Australians are relatively resistant. Also, since the advent of the Delta and Omicron variants, it is highly questionable whether the vaccines are preventing transmission or illness.
In any event, the implied and intended outcome of the gagging was to see Doctors and Health Professionals effectively mandated to support the government campaign to have the Australian population injected with drugs for which there was no adequate short-, medium-, or long-term safety or efficacy data. Indeed, the rush to market and Provisional Approval occurred despite the absence of the usual pre-clinical studies, including testing for Carcinogenicity and Genotoxicity. In this regard, it should be of serious interest that a peer-reviewed investigation3 has demonstrated that mRNA-derived Spike proteins enter the cell nucleus and interfere with DNA. However, many critical facts like these became forbidden subjects for Health Professionals and Doctors to raise with their patients, let alone in public forums. Thus, we contend that the joint statement of 9 March 2021 has compromised proper and informed consent in Australia.
Especially given the lack of available pre-clinical research for each of these products, or clinical studies powered to detect early safety signals at the time of Provisional Approval, the need for ongoing critical appraisal of pharmacovigilance data remains paramount, to instruct responsible day to day practice. To date, none of the makers of the COVID-19 injectables have been able to stringently show their products to be Safe or properly Effective. To date, Adverse Events flowing from these products are at historically unprecedented levels globally and continue to rise. And again, to date, no other drugs in human history have reported more deaths, illnesses, injuries, and disabilities, which number as follows (to 28 June 2022):
It is widely acknowledged that all Adverse Event reporting systems suffer from under-reporting12, an inherent challenge for passive reporting systems and their interpretation. For US VAERS reporting in respect of the COVID-19 injectables, the Under-Reporting Factor (URF) has been estimated to be between 40-49x13. If a conservative URF of 10x is applied, the above figures begin to more realistically represent the likely true effects of the Covid-19 injectables:
To be clear, the TGA has received more Adverse Event reports in 2021 through June 2022 for the COVID-19 vaccines, than they have been seen for all other vaccines in the preceding 50-year period. A similar explosion in Adverse Event reports for the COVID-19 injectables has occurred in all other countries that chose to deploy them14, but in Australia, comparing the period from 197115 until the start of 2021 in respect of traditional protein-based vaccines, to the period from 1 February 2021 through 8 June 2022 in respect of the COVID-19 injectables, we observe the following:
To assist your organisation and membership to understand the causes leading to these concerning signals, we provide to you the comprehensive and up-to-date report of Dr Phillip Altman. By way of background, Dr Altman’s report has been used in modified formats to assist judiciaries in Australia and New Zealand to understand the scientific evidence behind the COVID-19 injectables. We believe it is proving to be the long-awaited body of work needed by the Judicial, Medical, and Scientific communities of Australia, to bring clarity by critical scientific appraisal during these controversial times of COVID-19.
Since your organisation is now in possession of the information and resources contained in the linked report, we ask that your members also receive the same for the benefit of their being fully informed as to the state of the science surrounding COVID-19. After considerable consultation, AMPS is of the opinion that Australia is experiencing a highly significant iatrogenic event. Further, we believe that this did not have to occur: it could have been avoided, but for the state of Australia’s health law leading into the pandemic. AMPS is strenuously of the view that in order to avoid a repeat of the recent past, Australian health law requires urgent reform. To this end we invite every organisation receiving this email, including every parliamentarian CC’d, to review the Declaration and Urgent Demands for healthcare law reform set forth on the following page:
On the above Declaration page is also found Proposed Amendments to the Health Practitioner Regulation National Law, and Proposed Amendments to the Therapeutic Goods Act.
Many organisations receiving this email have members who are directly affected by the overarching powers of AHPRA and the National Boards, who have tended to dictate rather than consult with their registered members. This has caused a dangerous interference with the provision of information, for the purpose of each Australian exercising their right to fully Informed Consent, while it has also unduly and harshly seen Health Professionals sanctioned for seeking to uphold ethics and their Codes of Conduct.
It is not only regarding COVID-19 that AHPRA has been perceived to show over-reaching powers. Dissatisfaction and fear of AHPRA is widespread amongst many health professionals as evidenced by the Victorian branch of the AMA calling for a Royal Commission16 into AHPRA’s conduct.
Equally, we say it is evident that Australians have suffered as a consequence of the Provisional Approval pathway laws. These have facilitated the rapid entry of significantly undertested products into the Australian market, despite their being recognised to be highly novel and experimental. Nonetheless, the COVID-19 injectables were mandated in many jurisdictions and workplaces, causing large numbers of Australians to feel coerced and simultaneously baffled by the inability of Doctors and other Health Professionals to give them a voice.
This can all be changed.
We implore you as fellows and colleagues to give the information and resource contained in this email your greatest attention, with a view to sharing the same with your members. There will doubtless be many questions arising from our email and we invite further discussion with you. All of your considerations and efforts towards the continued promotion of evidence-based medical science are greatly appreciated.
 Individual reports refer to a single patient, where more than one adverse reaction is often included. The 458,463 reports received to 24 June 2022 reported a total of 1,495,273 various forms of adverse reaction.
Lab Rat Offspring Got Rib Malformations After COVID Vaccination: Moderna Trial Documents
By Enrico Trigoso
August 16, 2022Updated: August 17, 2022
Moderna documents regarding their COVID vaccine trial on animals, obtained via a Freedom of Information Act request by Judicial Watch, showed that some of the offspring of rats that were injected with Moderna’s mRNA shot developed rib malformations.
The 700 pages contain a portion of the formal Biologics Licensing Application (BLA) package that a manufacturer is required to submit to the FDA for approval.
The documents have not yet been made public, but were analyzed by former pharma executive Alexandra Latypova and reviewed by The Epoch Times.
Included in the documents are test results that show that Moderna mRNA shots caused statistically significant skeletal malformations in the offspring of the rats that took the mRNA-1273 (Spikevax mRNA) doses.
“mRNA-1273-related variations in skeletal examination included statistically significant increases in the number of F1 rats with 1 or more wavy ribs and 1 or more rib nodules. Wavy ribs appeared in 6 fetuses and 4 litters with a fetal prevalence of 4.03% and a litter prevalence of 18.2%. Rib nodules appeared in 5 of those 6 fetuses,” according to Moderna’s internal documents.
F1 refers to the rat offspring and litter indicates a group-birth of rats.
“Maternal toxicity in the form of clinical observations was observed for 5 days following the last dose (Gestation Day 13), correlating with the most sensitive period for rib development in rats (Gestation Days 14 to 17)” the documents state.
“Wavy ribs” refers to ribs not properly shaped.
In other words, 6 out of about 149 baby rats had wavy ribs and 5 of those also had rib nodules.
According to Latypova’s analysis, only female rats were studied (male rats were not treated with the Moderna vaccine).
The females got a human dose of 100mcg Spikevax mRNA, 28 and 14 days prior to mating and gestation days 1 and 13.
“1/2 rats euthanized before delivery to examine fetuses, the rest followed to 21 days after delivery,” Latypova stated, “No numbers are provided for the study size.”
In addition, there is no study report, but only Moderna’s own interpretation of the outcomes.
The results were part of reproductive toxicology tests done by Moderna, which is the only reproductive toxicology test for the product, according to Latypova.
It is not known how the dose translates from humans to rats.
“Neither Moderna nor Pfizer provided any dose calculations or justification information for dose selection in animal studies,” Latypova told The Epoch Times.
“Doses of drugs, or especially biologics do not necessarily have linear relationships with toxicity or efficacy. It is likely a much more complex relationship and unfortunately not known at all.”
“Reproductive toxicology is the study of adverse effects of medicinal products on reproduction. The FDA requires reproductive toxicity testing for any NME to be used in women of childbearing potential,” added Latypova, who has worked in more than 60 pharmaceutical companies, mainly focusing on creating and reviewing clinical trials, many of which were submitted to the FDA.
Despite the abovementioned lab results, the FDA issued a statement on Jan. 30 saying that there were no adverse effects on postnatal developments.
“No vaccine-related fetal malformations or variations and no adverse effect on postnatal development were observed in the study,” the FDA stated on the label for Moderna’s Spikevax vaccine.
“In a developmental toxicity study, 0.2 mL of a vaccine formulation containing nucleoside-modified mRNA (100 mcg) and other ingredients that are included in a 0.5-mL single human dose of SPIKEVAX was administered IM to female rats on four occasions: 28 and 14 days prior to mating, and on gestation days 1 and 13,” reads the FDA publication.
Pfizer Vaccine Also Caused Abnormal Ribs in Rats
In August of 2021, Elsevier published a peer-reviewed study (pdf) titled “Lack of effects on female fertility and prenatal and postnatal offspring development in rats with BNT162b2, a mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine.”
BNT162b2 is the Pfizer jab.
All the authors of the publication were employed by Pfizer, BioNTech, or Charles River, a Pfizer contractor.
This publication suggests that there was a “lack of effects” in postnatal offspring development, but the study shows that there was a 295 percent increase (8.3 percent compared to 2.1 percent in the control group) in abnormal ribs in vaccinated rat offspring. A huge increase in what is described as the “supernumerary lumbar.”
‘This Was an Extremely Dangerous Warning’
“Skeletal abnormalities in the bony rib cages are absolutely important and were statistically increased in the rat offspring of the experimental group compared with the placebo group,” James Thorp, an MD board-certified in obstetrics and gynecology, as well as maternal-fetal medicine, told The Epoch Times after reviewing Latypova’s analysis of Moderna’s BLA package.
“In clinical obstetrics and maternal-fetal medicine we see similar findings in skeletal abnormalities prior to birth that are extremely serious and often lethal. This was an extremely dangerous warning signal in reproductive toxicology studies and was never brought to the light of day to protect our global citizens. The CDC, Pfizer, Moderna, and the flagship medical journals of the medical industrial complex lied to the American public and should be held accountable,” Thorp said.
Thorp recently analyzed and verified the most recent Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data related to COVID-19 vaccines and compared them to the influenza vaccines, finding numerous abnormalities.
The CDC website recommends the COVID vaccines during pregnancy in order to “prevent severe illness and death in pregnant women.”
Washington’s behavior on the world stage risks direct conflict between the nuclear states, the Russian embassy in the US has warned.
“Today, the United States continues to act with no regard to other countries’ security and interests, which contributes to an increase in nuclear risks,” the embassy said in a statement on its Telegram channel.
“The [US’] steps to further engage in a hybrid confrontation with Russia in the context of the Ukrainian crisis are fraught with unpredictable escalation and a direct military clash of nuclear powers.”
The embassy noted that Washington has recently withdrawn from two key arms control agreements, the 1987 Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which banned certain classes of land-based missiles, and the 1992 Treaty on Open Skies, which allowed for surveillance flights over each other’s territories.
The embassy urged the US to “take a closer look at its own nuclear policy instead of making unfounded accusations against the countries whose worldviews do not coincide with the American ones.”
“Our country faithfully fulfills its obligations as a nuclear-weapon state and makes every effort to reduce nuclear risks,” the diplomats said.
Read more No need for nuclear weapons in Ukraine – Moscow
The statement comes after the US accused Moscow of using the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant in southern Ukraine as cover for its soldiers. The plant, the largest in Europe, was seized by Russian troops during the early stages of Moscow’s military operation in Ukraine, which was launched in late February. It continues to operate with Ukrainian personnel under Russian control.
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken called Russia’s action at the facility “the height of irresponsibility.” Russia and Ukraine, meanwhile, have been accusing each other of shelling the plant. According to Moscow, artillery fire by Ukrainians forces caused several fires and partial power outages this month.
Russia initiated a UN Security Council meeting last week regarding the situation around the Zaporozhye power plant. Russian envoy Vassily Nebenzia said that Moscow supports the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to inspect the facility as quickly as possible.
Trump Releases Dramatic Political Video After FBI Raids Mar-a-Lago
By Caden Pearson
August 10, 2022Updated: August 10, 2022
Former President Donald Trump released a dramatic political video, hours after the FBI raided his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, in which he laments the “declining” state of America and says it’s “time to start talking about greatness for our country again.”
“We are a nation in decline … We are a nation that in many ways has become a joke,” says Trump over the ominous sounds of thunder and rain in the nearly four-minute video in which he lists the apparent failures of the Biden administration, before promising, “Soon we will have greatness again.”
Trump, who is expected to announce that he will run again for president in 2024, released the video on his Truth Social platform late Tuesday.
In the video, he says that America has the “highest inflation in over 40 years” and “highest energy cost in its history.” He adds that in the two years since President Joe Biden took office, America has lost its energy independence and dominance.
“We are a nation that is begging Venezuela and Saudi Arabia for oil,” Trump says. “We are a nation that surrendered in Afghanistan, leaving behind dead soldiers and American citizens and $85 billion worth of the finest military equipment in the world.”
Trump accuses the Biden administration of allowing “Russia to devastate a country, Ukraine, killing hundreds of thousands,” and suggests that “it will only get worse.”
‘Weaponization of the Justice System’
“We are a nation that has weaponized its law enforcement against the opposing political party like never before. We’ve never seen anything like this,” Trump says in his video.
Late on Monday, Trump announced that the FBI was raiding his Palm Beach estate, Mar-a-Lago, calling it evidence of “prosecutorial misconduct” and a “weaponization of the Justice System.”
The former president said the raid wasn’t announced and that it was motivated because Democrats do not want him to run again for president in 2024.
“They detest Donald Trump, not just on the Democrat side but the general establishment, because he’s not one of them. Because he doesn’t play their game,” his daughter-in-law Lara Trump told Fox News on Tuesday.
“They are terrified he’s going to announce any day that he’s running for president in 2024. And this is a very convenient way to just throw a little more mud on Donald Trump.”
America ‘No Longer Respected’
In his video, Trump also cites the legacy media as contributing to what he says is a nation in decline, saying America “no longer has a free and fair press. Fake news is about all you get.”
Traditionally, the media acts as a guardian of the public interest and a watchdog on government activities. But Trump has in the past accused legacy outlets of being partisan and colluding with “radical left Democrats … to hide the real facts.”
“We are a nation that is allowing Iran to build a massive nuclear weapon and China to use the trillions and trillions of dollars it’s taken from the United States to build a military to rival our own,” Trump says in the video.
“We are a nation that over the past years is no longer respected or listened to all around the world. We are a nation that is hostile to liberty and freedom and faith.
“We are a nation whose economy is floundering, whose stores are not stocked, whose deliveries are not coming, and whose educational system is ranked at the bottom of every list,” he says.
“We are a nation that in many ways has become a joke,” says Trump. “But soon we will have greatness again.”
‘Soon We Will Have Greatness Again’
Trump’s political video starts in black and white with only the sounds of rain and thunder underscoring it. This sequence features video representative of the Biden administration’s apparent failures, including oil fields, the chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
However, the last third of the video becomes colorized and the musical score uplifting as Trump shifts to speak about his promise of America having “greatness again.”
“It was hard-working patriots like you who built this country. And it is hard-working patriots like you who are going to save our country,” Trumps says in his video.
“There is no mountain we cannot climb. There is no summit we cannot reach. There is no challenge we cannot meet. There is no victory we cannot have.
“We will not bend. We will not break. We will not yield ever, ever, ever. We will never give in, we will never give up, and we will never ever back down. We will never let you down.
“As long as we are confident and united the tyrants we’re fighting do not stand even a little chance. Because we are Americans and Americans kneel to God and God alone. And it is time to start talking about greatness for our country again,” he says.
The video ends on a black screen with the words, “The best is yet to come.”
Judge who signed off the FBI raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago mansion donated $2,000 to Barack Obama’s campaign and represented Jeffrey Epstein’s Lolita Express pilots, his scheduler and ‘Yugoslavian sex slave’
Bruce Reinhart acted for several employees of the billionaire pedophile before he sanctioned the ‘unannounced’ search on Mar-a-Lago yesterday.
He left the local US Attorney’s office over a decade ago to set up a private practice and help staff members including his Lolita Express pilots and his scheduler.
He was accused in a lawsuit of breaking the Justice Department’s policies by using information from his previous job to benefit in the private sector, which he denied.
Meanwhile Reinhart was also revealed to have donated to Barack Obama’s campaign in 2008 and Jeb Bush’s when he ran against Trump in 2015.
The FBI searched Trump’s estate as part of a probe into whether he took classified records from the White House to his Florida mansion.
The ex-president revealed the raid in a lengthy statement and said the Feds broke into a safe at his home as they hunted the documents.
The agents are reported to have seized 15 boxes worth of classified information but have not commented on what they contained.
Sources told the New York Post Reinhart approved the FBI warrant that let them ransack the Florida mansion yesterday morning.
Agents had filed two requests with the federal magistrate in West Palm Beach before the search was carried out.
The office is made up of three judges – William Matthewman, Ryon McCabe and Reinhart, who was assigned the cases.
The two warrant applications entered the system on Monday but do not disclose that Trump was the target.
Reinhart was made a magistrate judge four years ago after spending 10 years in the private sector where he worked with Epstein’s staff.
Pilot David Rodgers was another the pilots to be represented by Reinhart
He helped the billionaire pedophile’s pilots Larry Visoski, David Rodgers, Larry Morrison and Bill Hammond.
He also worked with scheduler Sarah Kellen and Nadia Marcinkova, who was known as his ‘Yugoslavian sex slave’.
On New Year’s Day 2008 he left his job at the South Florida US Attorney’s Office and went to work with the employees the next day.
His official biography says he ‘managed a docket that covered the full spectrum of federal crimes, including narcotics, violent crimes, public corruption, financial frauds, child pornography and immigration’.
Reinhart was hauled over the coals in a 2011 Crime Victims’ Rights Act lawsuit which accused him of violating Justice Department policies by switching sides.
It implied the attorney had leveraged inside information about the probe into Epstein’s affairs to gain favor with him.
He flatly denied this and said he was nothing to do with the team that was looking into the pedophile’s horrific crimes.
But two years later his former supervisors in the US Attorney’s Office said ‘while Bruce E Reinhart was an assistant U.S. attorney, he learned confidential, non-public information about the Epstein matter’.
He hit back in 2018, telling the Miami Herald: ‘Even assuming I had participated ”personally and substantially” in the Epstein investigation [which I did not], the relevant Department of Justice regulations only prohibited me from communicating with, or appearing before, the United States on behalf of Mr. Epstein.’
He made clear in the statement he had represented the disgraced financier’s workers but had nothing to do with him – yet would not say who paid for them.
But in Newsmax appearances, he appeared to shrug off accusations against Epstein and his workers.
It also emerged today Reinhart donated to Obama’s campaign twice in 2008 totaling $2,000, as well as to Trump rival Bush in 2015.
It also emerged today Reinhart donated to Obama’s campaign twice in 2008 totaling $2,000, as well as to Trump rival Jeb Bush in 2015
In Newsmax appearances, he appeared to shrug off accusations against Epstein and his workers
The search on Trump’s house intensifies the probe into how classified documents ended up in boxes of White House records located at Mar-a-Lago earlier this year.
It occurs amid a separate grand jury probe into efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election and adds to the potential legal peril for Trump.
Trump and his allies sought to cast the search as a weaponization of the criminal justice system and a Democratic-driven effort to keep him from a 2024 bid.
This is despite the White House saying it had no prior knowledge of it and that FBI director Christopher Wray was appointed by Trump five years ago.
Trump wrote: ‘These are dark times for our Nation, as my beautiful home, Mar-A-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, is currently under siege, raided, and occupied by a large group of FBI agents.’
He said: ‘Nothing like this has ever happened to a President of the United States before.’
‘After working and cooperating with the relevant Government agencies, this unannounced raid on my home was not necessary or appropriate.’
Justice Department spokesman Dena Iverson declined to comment on the search, including about whether AG Merrick Garland had personally authorized it.
Trump did not elaborate on the basis for the search but the Justice Department has been investigating the potential mishandling of classified information.
It comes after the National Archives and Records Administration said it had received from Mar-a-Lago 15 boxes of White House records, including documents containing classified information, earlier this year.
The National Archives said Trump should have turned over that material upon leaving office, and it asked the Justice Department to investigate.
There are multiple federal laws governing the handling of classified records and sensitive government documents, including statutes that make it a crime to remove such material and retain it at an unauthorized location.
Though a search warrant does not suggest that criminal charges are near or even expected, federal officials looking to obtain one must first demonstrate to a judge that they have probable cause that a crime occurred.
Two people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the search happened earlier Monday and was related to the records probe.
Agents were also looking to see if Trump had additional presidential records or any classified documents at the estate.
Trump has previously maintained that presidential records were turned over ‘in an ordinary and routine process.’
His son Eric said on Fox News on Monday night he had spent the day with his father and the search happened because ‘the National Archives wanted to corroborate whether or not Donald Trump had any documents in his possession’.
Asked how the documents ended up at Mar-a-Lago, Eric said the boxes were among items that got moved out of the White House during ‘six hours’ on Inauguration Day.
He said: ‘My father always kept press clippings. He had boxes, when he moved out of the White House.’
Trump emerged from Trump Tower in New York City shortly before 8 pm and waved to bystanders before being driven away in an SUV.
n his first public remarks since news of the search surfaced, Trump made no mention of it during a tele-town hall on behalf of Leora Levy, the Connecticut Republican he has endorsed in Tuesday´s US Senate primary to pick a general election opponent against Democratic US Senator Richard Blumenthal.
Trump gave his public backing to Levy late last week, calling her on Monday the best pick ‘to replace Connecticut´s joke of a senator.’
But in a social media post he called the search a ‘weaponization of the Justice System, and an attack by Radical Left Democrats who desperately don´t want me to run for President in 2024’.
GOP National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel denounced the search as ‘outrageous’ and said it was a reason for voters to turn out in November.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a Republican who is considered a potential 2024 presidential candidate, said it was ‘an escalation in the weaponization’ of US government agencies.
Kevin McCarthy, the House Minority Leader, said in a tweet that the Justice Department ‘has reached an intolerable state of weaponized politicization’ and said that if Republicans win control of the U.S. House, they will investigate the department.
That Trump would become entangled in a probe into the handling of classified information is all the more striking given how he tried during the 2016 presidential election to exploit an FBI investigation into his Democratic opponent Hillary Clinton over whether she mishandled classified information via a private email server she used as secretary of state.
Then-FBI Director James Comey concluded Clinton had sent and received classified information but the FBI did not recommend criminal charges because it determined Clinton had not intended to break the law.
Trump lambasted that decision and then stepped up his criticism of the FBI as agents began investigating whether his campaign had colluded with Russia to tip the 2016 election.
He fired Comey during that probe, and though he appointed Wray months later, he repeatedly criticized him too as president.
Thomas Schwartz, a Vanderbilt University history professor who studies and writes about the presidency, said there is no precedent for a former president facing an FBI raid – even going back to Watergate. Source
We are learning how our medical systems is corrupt and causing death. This Medical Professor calls out his own industry and tells you everything you need to know to avoid big pharma.
This lady trusted the medical community
They were not following the science
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci testifies during a Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies hearing, on Capitol Hill in Washington on May 17, 2022. (Shawn Thew/Pool/AFP via Getty Images)
Health officials have been making headlines in the news for their recent comments that seem to be reversing previous COVID-19 public health messages.
Both Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and former White House COVID-19 advisor Dr. Deborah Birx, admitted that the COVID-19 vaccines are not particularly capable at preventing infection, reversing previous COVID-19 narratives that asserted the vaccine prevented disease acquisition and transmission.
This is a significant fallback considering that she promoted Moderna and Pfizer COVID-19 vaccines when both were granted emergency use authorization in late 2020.
“This is one of the most highly-effective vaccines we have in our infectious disease arsenal. And so that’s why I’m very enthusiastic about the vaccine,” Birx said on an ABC podcast at the time.
On that podcast, she made no mention of concerns the vaccines might not protect against infection.
Fauci and Birx also made statements showing their “open” minds regarding a laboratory leak as a possible explanation for the original source of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
It appears that the messaging around COVID-19 health policies is opening up, or is it?
Changing Narrative Around COVID-19 Vaccines
Public health messaging regarding effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccines has shifted throughout the two years of the pandemic.
“I think the whole COVID-19 vaccine program was over promised and it was too broadly applied. No vaccine against respiratory illness has been very effective in the history of medicine,” Dr. Peter McCullough, cardiologist and co-author of The Courage to Face COVID-19 told The Epoch Times during a phone call.
He reasoned that the reversals by Fauci and Birx were to negate the broad claims health officials made at the start of the pandemic.
McCullough said that there were three major false claims in the overall COVID-19 vaccine narrative.
“The first claim was that the vaccine would stop the virus and people wouldn’t get sick if they got the virus. That’s never happened with an influenza vaccine or pneumococcal vaccine,” McCullough said.
“The next false claim is that the vaccines would stop transmission,” said McCullough.
In a statement released on March 2021, a few months after the initial vaccine rollout, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) stated that the vaccination program “interrupted chains of transmission.”
However, papers were soon published showing that the amount of virus detected in vaccinated and unvaccinated people was the same. Since viral load is analogous to infectiousness, this finding indicated that transmission rates would be same regardless of vaccination status.
McCullough said that health officials are now down to their last few false claims including that the vaccines prevent hospitalization and death.
In the approval announcement for the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine, the Food and Drug Administration wrote that “the vaccine is effective in preventing COVID-19 and potentially serious outcomes including hospitalization and death.”
In New South Wales, a state in Australia, over 96 percent of people over 16-years-old have received two COVID-19 vaccine doses, of which, 69 percent have received a third dose. However, the state’s health statistics show that the majority of hospitalization, ICU admissions, and deaths have occurred in the vaccinated demographic (pdf), with the majority occurring in people who had three or four vaccinations.
“There’s never been a randomized trial where hospitalization and death have been reduced by the vaccine…the only thing we’ve had is a series of biased papers that don’t account for prior immunity or for early treatment [which reduces hospitalization and death],” said McCullough.
Despite findings from other countries that indicate that the vaccine may not be reducing hospitalization and mortality risks, this claim has persisted in the United States.
Dr. Pierre Kory, a pulmonologist and critical care specialist, and the president and chief medical officer of the Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance, gave an anecdotal explanation for why the hospitalization agenda is still going strong.
“When a patient enters a hospital and they show their [COVID-19] vaccine card…although they (the hospital) will enter the data of the vaccine card, it’s (the vaccination status is) buried in a nursing note. On the main screen, which categorizes them as vaccinated or unvaccinated, in many of the systems they go in as unknown,” Kory told The Epoch Times.
The few patients that do get submitted as “vaccinated” are those that got vaccinated by a doctor in that healthcare system.
“So I will tell you that the vast majority of patients in the hospital have an unknown vaccination status, and that’s interpreted as unvaccinated, and that is why the CDC is constantly pumping out this data showing all this protection…I cannot prove that, although I’ve seen that with my own eyes, and I have colleagues who’ve seen it.”
A major narrative of COVID-19 vaccines that has seen changes is vaccine efficacy.
When initially released, both Pfizer and Moderna promised over 95 percent efficacy, with over 90 percent efficacy in stopping COVID-19 transmission and symptomatic infection 6 months after the second dose.
However, once the Delta and Omicron variants emerged, the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines waned dramatically.
Studies found that up to 6 months after the second dose, the efficacy of the Pfizer vaccine against symptomatic infections dropped to 80 percent. Moderna dropped from 74 percent efficacy against the Alpha variant to 67 percent for Delta.
Once the Omicron variant arose, studies showed that efficacy against symptomatic infections fell to negative values six months after receiving two doses of either Moderna or Pfizer vaccines.
Backtracking on COVID-19 Messaging
Apart from vaccine usage, Fauci’s recent media commentary also contradicted previous messages on vaccine safety and COVID-19 immunity.
Both Fauci and Birx recently made news when they conceding that the vaccines were not very effective at preventing infection.
Fauci admitted that the vaccines do not protect “overly well,” against infection, though he argued that it offered good protection against severe disease.
Birx implied that the researchers knew from the beginning that the vaccine was not very effective at protecting against infection.
Kory said he was surprised at Birx’s admission, calling her concession a “small crack in their very consistent narrative.”
“They’ve employed multiple narratives, but this actually does backtrack on one of the original narratives…they’ve been saying for several months that the vaccines protected [against the virus], and now to hear that they knew that they weren’t, I think that’s pretty remarkable.”
“Well, the menstrual thing is something that seems to be quite transient and temporary, that’s one of the points,” Fauci said in an appearance on Fox News on July 25. “We need to study it more.”
His comments drew criticisms from obstetricians and gynecologists who have been observing severe cases of menstrual irregularities.
Dr. Christiane Northrup, a former fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists accused Fauci of discounting “the experience of thousands of women,” by dismissing the cases with “we need to study it more.”
“Unfortunately the menstrual problems we are seeing are far from transient and temporary. Many women have been bleeding daily or having heavy, irregular, painful periods for an entire year. And some of these are well past menopause. Something is way off here,” she told The Epoch Times.
Kory speculated that Fauci’s small admissions are “tactical,” and dismissive rather than a sign to engage in open, and honest scientific discussion.
“I still think it’s in the service of covering up this catastrophe. They’ve been dead wrong on innumerable policies,” Kory said. “I don’t see this as any concerted effort to be more honest or to show more integrity.”
McCullough speculated that officials are “backtracking because they know that the data are overwhelming refuting the false claims, and that public opinion has turned against the vaccines.”
Congress and Senate inquiries into vaccine safety have also exerted pressure on the health agencies.
Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) released a statement on March 24, 2022 announcing that he had sent 36 letters to the federal health agencies including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), FDA, CDC, and NIAID health officials on vaccine oversight.
McCullough disclosed that Johnson has since sent many more letters but has been “stonewalled” by the health agencies.
Dr. Tracy Høeg, a physician based in California and an consultant epidemiologist for the Department of Health in Florida, tweeted on June 23, 2022 that the NEJM shows that “natural immunity (A) provides greater protection than vax (B) against future infection, but it [the study] calls into question the very idea of “hybrid immunity;” an extra vax dose (C) doesn’t seem to add much to nat[ural] immunity.”
Kory argued that despite Fauci’s shift in narrative from vaccinated immunity to hybrid immunity, the messaging “hasn’t changed.”
“[Rochelle] Walensky and Fauci have long been saying they believe that vaccination plus natural immunity is better than natural immunity. That’s not new.”
Opening Up to Lab Theory and Lockdown Contradictions
Fauci also made other contradictory statements about keeping an “open mind” over claims that the SARS-CoV-2 virus may have leaked from a Chinese lab, despite long-standing assertions that the virus was of natural origin.
“First of all, I didn’t recommend locking anything down,” Fauci said on the show, suggesting it had been a recommendation from the CDC.
However, in October 2020, Fauci publicly recommended that former President Donald Trump “shut the whole country down,” although it’s not clear what he meant, as presidents don’t have the authority to enact sweeping lockdowns.
“When it became clear that we had community spread in the country … I recommended to the President that we shut the country down,” he said in an event with students at the College of the Holy Cross in October 2020.
Fauci also publicly suggested multiple times in 2020 that bars and restaurants should remain closed, then arguing that there was a binary choice between opening schools or bars.
“You have a choice—either close the bars or close the schools. Because, if you have people congregating in bars, it’s likely you’re going to stay red,” the longtime head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases said in November 2020.
Shift in Public Opinion and Policies For the Future
McCullough says he is observing changes in both public and professional discourse surrounding COVID-19 health policies and is hopeful that more changes are coming.
“I don’t see any celebration of the vaccines. None. There’s health freedom rallies going on all over the United States where people are advocating for their civil liberties…No one is out there advocating for the vaccines,” McCullough said.
“The very low uptake of childhood and young adult vaccination, I think is a proxy for Americans being very concerned about the lack of safety and the lack of justification for these vaccines,” said McCullough.
He also observed shifts in public opinion and guidelines on early treatment.
Since the start of the pandemic, McCullough and Kory have been active advocates for using ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine as early treatments to prevent COVID-19 disease. Despite the CDC and the FDA pronouncing these drugs unsafe and not beneficial, emerging studies from other countries have found these off-label use drugs are remarkably beneficial in controlling COVID-19.
“The message on early treatment has gotten out. It largely was responsible for taking us off that big peak that we had in January of 2021,” said McCullough. “The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons is now coming up on two years of having a home treatment guide (pdf).”
However, McCullough argues that it may be too early to see big changes in health policies and reversal of previous decisions.
“This is very similar to the relationship between smoking and lung cancer. There was data that existed for about 40 years as originally proposed by Sir Austin Bradford Hill, an epidemiologist, who said, by good criteria, that smoking is causative for lung cancer. It was about 40 years before there was finally capitulation recognition,” said McCullough.
“The same is true with the vaccine program. We’re into our second year of it; it’s a complete failure. It’s causing great harm…and I anticipate it’s just too early for recognition and stopping the public harm.”
McCullough expected a shift in talking points as health agencies rollout “second generation” COVID-19 vaccines, stating that the second generation vaccines are going to be better and safer than the first.
Kory, however, was not optimistic for major changes.
“[Healthcare] agencies are largely working in the service of vaccine manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies. So repurposed drugs…have long been the natural enemy, essentially of the pharmaceutical industry, and they have spent decades attacking repurposed drugs,” Kory said.
“I have no evidence that that system is going to change…I would be shocked to see that the agencies support a repurposed drug.”
McCullough said that doctors are also catching wind of the inconsistencies in public health messaging. A survey conducted on 737 primary care physicians in the United States in May 2021 found that 10 percent of physicians were ‘not confident’ in vaccines in general and less than 10 percent reported ‘somewhat to no confidence’ in Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.
Physicians reporting ‘low confidence’ at around 30 percent for the J&J vaccine.
Nonetheless, a survey by the American Medical Association (AMA) showed that over 96 percent of doctors have received two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine.
“The vast majority of doctors were tricked into taking the vaccine. They want to believe that it’s safe…that it’s effective…so the doctors are having a hard time recognizing vaccine injuries because of the psychological fear of them understanding that the vaccine is in their body,” concluded McCullough.
Zachary Stieber, Jack Phillips, Enrico Trigoso, and Rita Li contributed to this report.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times. Epoch Health welcomes professional discussion and friendly debate. To submit an opinion piece, please follow these guidelines and submit through our form here.
Our Government is made up of appointed officials that are creating a racist and discriminatory environment.
The Ukraine Hoax
“The Ukraine Hoax is a documentary detailing the shady origins of America’s Ukraine problem and how the two nations meddled in each other’s elections, at the cost of 130 lives. After three years of failed investigations into Trump campaign connections to the Kremlin, the documentary ties impeachment to the Russia hoax and introduces important new participants – shady diplomats, corrupt politicians, treacherous snipers, and a billionaire in the background. It’s a tale only Michael Caputo could tell: a former aide to President Donald Trump whose close ties to the former Soviet Union put him in the crosshairs of federal investigators.”
During the COVID-19 pandemic, virtually no one was spared from the Great Vaccine Scare – hysteria about any and all vaccine criticism. Investigative journalist Paul Thacker details how most anyone who dares to critique vaccines is quickly silenced.
The topic of vaccines has always been controversial, but it reached a fever pitch during the COVID-19 pandemic, when it became sacrilegious to speak out against them, or even question their safety and efficacy.
In 2021, investigative journalist Paul Thacker became a target of what he calls “the Great Vaccine Scare — hysteria about any and all vaccine criticism,”1 after he wrote an article published in The BMJ, titled, “COVID-19: Researcher Blows the Whistle on Data Integrity Issues in Pfizer’s Vaccine Trial.”2
The article, it should be noted, was thorough, accurate and “based on dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings and emails.”3
It was so well done that it earned Thacker a nomination as a finalist for the Steve Connor Award for Investigative Science Journalism, presented by the Association of British Science Writers (ABSW). An ABSW judge described the article as, “A very good story on a sensitive issue that was reported responsibly, it very clearly spells out why the story mattered.”4
Fact Checkers Pounce, Label Factual Info ‘Misinformation’
Thacker’s investigation details a series of problems with laboratory management and quality control checks by Pfizer subcontractor Ventavia Research Group, which was testing Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine.
Regional director Brook Jackson, formerly employed by Ventavia, said she witnessed falsified data, unblinded patients, inadequately trained vaccinators and lack of proper follow-up on adverse events that were reported. After notifying Ventavia about her concerns repeatedly, she made a complaint to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration — and was fired the same day.5 Other former Ventavia employees spoke of similar issues. According to Thacker’s report:6
“One said that she had worked on over four dozen clinical trials in her career, including many large trials, but had never experienced such a “helter skelter” work environment as with Ventavia on Pfizer’s trial … She added that during her time at Ventavia the company expected a federal audit but that this never came.
After Jackson left the company problems persisted at Ventavia, this employee said. In several cases Ventavia lacked enough employees to swab all trial participants who reported covid-like symptoms, to test for infection.
Laboratory confirmed symptomatic covid-19 was the trial’s primary endpoint, the employee noted. (An FDA review memorandum released in August this year states that across the full trial swabs were not taken from 477 people with suspected cases of symptomatic covid-19.) ‘I don’t think it was good clean data,’ the employee said of the data Ventavia generated for the Pfizer trial. ‘It’s a crazy mess.’”
Soon after Thacker’s investigative piece was published in BMJ, it was “fact checked” by a group called Lead Stories, which referred to the investigation as a “hoax alert” in the related URL. Along with “correcting” statements that Thacker did not make, Lead Stories disparaged the investigation for “missing context,” but as investigative reporter Matt Taibbi explained, “‘Missing context’ has become a term to disparage reporting that is true but inconvenient.”7
Lead Stories took further issue with The BMJ investigation because it was shared by people such as Dr. Robert Malone and Robert F. Kennedy, who themselves have been targeted by fake fact checkers. Taibbi added:8
“The real issue with Thacker’s piece is that it went viral and was retweeted by the wrong people. As Lead Stories noted with marked disapproval, some of those sharers included the likes of Dr. Robert Malone and Robert F. Kennedy. To them, this clearly showed that the article was bad somehow, but the problem was, there was nothing to say the story was untrue.”
Thacker also called the “fact check” against his BMJ investigation “insane,” telling Taibbi, “Here’s what they do. They’re not fact checking facts. What they’re doing is checking narratives. They can’t say that your facts are wrong, so it’s like, ‘Aha, there’s no context.’ Or, ‘It’s misleading.’ But that’s not a fact check. You just don’t like the story.”9 Meanwhile, writing in The Disinformation Chronicle, Thacker explained:10
“After The BMJ published my investigation, we ran into a political buzzsaw from Facebook, which labeled the article “misinformation” even though they could find no factual errors. Facebook’s awkward political response spurred editors at The BMJ to send Mark Zuckerberg an open letter11 complaining about his “inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible” fact check.”
Harassment for Voicing Vaccine Concerns Now Commonplace
Anyone who dares to question or criticize vaccinations is at risk of being harassed in today’s climate. Dr. Aseem Malhotra, a consultant cardiologist and chairman of public health collaboration in the U.K., is among those targeted for sharing science relating to COVID-19 shot side effects. Malhotra has earned some notoriety for speaking about the underlying factors that make certain people more vulnerable to COVID-19 — namely lifestyle-related diseases driven by poor diet.12
This aspect of prevention via a long-term healthy lifestyle, which could save lives in future pandemics, is another tenet that’s ignored by the dominant narrative. However, in June 2022, Malhotra was invited to speak at a “side event during a meeting of the British Medical Association.”13
“Just so we’re all clear — because people seem to freak out,” Thacker wrote, “Malhotra was NOT giving a talk FOR the British Medical Association (BMA). It was a talk for some international physicians, who happened to have their meeting during a BMA event.”14 The talk was based on the importance of evidence-based medicine and included information about historical corruption in the pharmaceutical industry.
The talk was not about vaccine side effects, per se, but Malhotra did mention a preprint article that found Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 shots are associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events of special interest.15 The excess risk of these adverse events exceeded the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization compared to the placebo group.
Malhotra received praise for his talk, and the next day was presented with a Champion of Preventive Medicine award by the chair of the BMA, who had also attended Malhotra’s talk. Soon after, the harassment started. According to Thacker:16
“Just so that we’re all clear — because people seem to freak out — Malhotra was NOT given a British Medical Association award. The person who gave it to him, just happens to also be Chair of the BMA.
Malhotra later tweeted a photo of himself receiving the award … and that’s when panic set in and hysteria began — good night, and good luck — like something out of a movie. Running around with their hair on fire, several prominent physicians began texting Malhotra to take down his tweet, which he then did.”
BMA then issued a statement about the kerfuffle, to ensure all were aware that Malhotra’s award was not a BMA award, and his views were not endorsed by the BMA.17
“If you’re reading this and scratching your head wondering how a tweet could rip a hole in the vaccine universe, thank yourself for not falling under the spell of vaccine magic where minor denunciations must be warded off with counter enchantments and press release potions,” Thacker wrote. “‘There’s a lot of money and many careers behind these vaccines,’ Malhotra told me.”18
Inconvenient Science Silenced by Twitter
Former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson was also a victim of vaccine hysteria: His Twitter account was suspended when he posted this scientifically accurate information:19
“It doesn’t stop infection. Or transmission. Don’t think of it as a vaccine. Think of it — at best — as a therapeutic with a limited window of efficacy and terrible side effect profile that must be dosed IN ADVANCE OF ILLNESS. And we want to mandate it? Insanity.”
Berenson filed a lawsuit against Twitter for labeling the tweet as misleading and canceling his account. The case has since been resolved, with Twitter acknowledging that the tweets should not have led to a suspension. When his account was reinstated, Berenson tweeted the exact same message, which this time escaped Twitter’s “misinformation” flag.
Dr. Meryl Nass was similarly censored by Twitter after she tweeted the findings of a preprint study by Israeli scientists, which looked into the immunogenicity and efficacy of a fourth COVID-19 mRNA shot.20 It showed that while antibody titers were high, efficacy was low — “strong evidence,” she tweeted, “that titers are useless at predicting efficacy.” In a show of the hypocrisy of vaccine hysterics, Thacker explained:21
“Nass told me she does not understand how she desecrated vaccine magic. ‘I guess you have to ask Twitter that,’ she emailed me. However, her sacrilege seems to involve repeating the study’s conclusions that antibody titers do not correlate with vaccine protection.
Oddly enough, former CDC Director Tom Frieden made this exact same point22last September to The BMJ, ‘We don’t know that antibody level is what determines protection.’”
Politics Put Ahead of Science in Booster Rollout
In another disturbing example of the narrative taking priority over science, Dr. Marion Gruber, director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research & Review (OVRR) and OVRR deputy director Dr. Philip Krause both left their positions near the end of 2021, citing frustration that the CDC is involved in decisions that should be left up to the FDA, and that the White House announced booster shots were coming before the FDA had finished its reviews of the booster shots.23,24
Both Gruber and Krause were authors of an article published in The Lancet, which stated, “the currently available evidence does not show the need for widespread use of booster vaccination in populations that have received an effective primary vaccination regimen.”25
Harvard professor Martin Kulldorff, a member of the FDA’s Drug Safety and Risk Management Advisory Committee, was also punished by the CDC — which removed him from its advisory committee on vaccines — when he stated a COVID-19 clinical trial should not have been paused. Twitter then censored him when he tweeted that people with prior natural COVID-19 infection and children do not need COVID-19 shots.26
Steve Kirsch, executive director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, has also been vilified for speaking out against vaccines, and he has proof, in the form of a timeline of changes made to his Wikipedia page, which went from describing him as a “good guy,” including his 2003 humanitarian award, to painting him as a “menace to society.” “Because I’m a threat, it’s important to discredit me,” he wrote.27,28
When an exposé by The New York Times revealed in February 2022 that the CDC hasn’t published most of the data it’s been collecting during the pandemic,29 the CDC stated it was due to fear that the information might be misinterpreted.30
“Let’s be clear,” Kirsch wrote. “The only way the vaccine data could be interpreted as ineffective by us ‘misinformation spreaders’ is if the data shows the vaccines don’t work … The truth is the data didn’t support their narrative so they hid it. Do you think they would hide the data if it showed the vaccines worked? Of course not! … CDC admits it withheld data from the public because they didn’t want to create vaccine hesitancy.”31
In these unprecedented times, it’s clear that government agencies and the media are intent on sharing only the official narrative — not the truth about COVID-19 shots.
“Of course, none of the science writers working at mainstream outlets — New York Times Science Desk, Nature Magazine, Scientific American, Science Magazine and UnDark Magazine — have done an Edward R. Murrow and spoken out in alarm and dismay about this state of fear and paranoia,” Thacker noted. “Oh no! Most science writers are too busy doing their scicomm — helping and supporting the government to promote their position on vaccine policies.”32
Originally published August 02, 2022 on Mercola.com
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times. Epoch Health welcomes professional discussion and friendly debate. To submit an opinion piece, please follow these guidelines and submit through our form here.
Global stability was undermined by the 2014 Western-orchestrated coup d’état in Ukraine, the Kremlin said
The original source of the contemporary threat to the global order was the 2014 Maidan coup in Kiev, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov claimed on Thursday. Peskov was pushing back on assertions made by NATO’s secretary-general that Russia’s military offensive in Ukraine was to blame for a major shake-up.
“The real threat to the world order and the situation in the world and … in Europe comes from the coup that took place in Ukraine in 2014, which was carefully orchestrated by, among others, NATO countries, despite the guarantees that the foreign ministers of a number of countries had provided. Hence the threat and danger to the world order,” he stressed.
According to Peskov, tensions in Europe have been stoked by aggressive NATO policies and encroachment toward Russia’s borders.
“This situation has been maturing for several decades and in many ways it was fueled by the aggressive policies NATO pursued towards our country as they brought their infrastructure closer to Russia. This created additional threats for us,” Peskov noted, explaining that, faced with such reality, Moscow had no choice but to take action.
On Thursday, NATO’s Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said that the Ukraine conflict is the “most dangerous situation in Europe since World War Two,” and the West must do its best to stop Russia from winning. With that, he vowed to continue to support Kiev with arms and other types of aid.
Moscow has repeatedly warned the West against sending weapons to Kiev, saying it only prolongs the conflict, increases the number of casualties, and will result in long-term consequences.
Russia sent troops into Ukraine on February 24, citing Kiev’s failure to implement the Minsk agreements, designed to give the regions of Donetsk and Lugansk special status within the Ukrainian state. The protocols, brokered by Germany and France, were first signed in 2014. Former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko has since admitted that Kiev’s main goal was to use the ceasefire to buy time and “create powerful armed forces.”
In February 2022, the Kremlin recognized the Donbass republics as independent states and demanded that Ukraine officially declare itself a neutral country that will never join any Western military bloc. Kiev insists the Russian offensive was completely unprovoked.
This is the best and most comprehensive documentary I have ever seen . It logically and concisely lays out how the power structure of the world works from WWI to modern times. No one should be surprised of the CIA involvement. This should be mandatory viewing for every person on the planet especially people of the United States. It is long, but worth of the time for those seeking the truth. The world is not as it seems. Please share!