Discovery+ is releasing Generation Drag. Produced by Tyra Banks, the show documents five young drag queens as they participate in a drag show, “Dragutante,” designed for LGBTQ kids ages 8-18. In celebration of Pride Month, Discovery+ plans to release the six-episode docuseries on June 1.
The Warner Bros.-owned streaming platform, Discovery+, is wrong to produce this type of program. Many would consider it child abuse to encourage these children to dress in drag, question their gender, and sexually exploit themselves.
The parents shown on camera who celebrate their child’s decision to become transgender should be ashamed. 1MM knows that God makes no mistakes. These children were designed in His image before they left their mother’s womb.
While normalizing the drag queen lifestyle, Generation Drag attempts to make the lifestyle appear glamourous by using young cast members to lure a young audience. The reality show depicts transgenderism as the way a person is born but then glorifies this lifestyle as a decision. Tolerance is one thing, but acceptance or affirmation is another.
Obviously, Discovery+ is attempting to desensitize America’s youth by airing programs starring young people. This docuseries covers the real life of young people and will attract both young and old viewers. Children and teens are being desensitized, but parents can do something about this hidden agenda.
Please sign our petition urging Discovery+ to drop plans to air the docuseries ‘Generation Drag’ immediately.
Let Discovery+ know that you and your family will not be watching ‘Generation Drag’ or anything else on the streaming platform in protest of this new show.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00One Million Momshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngOne Million Moms2022-05-24 04:57:202022-05-24 05:12:25TAKE ACTION: Discovery+ Promoting Drag Queen Lifestyle to Children
What would we do without the Department of Homeland Security? Those intrepid defenders of our liberties are showing these days how richly they deserve our taxpayer billions, as DHS officials, ever on the watch, warned on Monday that “domestic violent extremists” are “infiltrating” the national debate over abortion, with nefarious plans to “incite violence amongst their supporters.”
Now, I must admit, I’m not as sharp as the all the knives in the drawer over at the DHS, and I don’t have my finger on the pulse of threats to “our democracy,” which Leftists are constantly telling us is in imminent peril from people who believe in the U.S. Constitution and the basic goodness of the American experiment. So I hope that Alejandro Mayorkas and his henchmen, that is, colleagues, at the DHS will forgive me for not realizing that domestic violent extremists have only recently infiltrated the abortion debate. I had the crazy idea that domestic violent extremists had actually infiltrated the abortion debate decades ago; in fact, I thought they had been there from the very beginning. After all, there are people out there who think that those who dismember babies in the womb are performing a decent and righteous act; if that’s not domestic violent extremism, what is?
But that is, of course, not the kind of domestic violent extremism that the DHS has in mind. To be sure, our intrepid defenders didn’t specify exactly what kind of domestic violent extremism they did have in mind. ABC News reported that the DHS official who disclosed this warning “did not specify which side, if any, the extremists were taking.” However, it’s not hard to figure out which side the DHS has in mind. The FBI, as well as DHS officials, have quitefrequentlyrepeated the claim that “white supremacists” are the most formidable “domestic extremist” threat that the nation faces today.
This is an administration that has likened parents who have protested at school board meetings against Communist indoctrination and transgender propaganda in public schools to terrorists, while not saying a thing about genuine Antifa violence and thuggery, so when the DHS warns that “domestic violent extremists” are infiltrating the abortion debate, it’s absolutely certain that the people they are tarring with this label are pro-lifers. And while there have been a handful of pro-lifers who were violent in the past, it’s far more likely that DHS is equating dissenting words with violence.
Why do I say that? Because it has happened to me. Last year, the Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism (GIFCT), an organization created by Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and YouTube to police terrorism on the Internet, bizarrely designated my organization Jihad Watch a “violent extremist” group, despite the fact that pretty much all we do is type and report on jihad activity in the U.S. and around the world. In response to a letter from my attorney demanding a retraction, the GIFCT refused to back down. Those who designated Jihad Watch as a “violent extremist” group explained that we reported on violent activity — terrorist bombings, murders, etc. — and that this in some way “dehumanized” Muslims.
How we did this was left unexplained; it would have been impossible to explain, as it was absurd on its face. If reporting news that puts some group in a bad light is “dehumanizing,” the GIFCT and DHS should go after the establishment media for “dehumanizing” Trump and his supporters. The response to my attorney’s letter was essentially the increasingly common Leftist argument that speech that dissents from its party line is violence, and hence must be shut down.
DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, fresh from defending his sinister and Orwellian new Disinformation Governance Board, promises that his department is right on top of this alleged “domestic violent extremist” threat: “Over the past year, we in the Department of Homeland Security have improved and strengthened our approach to combating this dynamic, evolving threat.”
How reassuring. Meanwhile, Leftist pro-abortion ideologues have been demonstrating at the homes of the Supreme Court Justices who are likely to vote to overturn Roe v. Wade in a naked attempt to intimidate them into changing their vote. Despite the fact that it is a felony to demonstrate at private homes, the Biden administration has applauded these protests. The government is presently in the hands of thugs who believe that bullying and frightening people into submission is an acceptable political tactic. Can the DHS, in such an environment, spare even a few agents to try to head off any possible Leftist violence regarding a possible overturning of Roe? After all, Leftists are much, much more likely to be violent than pro-lifers. This is true both historically and recently and is indicated by the nature of what they’re so avidly defending.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Center For Security Policyhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngCenter For Security Policy2022-05-23 14:09:422022-05-23 14:10:13DHS: ‘Domestic violent extremists’ are ‘infiltrating’ the abortion debate
Please use social media, etc. to pass on this Newsletter to other open-minded citizens…
If at any time you’d like to be added to (or taken off) the distribution of our popular, free, worldwide Media Balance Newsletter, simply send me an email saying that.
Note 1: We recommend reading the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone, as some documents (e.g. PDFs) are much easier to read on a large computer screen… We’ve tried to use common fonts, etc. to minimize display issues.
Note 2: For recent past Newsletter issues see 2020 Archives & 2021 Archives & 2022 Archives. To accommodate numerous requests received about prior articles over the twelve plus years of the Newsletter, we’ve put together since the beginning of the Newsletter — where you can search by year. For a detailed background about the Newsletter, please read this.
Note 3: See this extensive list of reasonable books on climate change. As a parallel effort, we have also put together a list of some good books related to industrial wind energy. Both topics are also extensively covered on my website: WiseEnergy.org.
Note 4: I am not an attorney or a physician, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or any of my websites) should be construed as giving legal or medical advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent, licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues, and consult a competent physician regarding medical matters.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00John Droz, Jr.http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJohn Droz, Jr.2022-05-23 06:32:222022-05-23 06:32:22AWED NEWSLETTER: We cover COVID to Climate, as well as Energy to Elections.
Founded in 1933 by Archbishop of Cincinnati John T. McNicholas the National Legion of Decency was an organization dedicated to identifying and combating objectionable content, from the point of view of the Roman Catholic Church in the United States, in motion pictures. Bishop Cicognani warned against the “massacre of innocence of youth.” The Legion originally included many Protestant and even some Jewish clerics. The National Legion of Decency caused the movie industry to create a rating system. To learn more read our column: Is it time for the Motion Picture Association of America to Add a “Q” Rating?.
Recently Bill Mahar did a monologue during his “New Rule” segment titled “Along for the Pride.” Mahar took a look at on what has happened to children identifying as gay overtime. Bill used a chart showing the increase in the number of Americans who self-identify as LGBTQ (click here to view the chart).
Bill’s concern, like that of Bishop McNicholas, is the “massacre of the innocence of youth” over time by social pressures, chemically and via medical procedures. Watch:
Bill Mahar asked a key question about why trans children are more likely to be from Los Angeles, Californian rather than Youngstown, Ohio, “If this spike in trans children is all natural why is it regional?”
Mahar answers his own question stating, “Either Ohio is shaming them (gays) or California is creating them.”
Bill is spot on. America is creating gays and this is the goal of public schools, colleges and universities, corporations from Apple to Amazon to Disney to the Democrat Party.
Shaming versus Creating Homosexuals
The National Legion of Decency shamed the movie industry into creating a system to classify film based upon “objectionable material.” In 1968 the MPAA set up a rating board that classified films as G, M, R, and X. The MPA ratings are now as follows:
G, for general audiences;
PG, parental guidance suggested;
PG-13, parents strongly cautioned, because film contains material inappropriate for children under 13;
R, restricted to adults and to children under 17 accompanied by parent or guardian;
and NC-17, no children under 17 admitted.
Is it not feasible and reasonable to do the same with those who are encouraging, promoting and thereby creating more who self-identify as LGBTQ+? We agree with Bill Mahar that this conversion to LGBTQ+ is regional but its reach is both national and global.
It is national because the U.S. public schools are brainwashing American children into believing that be gay is good, when just the opposite is true.
In the 1830s Horace Mann, a Massachusetts legislator and secretary of that state’s board of education, advocated for the creation of a national system of public schools with the focus on training students to become skilled workers while teaching them the traditional core academic disciplines (i.e. reading, writing, arithmetic and applied science).
Today public schools are under the microscope for teaching “objectionable material” children about the gay lifestyle, thereby creating more children who self-identify as gay.
LGBTQ individuals are more than twice as likely as heterosexual men and women to have a mental health disorder in their lifetime. They are 2.5 times more likely to experience depression, anxiety, and substance misuse compared with heterosexual individuals.
There has been a concerted effort to stop others from “shaming” those who act gay. Gay organization like GLSEN have called it bullying and many public schools have implemented programs to stop bullying. But these anti-bullying programs are as Bill Mahar said are creating more gays.
But you see that is the objective. They want to shame heterosexuals to become gay.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-05-22 08:12:412022-05-23 06:48:21Time For A New National Legion of Decency to stop the social and medical ‘massacre of the innocence of youth’
There is a growing concern, which has turned into a national movement, to warn parents about efforts to groom their children in public school classrooms, public school media centers, by corporations like Disney, Amazon, and Apple and other publishers and distributors of books, films and TV programs.
Add to this the calls to expose misinformation, disinformation and mal-information. We are witnessing a perfect storm to expose untruths and myths in every media format.
The current pre-sales movie ticket purchasers are majority male (accounting for 61% of those purchases) and the majority are younger (aged between 12 and 34). Pairs and groups take the majority of these ticket purchases (84%), lending power to the notion of cinema’s pull as a social event, and a destination for friends and groups.
“Comparing the data to pre-pandemic shut down numbers, we can see a fair few similarities,” Rizzolo said. The pre-sales moviegoers were predominantly male, and that has shifted to a heavier weighting now, meaning fewer females are buying pre-sales tickets today than pre-2020. The average age of pre-sales moviegoers has also gone down significantly, from men in the range of 25 to 54 to a majority that is younger, aged 12 to 34.
“Moviegoers over the age of 55, as can be expected, are the slowest to return to cinemas.” Pre-pandemic, this audience favoured Tuesday screenings, as opposed to the Thursday and Friday screenings that make up 60% of the pre-sales majority’s purchases. That trend has solidified; older moviegoers were seeing 22% of their sessions on a Tuesday pre-pandemic, and that number is now up to 27%, with Friday sessions following at 19%.
So, the audience of movie goers in 2022 are males, pairs and groups aged 12-34 years old. A prime market shift.
History of Movie Censorship
In 1907 Chicago became the first city to regulate and censor movies. The United States Supreme Court upheld Chicago’s right to do this. In 1909, New York City, by order of Mayor George B. McClellan, closed 550 theaters because the police chief claimed that “most movie material was reprehensible.” A 1915 United States Supreme Court landmark decision firmly established that censorship could be applied to film.
The MPAA was founded as the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA) in 1922 as a trade association of member motion picture companies. At its founding, MPPDA member companies produced approximately 70 to 80 percent of the films made in the United States. In 1930, the MPPDA set up the Motion Picture Production Code (also known as the Hays Code). It didn’t wield any real power until it joined forces with the Legion of Decency, an organization created by the Catholic Church (as well as other religious organizations) dedicated to combating “objectionable material.” From that point forward, the MPPDA would only approve films that had the Catholic Church’s seal of approval. The Legion of Decency would also assign ratings to the approved films.
The MPPDA became the MPAA
In 1968 the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) established a system of movie ratings for parents to use as a guide to determine the appropriateness of a film’s content for children and teenagers. The ratings system is voluntary, and there is no legal requirement that filmmakers submit their films for rating.
In 1968 the MPAA set up a rating board that classified films as G, M, R, and X. After various changes the MPA ratings are now as follows:
G, for general audiences;
PG, parental guidance suggested;
PG-13, parents strongly cautioned, because film contains material inappropriate for children under 13;
R, restricted to adults and to children under 17 accompanied by parent or guardian;
and NC-17, no children under 17 admitted.
X-rated films are now considered pornography.
Should the MPAA add a “Q” to each of its ratings?
The use of and promotion of LGBTQ+ characters has grown since the release of the film The Best Man (1964), where a character, played by Shelley Berman, is accused of being homosexual. This was the first American film to use the word “homosexual”. Brock Peters played one of the first expressly homosexual characters in an American film The Pawnbroker in 1964.
Since 1964 there have been a growing number of homosexual characters introduced into films by all of the studios, from Disney, to Marvel, to Sony. Some studios like Disney have made it their goal to increase the number of homosexual characters in films and cartoons. This includes online streaming services who produce films such as Netflix, HBOMax, Hulu, Amazon Prime and others.
Given the growing concern by parents, healthcare professionals, psychologists, psychiatrists, politicians and the general public, we suggest it is time that the MPAA add a new rating. This rating is “Q.”
This is not a stand alone rating but rather a rating added to the current ratings of films as follows:
G-Q, for general audiences;
PG-Q, parental guidance suggested;
PG-13-Q, parents strongly cautioned, because film contains material inappropriate for children under 13;
R-Q, restricted to adults and to children under 17 accompanied by parent or guardian;
and NC-17-Q, no children under 17 admitted.
We also suggest that we have a rating of X-Q.
The Bottom Line
We recently went to see the Disney Studios and Marvel film Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness. The film was rated PG. One of the scenes is of the parents of the Marvel character America Chavez played by Xochitl Gomez. America Chavez’s parents are two lesbians.
What message is Disney and Marvel Studios sending to Hispanic children who’s families are predominantly Catholic?
After seeing the most recent Dr. Strange film we learned that Zara Phythian, the martial arts stuntperson and actress who appeared in 2016’s Doctor Strange, and her husband, had been sentenced to eight years of prison after being found guilty of sexually abusing a 15-year-old girl.
We also watched as Corporate President Karey Burke of Disney, Inc. declared that she was determined to have 50% of Disney characters be homosexuals. Watch:
SCOOP: Disney corporate president Karey Burke says, "as the mother [of] one transgender child and one pansexual child," she supports having "many, many, many LGBTQIA characters in our stories" and wants a minimum of 50 percent of characters to be LGBTQIA and racial minorities. pic.twitter.com/oFRUiuu9JG
— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) March 29, 2022
Disney, Inc. alone owns the following franchises:
ABC
ESPN (80% stake)
Touchstone Pictures
Marvel
Lucasfilm
A&E (50% equity holding with Hearst Corporation)
The History Channel (50% equity holding with Hearst Corporation)
Lifetime (50% equity holding with Hearst Corporation)
Pixar
Hollywood Records
Vice Media (10% stake)
Core Publishing
It is past time for movie goers to understand what is in each film whether viewed in theatres or via online streaming services or on television.
Knowledge is power. Knowing before one goes to see a movie should be an individual choice but that choice must be based upon the truth of what the film contains. If the film contains any LGBTQ+ character or promotion of the LGBTQ+ agenda then it is up to the buyer to beware.
In the eyes of many Americans what is on the silver screen today is “reprehensible.” It is time for the Motion Picture Association of America to catch up with the valid concerns of we the people.
Better safe than sorry by warning movie goers of “objectionable material.”
Readers who wish to contact the Motion Picture Association of America about adding a “Q” rating please click here.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-05-21 06:28:322022-06-13 11:08:41Is it time for the Motion Picture Association of America to Add a “Q” Rating?
And with that the Biden regime doubles down on vaccines for the young…..
In light of the FDA’s approval of booster shots for children, my story. I was a 33 year old avid hiker, biker, and traveler. I received the Pfizer booster on 12/15/21. That was the last normal day of my life. I have not been able to walk more than 80 feet since that day. #FDApic.twitter.com/vpMXB1GaKX
BY: Expose News, May 14, 2022 (hat tip Ben Armstrong):
Official figures published by the UK’s Office for National Statistics show that deaths per 100,000 among double vaccinated 18-39-year-olds were on average 91% higher than deaths per 100,000 among unvaccinated 18-39-year-olds between January 2021 and January 2022.
This means it can no longer be denied that the Covid-19 vaccines are deadly because even the official Government published figures now prove it
The Office for National Statistics is the UK’s largest independent producer of official statistics and the recognised national statistical institute of the UK. It is responsible for collecting and publishing statistics related to the economy, population and society at national, regional and local levels.
Its latest dataset on deaths in England by vaccination status can be found here. It contains a large amount of data on age-standardised mortality rates for deaths by vaccination status between 1 January 2021 and 31 January 2022.
Table 2 of the dataset contains data on the monthly age-standardised mortality rates by vaccination status by age group for all deaths in England. The following table shows an example of how the numbers are presented in the dataset –
What immediately catches the eye when looking at this data is the mortality rate per 100,00 person-years among 18-39-year-olds in the month of January 2021. The figures show the death rate among the unvaccinated in this month was 67.7 deaths per 100,000 person-years. Whilst the death rate among the partly vaccinated (at least 21 days ago) was 119.9 deaths per 100,000 years.
This shows that vaccinated 18-39-year-olds were more likely to die in January 2021, suggesting the Covid-19 injections increased the risk of death or played a part in causing death. So we dug further and extracted all the figures on 18-39-year-olds for each month between January 2021 and January 2022, and this is what we found –
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-05-20 16:21:082022-05-20 16:21:58Vaxxed Young Adults are 92% More Likely to Die than Unvaccinated
And now we are sending BILLIONS over there. The more we know, the darker, more evil it gets.
This is a catastrophe of unimaginable proportion.
Excerpt:
There is one Sub-Award that stands out among the rest, and it was awarded to Labyrinth Global Health INC for “SME Manuscript Documentation and COVID-19 Research”.
An award for Covid-19 research isn’t exactly shocking when the world is allegedly in the grip of a Covid-19 pandemic, but considering the fact the sub-contract was awarded 12th November 2019, at least one month before the alleged emergence of the novel coronavirus, and three months before it was officially dubbed Covid-19, the award for Covid-19 research should come as a shock to everyone. [Click here to view the document]
But the shock doesn’t end there, because the place the contact for Covid-19 research was instructed to take place was Ukraine, as was the entire contract awarded by the DOD to Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp.
The world first started to hear about a novel coronavirus in early January 2020, with reports of an alleged new pneumonia-like illness spreading across Wuhan, China. However, the world did not actually know of Covid-19 until February 2020, because it was not until the 11th of that month that the World Health Organisation officially named the novel coronavirus disease Covid-19.
So with this being the official truth, why does United States Government data show that the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) awarded a contract on the 12th November 2019 to Labyrinth Global Health INC. for ‘COVID-19 Research’, at least one month before the alleged emergence of the novel coronavirus, and three months before it was officially dubbed Covid-19?
The shocking findings, however, do not end there. The contract awarded in November 2019 for ‘COVID-19 Research’ was not only instructed to take place in Ukraine, it was in fact part of a much larger contract for a ‘Biological threat reduction program in Ukraine’.
Perhaps explaining why Labyrinth Global Health has been collaborating with Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance, and Ernest Wolfe’s Metabiota since its formation in 2017.
The Government of the United States has a website called ‘USA Spending‘, an official open data source of federal spending information. According to the site as of 12th April 2021, the US Government has spent a mind-blowing $3.63 trillion “in response to COVID-19”. But that’s not the only information on Covid that can be found on the site.
Hidden within the ‘Award Search’ are details on a contract awarded by the Department of Defense to a company named ‘Black & Veatch Special Projects Corp‘, which is allegedly “a global engineering, procurement, consulting and construction company specialising in infrastructure development”.
The contract was awarded on September 20th, 2012 and is described as “Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services”. Obviously, this is very vague and most likely of little interest to anyone who happens to stumble across it. But there is something contained deep within the details that should be of interest to anyone and everyone.
The ‘Award History’ for the contract contains a tab for ‘Sub-Awards’ detailing the recipients, action date, amount, and a very brief description for 115 Sub-Award transactions. Most of the Sub-Awards are extremely mundane for things such as “laboratory equipment for Kyiv”, or “office furniture for Kyiv”.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-05-20 05:03:042022-05-20 06:08:16United States D.O.D issued a contract for ‘COVID-19 Research’ in Ukraine 3 months before COVID-19 officially existed
Yesterday, I filed suit in federal court against HHS for failing to give me records on COVID vaccine safety I had requested under the Freedom of Information Act.
Let me back up to the beginning. In 1976, U.S. regulators pulled the swine flu vaccine from the market after it was linked to 25 deaths. In stark contrast, U.S. regulators have not pulled the COVID vaccines from the market despite almost 28,000 deaths in the U.S. alone that could be linked to the vaccines. So here we have a situation that is potentially more than a thousand times worse than the swine flu vaccine, but the government has left the COVID vaccines on the market. Not only that, the government spent a billion dollars to have media outlets like CNN and the Washington Post tell us the vaccines are safe. We have gotten government by phony narrative instead of a legitimate public health response. If the vaccines are safe, the government would not have had to spend a billion dollars trying to convince us of that.
In 1990, the government instituted a vaccine adverse event reporting system – VAERS. There have been a relative handful of adverse reactions to various vaccines reported every year since, but the line went straight up off the chart when the COVID vaccines were introduced. The purpose of the reporting system is to prompt the government to conduct safety studies when it looks like there’s a problem. I hadn’t seen any government safety studies of the COVID vaccines so, last November, I asked HHS for any studies they had performed and for any memo explaining their decision to perform, or not perform, such studies.
In response, I got back a government website URL where a number of studies are posted. As a group, they claim various adverse reactions to the COVID vaccines do not outweigh the benefits of the vaccines. Only one of the studies addresses mortality – the elephant in the room, the idea that the COVID vaccines just might be killing people by the thousands. That study, performed by a mix of CDC, Kaiser Permanente, and Pfizer-tied scientists did not look at the VAERS data. It performed a statistical analysis on another database. Unsurprisingly, it found “no increased risk for mortality among COVID-19 vaccine recipients.” However, “causes of death were not assessed” in individual cases and it was published last October. There have been an additional 12,000 deaths in the U.S. alone possibly caused by COVID vaccines since then [see The Daily Skirmish – 10/20/21], deaths your government has not investigated.
I never got the decision memo or most of the other records I requested. HHS was in bad faith because they referred my request to the CDC, a single component of HHS, when the decision about safety studies might have been made by the HHS Secretary or other leadership office. The CDC, from whom I received a handful of records, was in bad faith for initially claiming my request was burdensome and that other agencies and the manufacturers would have to be consulted. This was a lie because, when I asked for expedited processing, they gave me records the very next day. I went back to HHS, asking for an agency-wide search on an expedited basis limited in some respects to the subject of mortality, but there was no response. So I sued them yesterday. Now it’s out of their hands and a federal judge will decide what records I get.
I filed requests for expedited processing with the CDC and HHS because the CDC had initially wanted to leave the document production schedule open-ended and HHS had delayed matters by closing my case file in bad faith. I wasn’t willing to wait 75 years to find out when I might get records, which is how long the FDA, another HHS component, had demanded to produce records in another FOIA case, that one regarding the Pfizer vaccine. The FDA was shot down by a court which initially shortened the record production schedule from 75 years to eight months, although the litigation went on from there.
The government has 30 days to answer my complaint, and we’ll see what happens.
In the course of all this, I amassed over a hundred articles pointing to safety problems with the COVID vaccines, including mortality, and saw in a database there are thousands more. No, the government does not get to sweep this under the rug. I want to know what the government decided about mortality studies and why. I want to know why the government did not pull the COVID vaccines from the market when the situation is potentially more than a thousand times worse than the swine flu vaccine disaster.
Tomorrow, I’ll tell you about some of the COVID vaccine adverse reaction articles I gathered. They’re eye-opening.
EXPOSED – Pfizer vaccine in the UK. Deaths and injuries include: strokes, heart attacks, miscarriages, Bell’s Palsy, nervous system disorders, immune system disorders, psychiatric disorders and blindness.
16 people are now blind after covid jab – Latest AstraZeneca deaths and injuries. As well as blindness, some of the many injuries include: strokes, heart attacks, miscarriages, sepsis, paralysis, Bell’s Palsy, deafness and covid-19.
22 residents dead in three weeks in Basingstoke nursing home – ‘It is understood the outbreak started as residents began to have their coronavirus vaccines…’
A 41-year-old Portuguese mother of two who worked in paediatrics died at a hospital in Porto just two days after being vaccinated against covid-19
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Skirmish - Liberato.UShttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Skirmish - Liberato.US2022-05-19 11:36:302022-05-19 11:36:30COVID Vaccine Deaths: What Did the Government Know and When Did It Know It?
A Democratic witness testified that men can get pregnant and have abortions during a Judiciary Committee hearing Wednesday on abortion access and care.
Republican North Carolina Rep. Dan Bishop first asked witness AVOW executive director Aimee Arrambide how she defines a “woman.”AVOW is a pro-abortion non-profit organization working to secure unrestricted access to abortion for Texas.
“I believe that everyone can identify for themselves,” Arrambide said.
“Ok. Do you believe then that men can become pregnant and have abortions?” Bishop followed up.
“Yes,” Arrambide responded.
Q: "Do you believe that men can become pregnant and have abortions?" –@RepDanBishop
— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) May 18, 2022
Bishop also asked reproductive healthcare Dr. Yashica Robinson, who uses “she/her” pronouns, if she could define what a “woman” was prior to questioning Arrambide.
“It’s important for you to understand why I said I use ‘she/her’ pronouns,” Robinson said. “It’s because I understand that for people-”
Bishop then cut her off and again asked “what is a woman?”
“I think it’s important that we educate people like you about why we’re doing the things we do, and so the reason why I use ‘she’ and ‘her’ pronouns is because I understand there are people who become pregnant that may not identify that way, and I think it is discriminatory to speak to people or to call them in such a way that they desire not to be called,” Robinson said.
Bishop again asked if she was going to answer his question about the definition of a “woman.”
“I’m a woman,” Robinson said.
“Is that as comprehensive a definition you could give me?” Bishop asked.
Robinson said that the most comprehensive definition she could provide for the time being.
A “woman” is defined as “an adult female person,” according to Merriam-Webster. A female has XX chromosomes while men have XY chromosomes. Men do not. have the same reproductive organs that females have and are unable to get pregnant or receive an abortion.
Robinson and Arrambide are not the only ones unable to provide a definition of what a “woman” is. The Daily Caller reached out to every Senate Democrat to see if any of our leaders would provide a definition. Each request was met with silence. Only 15 Republican Senators were willing to provide a definition of what a “woman” is when questioned by the Caller.
Supreme Court nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson also dodged the question during her hearing, telling Republican Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn she is “not a biologist” and therefore could not define what a “woman” is.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2022-05-19 07:15:052022-05-19 07:17:01Dem Witness Says Men Can Get Pregnant And Have Abortions
The Evangelical Lutheran Church, a mainstream church with around 3,000,000 U.S. members and its very own openly Transgender Bishop the Rev. Megan Rohrer, a former lesbian who claims now to be non binary and who likes to be known as “they or them” pronouns, just declared that their 1991 social teachings document is the basis of their support for abortion – otherwise known to others as murder.
That transgendered female former lesbian Bishop, who will lead 65 synods from its church in San Francisco stated prior to the ordination, “ I step into this role because a diverse community of Lutherans in Northern California and Nevada prayerfully and thoughtfully voted to do a historic thing. My installation will celebrate all that is possible when we trust God to shepherd us forward.”
Really?????? This was Gods work?????
Bishop Elizabeth Eaton, the actual head of the ECLA, says the church rightly teaches that abortion should be regulated BUT NOT outlawed. The church – if you can call it that – says that a fetus is a human life and is a neighbor of – wait for it – the woman and the community!!!
So the developing life, the future human being and the mother of that human life are just neighbors!! The Church teaches that abortions of fetuses from their church members is not only a decision of the mother or father but rather it happens in the community. That is with God, family, partners, friends, doctors and pastors.
Her words:- “While the leaked draft does not represent the Supreme Court’s ruling in its final form; nevertheless, it contradicts this church’s teaching. This church teaches that abortion and reproductive health care, including contraception, must be legal and accessible.”
I am sure God, my God, is not ever on the side of murdering the fetus in a disgusting and savage act that is acceptable to the extremists and leftists in our country. All the others in on the decision are doing the work of Satan. Plain and simple.
America. How is this even remotely acceptable to any bible believing, Christian male or female? How can those 3,000,000 so called members even insult God by calling themselves Christians? These people are not only sick, they are evil.
Let me tell you all one thing that is as sure as the nose on your face. This humble scribe will not EVER be calling anyone who claims to be a different sex to that they were born, a “they” or “them.” They can call themselves whatever the heck they want to but guess what? They have either an X or Y chromosome which makes them a male or female.
In 1000 years, if a body is dug up and examined, do you think they will say ahhhh… that was a transgender? A non binary? A member of the LGBTQUI community? A confused individual? A pervert?
No is the answer. They will run a test and the result will be either male or female, the two sexes placed on earth by God. Placed to breed and raise families together.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Save America Foundationhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngSave America Foundation2022-05-19 06:41:382022-05-19 06:42:58The Evangelical Lutheran Church Comes Out in Support of Abortion!
Randall Smith: 16,000,000 dead black babies and counting. All those demonstrating to protect the abortion industry are not only on the wrong side of history, they’re also racist.
There’s been a lot of discussion recently about the upcoming Dobbs decision, in which the Supreme Court might finally overturn the Court’s deadly earlier decisions in Roe v. Wade and its companion case Doe v. Bolton. Many of the articles bemoaning the coming decision have been filled with incivility, mindless vitriol, fear-mongering, absurd non sequiturs, and outright lies.
When the Supreme Court overturned its 1986 decision in Bowers v. Hardwick seventeen years later in 2003 in Lawrence v. Texas – thereby protecting homosexual activity – liberals weren’t screaming that Brown v. Board of Education was next, because they knew that would have been an absurd non sequitur.
And today, no progressive liberal would find it acceptable were a conservative group giving out the home addresses of the dissenting judges in Dobbs, so that groups of angry demonstrators could gather outside their homes to pressure them to change their minds. No, only one side may do these things.
Well, to those defending Roe, I have only one thing to say: You’re on the wrong side of history.
I’ve always wanted to say that. Mostly just to show people on the other side how it feels. I do in fact believe that those who are arguing for abortion are on the wrong side of history and that, in fifty years, with advances in neonatal care and greater knowledge of the developing child in the womb, abortion will be seen as barbaric as slavery does to us today.
And just for the record, if you study history, you’ll find that when your side is the side that’s using euphemisms to cover up what you’re doing – breaking windows, lying, threatening people with violence, and stirring up mob anger, fear, and resentment – you usually are on the “wrong side of history.”
But simply saying to one’s opponents, “You’re on the wrong side of history,” is no argument. It is the verbal equivalent of a patronizing pat on the head. Imagine making a sophisticated argument about something only to have your interlocutor blurt out: “Well that’s just stupid!” or “You’re just wrong!” Now, I may be wrong; I may even be stupid. But you will have to make an actual argument to show that.
Too many people today assume they have no need to make logical arguments and can instead simply assume that “all good and sensible people” agree with them because, well, “it’s obvious.” The problem is, it almost never is, and with especially controversial issues, such as abortion, you can’t simply assume it is. What you are saying when you claim, “It’s obvious,” is that the people who disagree with you are stupid — too dense to see what’s “obvious.”
So I’m not going to simply say to those who disagree with me about abortion, “You’re on the wrong side of history.” I think they are; they obviously think they’re not. Fine. We need to move on and get to some real arguments and actual data.
“Disparate impact” and racial bias seem to be popular topics at the moment. You can barely go more than a day or two without a discussion of them showing up on the mainstream media. So let’s talk about them with reference to abortion.
The claim one often hears is that overturning Roe would be “disastrous” for the black community. But here is the reality:
Abortion is the leading cause of death for African Americans, more than all other causes combined, including HIV, violent crimes, accidents, cancer, and heart disease.
Abortions are performed on black women at a rate 3.5 times higher than white women; black women have over 30 percent of abortions though they are only 12.6 percent of the population.
Over their lifetimes, black women average 1.6 more pregnancies than White women but are 5 times more likely to have a pregnancy that ends in abortion.
Approximately 360,000 pre-born black babies are aborted every year, nearly 1000 per day.
More than 16-million black babies have died by abortion since 1973.
The percentage of the black population in the U.S. has dropped from 12.6 percent in 2010 to 12.4 percent in 2020. The black population in the U.S. (41 million) has dropped precipitously below the Hispanic population (63 million), numbers that would be radically different had 16 million black lives mattered enough to society to protect them from abortion and raise them to fruitful adulthood.
You might be thinking, “Yes, but the abortion providers didn’t abort these black children because they were black.” First, liberals never allow this excuse when it comes to any other “disparate impact” case. And second, are you so sure?
Everyone admits now that the eugenicist Margaret Sanger, the racist founder of Planned Parenthood, began her “Negro Project” in 1939 to stop the growth of the black population. And it’s still the case that 79 percent of Planned Parenthood surgical abortion facilities are within walking distance (2 miles) of relatively high black and/or Hispanic populations. Black women are five times more likely to have an abortion than white women. If that isn’t evidence of “systemic racism,” then the term is meaningless.
So all you people demonstrating to protect the abortion industry, you’re not only on the wrong side of history, you’re also racist.
You? No, not you! You’re the good people! Sixteen million dead black babies and counting, and you’re absolutely certain the people pushing back against this racial genocide are the horrible, evil ones, and you – you – are the people who will be judged by history as the ones who really cared about the black community.
And you are so certain of this, in fact, that you’re willing to silence your opponents, terrorize them in mobs, lie repeatedly, vandalize churches, disrupt church services, desecrate religious sacraments, tear down free women’s care centers that provide women the resources to make the choice not to terminate the life of their unborn child, and even overthrow the democratic process itself, all so that some women can terminate the lives of their unborn sons and daughters
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Catholic Thinghttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Catholic Thing2022-05-17 07:18:562022-05-17 07:18:56Abortion and the Genocide of the Black Community
In November 2021, Brook Jackson, a whistleblower who worked on Pfizer’s Phase 3 COVID jab trial in the fall of 2020, warned she’d seen evidence of fraud in the trial
With the release of Pfizer trial data — which they tried to withhold for 75 years — additional problems suggestive of fraud and data manipulation are coming to light
Trial site 1231, located in Argentina, somehow managed to recruit 10% of the total trial participants, 4,501 in all, and they did so in just three weeks, and without a contract research organization — a feat that has many questioning whether fraud was committed
The lead investigator for trial site 1231 is Dr. Fernando Polack, who also happens to be a consultant for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (RBPAC), a current adjunct professor at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee, an investigator for Fundación Infant, funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation, and the first author of Pfizer’s paper, “Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine,” published at the end of December 2021
Site 1231 held a second enrollment session, given the designation of “site 4444.” The 4444 trial site data raise another red flag. It supposedly enrolled 1,275 patients in a single week, from September 22 through 27, 2020 — the last week that recruitment could take place to meet the data cutoff for the FDA meeting in December 2020. Was “site 4444” fabricating data to create the appearance that the jab was having an effect?
In November 2021, Brook Jackson, a whistleblower who worked on Pfizer’s Phase 3 COVID jab trial in the fall of 2020, warned she’d seen evidence of fraud in the trial.
Data were falsified, patients were unblinded, the company hired poorly trained people to administer the injections, and follow-up on reported side effects lagged way behind. The revelation was published in The British Medical Journal. In his November 2, 2021, report, investigative journalist Paul Thacker wrote:1
“Revelations of poor practices at a contract research company helping to carry out Pfizer’s pivotal COVID-19 vaccine trial raise questions about data integrity and regulatory oversight …
[F]or researchers who were testing Pfizer’s vaccine at several sites in Texas during that autumn, speed may have come at the cost of data integrity and patient safety … Staff who conducted quality control checks were overwhelmed by the volume of problems they were finding.”
Jackson, a former regional director of Ventavia Research Group, a research organization charged with testing Pfizer’s COVID jab at several sites in Texas, repeatedly “informed her superiors of poor laboratory management, patient safety concerns and data integrity issues,” Thacker wrote.
When her concerns were ignored, she finally called the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and filed a complaint via email. Jackson was fired later that day after just two weeks on the job. According to her separation letter, management decided she was “not a good fit” for the company after all.
She provided The BMJ with “dozens of internal company documents, photos, audio recordings and emails” proving her concerns were valid, and according to Jackson, this was the first time she’d ever been fired in her 20-year career as a clinical research coordinator.
BMJ Report Censored
Disturbingly, social media actually censored this BMJ article and published pure falsehoods in an effort to “debunk” it. Mind you, the BMJ is one of the oldest and most respected peer-reviewed medical journals in the world! The Facebook “fact check” was done by Lead Stories, a Facebook contractor, which claimed the BMJ “did NOT reveal disqualifying and ignored reports of flaws in Pfizer’s” trials.2
In response, The BMJ slammed the fact check, calling it “inaccurate, incompetent and irresponsible.”3,4,5 In an open letter6 addressed to Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, The BMJ urged Zuckerberg to “act swiftly” to correct the erroneous fact check, review the processes that allowed it to occur in the first place, and “generally to reconsider your investment in and approach to fact checking overall.” As noted by The BMJ in its letter, the Lead Stories’ fact check:7
Inaccurately referred to The BMJ as a “news blog”
Failed to specify any assertions of fact that The BMJ article got wrong
Published the fact check on the Lead Stories’ website under a URL that contains the phrase “hoax-alert”
Pfizer Trial Data Raises Suspicions of Fraud
Now, with the release of Pfizer trial data8 — which they tried to withhold for 75 years — internet sleuths are finding additional problems suggestive of fraud and data manipulation. May 9, 2022, a Twitter user named Jikkyleaks posted a series of tweets questioning data from Pfizer trial sites 1231 and 4444.9
Trial site 1231, located in Argentina, somehow managed to recruit 10% of the total trial participants, 4,501 in all, and they did so in just three weeks, and without a contract research organization (CRO). CROs like the Ventavia Research Group, which Jackson worked for, provide clinical trial management services. The lead investigator for trial site 1231 is Dr. Fernando Polack,10 who also happens to be:11
A consultant for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (RBPAC) since 2017
A current adjunct professor at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee
An investigator for Fundación Infant,12 which is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates foundation13
The first author of Pfizer’s paper,14 “Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 Vaccine,” published at the end of December 2021
As noted by Jikkyleaks, Polack “is literally the busiest doctor on the planet,” because in addition to all those roles, he also managed to single-handedly enroll 4,500 patients in three weeks, which entails filling out some 250 pages of case report forms (CRFs) for each patient. That’s about 1,125,000 pages total. (CRFs are documents used in clinical research to record standardized data from each patient, including adverse events.)
This recruitment also took place seven days a week, which is another red flag. “Weekend recruitment for a clinical trial would be odd. Staff are needed to fill out that many record forms (CRFs) and there are potential risks to the trial, so you need medical staff. It would be highly unusual,” Jikkyleaks notes.
Is Polack just a super-humanly efficient trial investigator, or could this be evidence of fraud? As noted by Steve Kirsch in the featured video and an accompanying Substack article,15 Polack is the coordinator for a network of 26 hospitals in Argentina, so perhaps it’s possible he could have recruited 57 patients per week per hospital, but it seems highly unlikely.
Questions Surround Site 4444 Data
Now, “site 4444” does not exist. It’s actually the same as site 1231. It appears site 1231 held a second enrollment session, and these were for some reason given the designation of 4444. The 4444 trial site data raise another red flag.
Site 4444 (the second enrollment session for site 1231) supposedly enrolled 1,275 patients in a single week, from September 22 through 27, 2020, and the suspicious thing about that — aside from the speed — is the fact that this was the last week that recruitment could take place to meet the data cutoff for the FDA meeting in December 2020. Jikkyleads writes:16
“My guess: they needed enough numbers of ‘positive PCR tests’ in the placebo group to show a difference between groups for that VRBPAC meeting on the 10th Dec, and they didn’t have them. So, site 4444 appeared and gave them their ‘perfect’ result. Bravo.”
“Was there fraud in the Pfizer trial? Without a doubt. The story of Maddie de Garay is a clear case of that. Brook Jackson has evidence of fraud; she has 17 lawyers working for her. If there wasn’t fraud, these lawyers wouldn’t be wasting their time.
This new data on Site 1231/4444 looks suspicious to me. It looks too good to be true. But we can’t make the call without more information. Undoubtedly, the mainstream media will not look into this, Pfizer will remain silent, and Polack will be unreachable for comment. The lack of transparency should be troubling to everyone. That is the one thing we can say for sure.”
Pfizer Documents Reveal COVID Jab Dangers
Among the tens of thousands of Pfizer documents released by the FDA so far, we now also have clear evidence of harm. For nurse educator John Campbell, featured in the video above, these documents appear to have served as a “red pill,”18 waking him up to the possibility that the jabs may indeed be far more dangerous than anyone expected, including himself.
In the video, Campbell reviews the documents listed as “5.3.6. Postmarketing Experience,” which were originally marked “confidential.” They reveal that, cumulatively, through February 28, 2021, Pfizer received 42,086 adverse event reports, including 1,223 deaths.
To have 1,223 fatalities and 42,086 reports of injury in the first three months is a significant safety signal, especially when you consider that the 1976 swine flu vaccine was pulled after only 25 deaths.
As noted by Campbell, “It would have been good to know about this at the time, wouldn’t it?” referring to the rollout of the jabs. Campbell has been fairly consistent in his support of the “safe and effective” vaccine narrative, but “This has just destroyed trust in authority,” he said.
158,000 Recorded Side Effects — A World Record?
The first really large tranche of more than 10,000 Pfizer documents was released March 1, 2022. (You can find them all on PHMPT.org.19) In this batch were no less than nine single-space pages of “adverse events of special interest,” listed in alphabetical order20 — 158,000 in all!
To see the first page, click the link below. The first side effect on this shockingly exhaustive list is a rare condition known as 1p36 deletion syndrome. This condition, caused by the deletion of DNA in chromosome 1p36, results in developmental delays, severe intellectual disability, seizures, vision problems, hearing loss, breathing problems, brain anomalies, congenital heart defects, cardiomyopathy, renal anomalies, genital malformation, metabolic problems and more.21,22
Life expectancy depends on the amount of DNA that has been deleted. This, at bare minimum, sounds like something a pregnant woman might want to know before she gets the shot.
After reviewing some of the released CRFs in the March 1 tranche, investigative journalist Sonia Elijah also discovered several problems, including the following:23
Patients entered into the “healthy population” group who were far from healthy — For example, one such “healthy” participant was a Type 2 diabetic with angina, a cardiac stent and a history of heart attack.
Serious adverse event (SAE) numbers were left blank — Ventavia site No. 1085 has a particularly large number of missing SAE numbers.
Missing barcodes for samples collected — Without those barcodes, you can’t match the sample to the participant.
Suspicious-looking SAE start and end dates — For example, the so-called “healthy” diabetic suffered a “serious” heart attack October 27, 2020. The “end” date is listed as October 28, the next day, which is odd because it was recorded as serious enough to require hospitalization.
Also, on that same day, October 28, the patient was diagnosed with pneumonia, so likely remained hospitalized. “This anomaly raises doubt as to the accuracy of these recorded dates, potentially violating ALOCA-C clinical site documentation guidelines for clinical trials,” Elijah writes.
Unblinded teams were responsible for reviewing adverse event reports for signs of COVID cases, and to review severe COVID cases — Yet in some cases they appear to have dismissed the possibility of an event being COVID-related, such as pneumonia. This despite the fact that Pfizer’s protocol (section 8.2.4) lists “enhanced COVID-19” (i.e., antibody dependent enhancement) as a potential side effect to be on the lookout for. As noted by Elijah:
“Inadvertently, this could have led to bias, as the unblinded teams would have been aware which participants were assigned the placebo and those who received the vaccine. They might have been under pressure by the sponsor for the trial to go a certain way and for events like ‘COVID Pneumonia’ to be classified simply as pneumonia.”
Impossible dating — The diabetic who suffered a heart attack followed by pneumonia (which may have been unacknowledged COVID pneumonia) died, and the date of death is listed as the day before the patient supposedly went for a “COVID ill” visit.
Clearly, it’s impossible for a dead person to attend a medical visit, so something is wrong here. The clinical investigator note states: “There cannot be a date later than date of death. Please remove data from the COVID illness visit and add cough and shortness of breath as AEs (adverse events).” “What kind of pressure was being exerted here?” Elijah asks.
Second dose administered outside the three-week protocol window.
Observation period appears to have been an automatic entry — According to the protocol, each participant was to be observed by staff for a minimum of 30 minutes.
A majority of the CRFs state 30 minutes, which raises the question: Were participants observed for adequate amounts of time, or did they simply put down “30 minutes” as an automatic entry? Why is there so little variety in the observation times? If participants were not adequately observed, their safety was put at risk, which was one of Jackson’s concerns.
Adverse events listed as “not serious” despite extended hospital stay — In one case, the participant fell and suffered facial lacerations the day after the second dose and was hospitalized for 26 days, yet the fall was not reported as serious.
Other anomalies in this particular case include listing the fall as being caused by a “fall” unrelated to the study treatment, and the facial laceration being the result of “hypotension” (low blood pressure). The SAE number is also missing for the facial lacerations.
Elijah writes, “Doubts can be raised over the credibility of this information given the fall and facial lacerations were intrinsically related. So, if facial lacerations were due to ‘hypotension’ then the fall should be due to that too.” Might low blood pressure be an effect of the experimental shot? Possibly. Especially when you consider the patient fell the day after being given the second dose.
Even more suspicious: the causality for the fall was recorded as “related” (to the treatment) on the serious adverse event form, but listed as “not related” on the adverse event CRF. A note states, “Please confirm correct causality.”
Dismissing brand new health problems as unrelated to the treatment — For example, in one case, a female participant with no medical history of impaired kidney function was diagnosed with kidney stones and severe hypokalemia, requiring hospitalization, one month after her second dose. Yet despite her having no history of kidney problems, both events were dismissed as “not related” to the study treatment and no further investigation was done.
In closing, Elijah wrote:24
“All the evidence gleaned over a limited time appears to back up whistleblower Jackson’s claims of poor trial site data management and raises questions as to how Ventavia conducted the Pfizer clinical trials.
The errors and anomalies in the CRFs also allude to her claims that the clinical research associates were not trained adequately, with many having had no prior clinical experience history. If such egregious findings are true at these sites, could they manifest at other trial sites around North America and beyond?”
Can You Trust Pfizer?
Pfizer, which was quickly given emergency use authorization (EUA) for its COVID-19 mRNA gene therapy shot, has a long list of criminal verdicts against it:
In 2002, Pfizer and two subsidiaries paid $49 million to settle civil claims that it had failed to report best prices for its drug Lipitor, as is required under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Statute.25
In 2004, a Pfizer subsidiary Warner-Lambert pleaded guilty and paid more than $430 million to settle criminal charges and civil liability from fraudulent marketing practices.26
In 2007, another subsidiary was found guilty of paying out kickbacks for formulary placement of its drugs and had to pay a fine of $34 million.27
Two years later, in 2009, Pfizer was found guilty of health care fraud and ordered to pay the largest penalty ever for this kind of offense.28 When announcing the record penalty of $2.3 billion against the drug giant, the U.S. Department of Justice said one of the charges was a felony. The other charges stemmed from false actions and false claims submitted to federal health care programs.
In 2010, the company was again ordered to pay $142 million in damages for fraudulent marketing and promoting the drug Neurontin for unapproved uses.29
Less than 10 years later, in 2018, Pfizer was again caught in an illegal kickback scheme and agreed to pay $23.8 million to resolve claims that it used a foundation as a conduit to pay the copays of Medicare patients taking three of its drugs.30
As noted in the journal Healthcare Policy in 2010,31 “Pfizer has been a ‘habitual offender,’ persistently engaging in illegal and corrupt marketing practices, bribing physicians and suppressing adverse trial results.” The article also highlights the crimes of Johnson & Johnson, another COVID jab maker.
Despite its tarnished history, we’re now expected to trust that everything Pfizer does is above-board. I don’t think so. A company that continues getting caught committing the same crimes over and over again clearly has a deeply established ethical rot within its corporate structure that fines simply have no effect over.
Has Pfizer committed fraud in its COVID jab trials as well? It sure looks that way. Time will tell whether attorneys will have enough for a conviction in the future. If fraud did take place, Pfizer can (and likely will) be held liable for the more than one million injuries its injection has caused in the U.S. alone, and we all look forward to that reckoning.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MERCOLA Take Control of Your Healthhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMERCOLA Take Control of Your Health2022-05-17 04:19:432022-05-17 04:21:42Is This Why Pfizer Wanted Trial Data Buried for 75 Years?
Misinformation is false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive.
Disinformation is a subset of propaganda and is defined as false information that is spread deliberately to deceive people.
Malinformation or malicious information is having or showing a desire to cause harm to someone; given to, marked by, or arising from malice or malicious gossip.
In this article to expose mis, dis and malinformation we look at baby formula and Biden’s blame game campaign.
As JFK said,
The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth – persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
There are a number of articles, videos and other sources that focus on food shortages that include the lack of baby formula on grocery store shelves.
It this video the White House press secretary blames mothers and parents for hoarding baby formula:
Psaki on baby formula shortage: "What we are seeing which is an enormous problem is hoarding … & people hoarding because they are trying to profit off of fearful parents." pic.twitter.com/qtxQtnk4ng
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) May 12, 2022
In the below video Tucker Carlson explains that it is the government that is the largest buyer of baby formula since establishment of the Women, Infants and Children Program (WIC) in 1974.
Did you know these things about the Sarasota County WIC Program?
WIC services are available on a walk-in basis Monday through Thursday.
Appointments are available for those who need them.
A family of 4 earning $3,631 or less per month meets WIC income requirements.
Women are not required to show proof of pregnancy to receive WIC benefits.
Women who have had pregnancy losses [a miscarriage] are still eligible to receive WIC benefits for up to 6 months after delivery.
Breastfeeding Peer Counselors are available to provide breastfeeding support to WIC clients.
WIC has hospital-grade electric breast pumps that can be loaned to WIC mothers who have infants in the NICU. We also have single-user electric breast pumps we can give to full-time working mothers or students who are fully breastfeeding rather than receiving formula from WIC. Breast pumps are issued only during regular walk-in hours or by scheduled appointment.
WIC helps families buy fruits, vegetables and other healthy foods.
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is an equal-opportunity provider and employer.
The vast majority of baby formula purchased by WIC is from a Michigan based company, Abbott Nutrition which produces the Similac brand. Recently Abbott Nutrition’s Sturgis, Michigan plant was shut down by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA shut down the plant in March of 2022 after federal safety inspectors found Abbott “failed to maintain sanitary conditions and procedures at the facility.”
The Biden administration knew about this shutdown but put out mis, dis and malinformation to the people by blaming the shortage on mothers and parents. When you have 53% of low income parents with vouchers seeking baby formula in super markets it is a key factor in the shortages we are seeing today.
Note that Biden’s White House warned in February of 2022 of “baby formula shortages” and that a team was working on it.
Biden’s @BrianDeeseNEC: "We were aware … back in February" of the baby formula shortage, “and we have had a team on this from the FDA and interagency process since then." pic.twitter.com/P7AdzoFhIn
Supply chain problem, cost of food escalating and now a shortage baby formula all linked to the federal government. These problems are all inextricably connected and point to bad economic policies.
The Bottom Line
American families, especially poor families, are not first in line to get baby formula. They are actually third in line behind illegal aliens and Ukrainians.
Amid Nationwide Shortage, Biden Regime Makes Sure Illegal Immigrants Get Baby Formula First: The illegitimate regime has declared war on the American people. And it's all been made possible by the Democrat media axis ramming this poison down our throats. https://t.co/PgEnfkjXfGpic.twitter.com/H6gaV4LMWY
Perhaps someone needs to tell Biden, his administration and the Democrat Party that Donald J. Trump is no longer the president? Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. is.
The Department of Homeland Security’s website states that when Americans see something they must say something. It is the duty of every American citizen to report instances of mis, dis and malinformation to the Disinformation Governance Board for appropriate action. Even if this bad information is being passed along by those holding the highest office in the land.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-05-15 11:22:132022-05-16 04:40:06MISINFORMATION WATCH: Baby Formula and Biden’s Misinformation Blame Game
As if the Biden regime couldn’t be more evil, they are blaming desperate American mothers for the baby formula shortage.
“What we are seeing which is an enormous problem is hoarding….”
Psaki on baby formula shortage: "What we are seeing which is an enormous problem is hoarding … & people hoarding because they are trying to profit off of fearful parents." pic.twitter.com/qtxQtnk4ng
— The Post Millennial (@TPostMillennial) May 12, 2022
Part 1 The Bydin administration: 1. IS HOARDING BABY FORMULA 2. Knew about the shortage since Abbott closed plant in Michigan in FEBRUARY due to contamination pic.twitter.com/ZDDJXdodVX
Jen Psaki says the baby formula shortage, is being caused by people “hoarding” it. The only ones hoarding baby formula, is the government, and sending it to our Southern border.
— LindaWhitesides🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸UltraMaga🩸 (@CALILINDAK) May 13, 2022
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Geller Reporthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Geller Report2022-05-15 06:29:062022-05-15 07:28:21MONSTERS: Biden White House Blames American Moms For Baby Formula Shortage, ‘They’re HOARDING’
We have lived through a period that went from mankind cannot control the weather to environmental alarmists first warning about global cooling, then global warming and now the “existential threat” of climate change.
Now we learn from Biden’s Secretary of Commerce Gina M. Raimondo that American children having clothes comes second to dealing with the “existential threat” of climate change. Watch and listen:
When the climate cools during the winter children need coats, scarves and other clothes to keep them warm and protect them from the elements. When the climate warms in the summer children need clothes to keep them cool and protect them from sunburn and overheating.
Logic right? Wrong. The climate myth trumps logic.
On February 17th, 2021 USA Today’s Kerry Breen reported:
A winter storm that pummeled the state has set record-low temperatures in cities like San Antonio, Dallas and Corpus Christi, with some areas of the state seeing single-digit and below-zero temperatures. According to NBC News, the unprecedented cold put too much strain on the state’s electrical system, meaning that more than 3 million residents of the state are dealing with rolling power outages or total blackouts.
NBC News also reported that at least 25 people have died in “weather-related fatalities” since the weekend, with the “majority” of the deaths happening in Texas.
Shoppers are ready to restock their closets for the fall and winter. But many are asking, where’s all the clothing?
Kristin Sterling was trying to do some back-to-school shopping at TJ Maxx. “I’ve been looking for baby items, as well as for a teen, a school-age child,” Sterling said. But inside, she found a much smaller selection than she has seen before. “I’m finding that there’s not that much clothing,” Sterling said.
Shoppers across the country are finding half-empty clothing racks, and shoe shelves out of popular sizes at many stores. At a Burlington store, a third of the store is now closed off with a divider. High school sophomore Mia Dressel was looking for a homecoming dress with her grandmother, but… “All the dresses were really, really short, or really long,” Dressel said.
Owing to supply-chain snarls, two-thirds of fashion executives said they are expecting to increase prices in 2022, with an average price increase of 3% across all clothing and apparel, this year’s State of Fashion 2022report by the Business of Fashion and McKinsey & Co. found.
A worrying 15% of executives polled said they planned on increasing prices by more than 10% in 2022.
Inflation in fashion is caused by a combination of material shortages, transportation bottlenecks, and rising shipping costs straining supply and demand, according to the study, which surveyed more than 220 international fashion executives and experts.
All of these things are happening now but worse. Biden’s build back better for Americans nothings built, nothings back and nothings better.
The Bottom Line
America depends on cheap and reliable power. America depends on its supply chain to deliver goods and services. America depends on our economy to provide what we need to live healthy and prosperous lives. That is now all at risk.
Biden’s green policies of eliminating fossil fuels and replacing oil, coal and natural power plants with solar and wind generators to stop the “existential threat” of climate change is destroying foundation of the economy.
From climate change to lockdown mandates we are seeing the long term impact on everything we Americans have come to depend on. Going to the supermarket or store or online and buying what we need and want is gradually going away. It’s becoming more and more common to see shortages and higher prices for essentials.
Biden’s policies are the root cause our supply chain to being disrupted.
Disruptions to the supply chain aren’t over yet. It is predicted that supply chain issues facing the United States will continue into 2022—citing demand as one of the top contributors. The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, which account for 40% of shipping containers entering the U.S., have already started operating 24/7 to relieve supply chain bottlenecks. But with labor shortages in both warehousing and transportation, are consumers looking at something similar—or more disruptive than—the 2020 toilet paper shortage?
[ … ]
With a quickly shifting marketplace, many companies are finding it increasingly difficult to navigate the intricacies of the supply chain. This has led to many businesses looking to outsource their logistics needs to third-party logistics warehouses and transportation providers. In 2021, users of 3PL services reported that 40% of their total logistics expenditures were related to outsourcing. Much of this growth can be directly correlated to the rise of the ecommerce industry. Considering this push of online sales, expectations for the global third-party logistics market are expected to be valued at $1.1 trillion over the next six years.
Biden and his administration have reset the priorities of America and Americans are now feeling the pinch. From Covid to Climate Change this administration has fundamentally transformed our economy from being robust, our supply chain from being dependable and our store shelves full to the polar opposite.
From baby formula, to clothing, to fuel prices to the cost of living Biden’s policies are NOT making America better, rather it is making America MUCH worse.
What is more important to you? Feeding and clothing your new born baby or climate change?
Bill Nye said,
“The less we do to address climate change now, the more regulation we will have in the future.”
Under Biden we now have more and more regulations and mandates negatively impacting our economy in the name of climate change.
How’s that working out for you now?
Choose wisely on Tuesday, November 8th, 2022 because you and your family’s long-term health, welfare and well being are at stake.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Dr. Rich Swierhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngDr. Rich Swier2022-05-14 05:50:592022-05-14 09:26:51Biden’s Secretary of Commerce: American children ‘having clothes comes second to the existential threat of climate change’
