Interview with Reinette Senum
New interview:
Jan. 10, 2024 - The UN, the WHO, and the US Health and Human Services attack on humanity (42 min., Substack). Speakers: Reinette Senum and Katherine Watt.
Transcript (edited):
...RS - So if you don't mind, before we get into some questions, and there's a plethora of different directions we can take this, just talk to us about Bailiwick News and how you got going.
KW - So, my background is that I grew up in Pennsylvania and then I went to Penn State. I got a philosophy and natural sciences degree in 1996 and then I worked as a reporter for small newspapers in Massachusetts and in Arizona. And then we moved to the New York, New Jersey area and I got a paralegal certificate, and I worked with lawyers.
And in the process of being a reporter in the...mid- to late-90s, early 2000s, I watched the sort of collapse of newsrooms and collapse of, especially advertising revenue as a way to make print newspapers financially sound. A lot of that had to do with Craigslist and the internet because classified ads were a big source of financial support for newspapers. And so as the money dried up, the newsrooms also dried up and the quality and the things that reporters could do dried up and the amount of pressure from the other advertisers who did stay, to sort of control what you could and could not write about, came down harder on the editors who came down harder on the reporters.
And so in 2005, when I started to understand what blogs were, I started my first blog, and then continued doing sort of independent reporting, independent analysis, on my own while I was working part-time as a paralegal and raising my kids.
And then in 2016, I actually decided to try again to find a financial, business model, because I had tried a bunch of different things and could not figure one out. So I started a company, an LLC, called KW Investigations and wrote about things like corruption things happening in my county around environmental issues and corporate land use issues. Government corruption and corporate corruption.
That was in 2016 and the odd thing was fairly quickly someone hired me to specifically cover judicial and prosecutorial corruption in my county. So I dove into that and wrote about those three basic areas — the prosecutorial, judicial corruption, the government corruption, and the corporate corruption — from 2016 till about end of 2019.
And in doing that, and some of my previous volunteer work, I learned a lot about the preemption doctrine, which I've talked about in other interviews and written about, which is the idea that the higher levels of government can come in and tell lower levels of government and people, "You can't protect yourself from harms because this other higher level of law has come in."
And that was what equipped me, when COVID started, to look at how the international laws came in and the federal laws came in and made this weird tyrannical system function.
I was looking at land use issues, I was looking at environmental issues, and I realized by being part of citizen groups that were trying to get involved, that the decisions about whatever was going to happen had already been made before the public meetings when the county commissioners or the local board of supervisors was having their discussions.
And those decisions had been made behind closed doors by the administrators, like the municipal...they have different names, the executive. But they are people who are appointed. They are not people who are elected. They have sit-down meetings, behind closed doors, with the corporate leaders that want to do whatever the thing is. They come up with the plan of what they're going to do and how they're going to push the public acts through that will make it possible.
They are the sole source of information for the volunteer elected local officials on the planning commissions and on the zoning boards and all of that. So they give them the information they want them to have. They tell them what their legal limits are, so they don't think they can do anything else.
And then those people carry out the instructions that have been given to them by the local administrators. And that is the exact model that works, we now see, globally, federally, at the state level, and locally.
RS - Well, we've been saying here that our county government, which is incorporated, we say it's a corporation masquerading as a government, and we have a CEO. And many people in our community are very surprised to find out we have a CEO. They're like, why do we have a CEO?
It's like, well, because that is the tail wagging the dog here. You've got county supervisors as your elected officials who you believe are representing you, but really they're just taking their instructions. And what you're telling me too, which makes sense, is the legal counsel is framing it such where they believe or they think, and they're trusting, that their hands are tied in certain areas so they can do what they want.
KW - The municipal solicitors are like a linchpin of the whole system because they control the information and they control the sense of what's possible for the elected officials.
RS - And most of the elected officials don't even think to ask or do their own research or even think to look beyond what they're being told.
KW - Right. Or they do know what they're being told and they're getting the kickbacks and that's it. Both systems work to keep them in line.
RS - Well, you know, it's interesting because it makes me think of, in 2019 in California legislation passed that didn't seem that ominous at the time, but looking back at it now, which was basically the public health directors in all the counties throughout the state of California were given this unilateral power to decide to open or close churches and schools and mandates and mask mandates and stay at home orders and so on.
Nobody really realized what that meant because, again, as you just mentioned, this is not a person that was elected nor appointed. They were hired by the county staff, which is exactly who you were saying. They're getting their orders from the top. And they hire this public health director to essentially act like the king or the queen of the county. And nobody could fight it. Nobody could speak against it. It was insane.
So now you've been doing extraordinary work looking at the COVID shot, which we now know essentially is a bioweapon. You've been doing a lot of deep dive in that and around Health and Human Services, which I have a great deal of interest in because it seems to me that the Health and Human Services is the tentacle, right, it is where the rubber meets the road and it is where all of these things are implicated is through the Health and Human Services. Can you expand on that a bit more and kind of explain to people like how they're doing it, why they're doing it, perhaps even the history of it or so on?
KW - It goes back primarily to the 2005 PREP Act. And there were a whole series of laws that came in just before or just after the anthrax events in the Capitol around 9/11. Because that was done to get Congress to think, "Wow, we really have to do something about this biodefense, biowarfare stuff." And so they pushed through the PREP Act.
And the core provision, politically, of the PREP Act, is that it puts the power to declare and sustain public health emergency conditions in the country solely in the hands of the Health and Human Services Secretary. And it eliminates judicial oversight, congressional oversight, and the federalist principle that states and tribes and localities can handle things in a different way depending on their own local conditions. [42 USC 247d-6d(b)(7); (8); (9)].
There's actually, as I looked into it more, there's other mechanisms that can lead to an emergency use authorized product, and some of those conditions. But the core one is the Health and Human Services Secretary.
And the other thing I would say about that is that, as I have looked at it more, and Sasha Latypova has looked at it more, we found an organization called the Public Health Emergencies Medical Countermeasures Enterprise, PHEMCE, which is a quasi-public, quasi-private institution or committee similar to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the sense that it's private so that it isn't quite as exposed to whatever transparency laws there might be or Sunshine Act things, but it's public in the sense that it can use public money to buy stuff from private suppliers or contractors.
And that committee has people from HHS, from FDA, from CDC, from Department of Defense, from the Veterans Administration, from the Department of State, from the Agriculture Department. It's a lot of cabinet secretaries or their delegates. And that, we think, is where most of the coordination happens.
So it's true, I think it's true to say that the HHS Secretary is like the point man. But the Defense Secretary is right up there with him, because the whole thing is cast as a national security event. And the Department of Homeland Security Secretary is right up there too. Those three probably are the point ones. And they do a lot of their coordinating, as far as we can tell, through the PHEMCE...
RS - And so, question for you, have you found, did you find that it is true the Pentagon was behind the COVID shot and essentially they were having to almost put a face on the COVID shot, having it go through Pfizer, having it go through AstraZeneca. Is this something you actually saw as well? Did you see any correlation with that?
KW - Yes...It was January, 2022 when I heard Todd Callender's podcast about the [World Health Organization] International Health Regulations that took me into the domestic regulations and the PREP Act stuff that I was talking about, which has lots of provisions into lots of different areas of product development and contracting.
And so from the start that I got from Todd Callender's thing, led me to the realization of that 21 USC 360bbb-3(k), which is the one that says once you're using, any "use" of these products "shall not constitute a clinical investigation." And that "shall not" was what clued me in to, this is something other than a drug. It's something other than a vaccine. It's something other than a pharmaceutical product. It's not regulated. It can't be challenged for bad marketing or bad labeling or whatever.
And then after that, I found out more about Brook Jackson's whistleblowing case. She was a clinical trials manager working for a subcontractor that was working for Pfizer. And then the case documents in her case corroborated all of that. That Motion to Dismiss came out in April of 2022. I think I found out about it in May of 2022.
And that led back into the Other Transaction Authority and the actual way that it's a prototype, it's a demonstration, it's not a pharmaceutical, it's not a medicine, it's not a drug. It's not under FDA, and the entire performance has been a joint project between Pfizer, the FDA, and the Department of Defense to make it look like a drug, that's actually a weapon, so that people take it instead of running away from it.
RS - Right. So let's talk about then, the copywriting of humanity, essentially, that once a person essentially takes this weapon, that if they are altered, their DNA is altered, essentially, who owns them?
KW - That's an interesting question. That's another thing that Todd Callender talks about. I am less concerned about that than he is. He talks about, I believe, a 2013 case [Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, 569 US 576]
It's a Supreme Court case that has to do with the BRCA gene for breast cancer. And the case says basically, if a company has modified an organism genetically, and has a patent on that modification that they made, then they also own the modified organism that has incorporated the modified gene.
However, in 2011, Congress did actually pass a law saying this patent ownership of human beings cannot happen. [PL 112-29, amendment to 35 USC 101]. You can own a gene for breast cancer or a gene for some kind of modification of a plant if you're in agriculture, but you cannot own a human being as an organism, the human genetic system is not open for ownership.
There will probably need to be a case that puts those two things in direct, in front of a judge to say, is the 2011 law controlling in this case? Such that no, even if you've been genetically interfered with by these shots, you're not owned by anybody, you're still a human being.
RS - What if they stop defining us as human beings? I mean, that's one of my concerns. There's just so much, you know, trickery around the language and so on. It's like, well, you're human beings, but you're not human beings. It just, it's a slippery slope.
...Let's talk about the, the WHO and their treaty and what they're trying to, you know, impose upon us. What's your thoughts on that? What have you uncovered and, is there anything we can possibly do, right? There's this top-down that we're talking about, treaties and international law versus federal, state, local, and we're all being completely, you know, superseded by jurisdictions and agencies that we want nothing to do with. So let's just talk about that, what you've uncovered, and what can we possibly do to counter this, if at all?
KW - So, my position on the World Health Organization International Health Regulations is that they are a mechanism through which an effective constitutional overthrow or crisis has already been put in place because of the implementing domestic laws that Congress and U.S. presidents have passed to comply with the terms of that treaty.
It's not technically a treaty, it's called, "a binding instrument of international law" that's a little bit different than a treaty, but it's a binding instrument and they passed the domestic laws and regulations to comply with the terms of it. And they did that a long time ago over many, many years gradually, piece by piece. So that's what was already in place and could be triggered in January 2020.
My view, my position on what's been happening since then with the proposed amendments is that they if passed, if they go into effect, they will make things somewhat faster and somewhat more forceful, but they won't be a new stripping of sovereignty because the stripping of sovereignty has already taken place.
And the things to do about it, there are definitely things to do about it.
For legitimacy, the World Health Organization and the UN have to have member states who are active, full, participants. And they got that through congressional acts and presidential acts that brought the United States into the UN and into the World Health Organization.
Those acts can be repealed. Those acts can be reversed. And there is momentum, some, in Congress to get out of the World Health Organization and to get out of the United Nations, by using the power that Congress still has to say, "We got into this and now we're getting out of it. And now we're not subject to any of these regulations because we have left the construct, left the treaty."
And there are grounds to do that. There are grounds to do that under domestic law and there are grounds to do that under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.
And the second thing that Congress can do and states can do is two-fold: repeal of the enabling laws that they put into place, which they also had to do that to give legitimacy to the whole system. And they [Congress] can take away their moral participation in it by repealing those laws.
And states can nullify it. And that's what the 10th amendment-based campaigns in the states are aiming at. They're trying to educate state lawmakers to the fact that the federal laws are unconstitutional, the federal laws are illegitimate, and the states, because of federalism in our country and the Tenth Amendment, have the authority to say, "No, at our borders, these unconstitutional things will not have any force. Within our border," of whatever state it is, "you can't do these things."
RS - I would think that that would definitely weaken their move for this massive power grab. If you have a checkerboard across the United States of certain states that are like, "We're not doing this, we're pulling out," that they just wouldn't have the ability to actually do what they want to do.
Now, if they have their way, let's say we don't have states doing this. If they have their way, how would that look? Because right now what we're seeing once again are hospitals here in California, I believe New York, right, that are once again mandating masks. And so my concern is, is that, because they're absolutely blind and deaf, right? It doesn't matter. They're not hearing the information. They're not looking at the information. I just know as a former elected official, there's this, this kind of unsaid rule that if you don't acknowledge something, you're not responsible for it.
KW - It could definitely go that way. They have all the laws on the books to do more forceful things than what they did during COVID. They just didn't use them because they got people to comply by social pressure...and economic pressure, and the economic pressure is still there, too. They can still say, do it or you're fired, do it or you're kicked out of school...
RS - So where do you think, and I know this is going to be complete conjecture and so on, as you said, nobody knows where we're going to go, but where do you, first of all, are you surprised? Are you disappointed? Are you inspired by how certain individuals, though it is a small population, like the Todd Callenders of the world and so on, how they have galvanized, and it's a small little tiny group, but it only takes 3.5% to create a movement, are recalcitrant and fighting back. Are you impressed with this? Are you disappointed in humanity? I just want to kind of get like, what's your gauge on how we're responding to this as a society?
KW - I don't know how to, I mean, I have gone through so many cycles since it started four years ago. I really did think in 2020, at first I was like, okay, something's wrong. We should try to deal with it. And I tried to help out in the ways that they were saying to help out. And then I started realizing, wait, something's wrong. This is not, it's not what they're — what they're saying is not what's happening. And what we're doing is not the right thing to be doing. So then I got to that around May, April, May, 2020.
And then I kept thinking, well, the courts are going to kick in. There's going to be cases. They're going to come through. They're going to apply the constitution. This is not going to keep going on. And then I thought, okay, people are going to figure out that this whole masking thing is complete nonsense and they're not going to make us do it anymore, even by social pressure.
And, and then I would just keep going on and be like, no, it really is going to continue going on. People are still falling for it. The people who are running it have good ways to adjust their manipulation campaigns to manage and sideline the dissident people.
I think the growing number of people who will see the effects of it in their own families and friends was something that I started thinking about pretty early. Like, okay, people are going to be getting sick and dying from these shots. People are going to notice at a certain point when it's too many for them to pretend it's something else.
And I still think that that is a process that is, it's playing out now. And the weakness of that is the ability of the people who are running the programs to get people to attribute the deaths and the illnesses to something other than the injections.
And so I don't have a good answer to whether I'm inspired or disappointed or whatever, because it varies a lot. And I don't have any way of knowing where the tipping point is or what the things that will lead to that tipping point are going to be. I just know we have to keep going.
RS - And that's it. Keep falling forward. You know, it's interesting. What I've been noticing lately is, it's generational. It's different between the generations. I am finding people in their 70s, their 60s, their 50s, and so on, who are seeing harm being done. And they're realizing that something's up with a shot.
And so I asked a dear friend of mine who's completely awake to all of this, and I said, are your friends, are they waking up to this? And she said, you know what, Reinette, I was talking to my one best friend, she's totally vaccinated, she hears me talking all the time, and what she said to me was, if what you are saying is true, she says, I can't believe what you're saying, because if what you're saying is true, I will lose all hope, and I just can't go there. And what I'm finding is that the younger the generation, the less likely they are willing to take a hard look at what's really going on.
And the older generation, I'm starting to see, are actually waking up at a much faster rate than the younger generation. And it could also be attributed to the fact that, you know, their lives are still before them, right? I mean, if you're, you know, 60, 70, it might be a little bit easier. Or if you want to have children and you realize everyone's becoming infertile, I mean, these are difficult things to grapple with. You know, and that's just something I've been noticing. And it is psychological warfare.
And so have you done any, I have not seen in on your Substack, have you done any reporting or deep dive in, you know, this fifth-generation warfare, how it is information warfare and their tactics and so on? Like, you know, the whole entire 201 event before COVID struck?
KW - I haven't done a specific deep dive. I've mentioned it in passing and I've mentioned it that I think of that as the top of the pyramid. If they didn't have control over the informational space, none of this other stuff would have been able to unfold the way it did.
And if they lose control of that information space, it definitely changes the dynamics of the whole war. And that's another thing where I don't know where the tipping point is.
There are more people, and...I don't think there are any people, probably not very many, who have gone from understanding it all and being like, this sucks, I'm horrified, I don't want to think about it, but it's true, back over to, I'm just going to believe everything the government says to me.
I know people waver right on the line for a while when they're starting to grapple with it.
But there are a lot of people, all of the momentum is from the point of view of getting out of the lie space and into the true space. And while I don't know anything about the rate at which that needs to happen, the direction is good. The direction is where it needs to go.
RS - Well, a few years ago, Dr. Pam Popper, she was talking about how, you know, there's a lot of people sitting on the fence and when they fall off the fence, they always fall towards our side and not the other. They just don't go the other way. And I have not run into that. And the other thing is, too, is I've never met anybody ever at this point in time who's not gotten the shot and said today, gosh, I wish I would have gotten that shot. That doesn't exist either. I've never run into that. Tons of people saying, I'm so sorry, I didn't know, I wish I would have known, I wish I would have done research or somebody would have told me and so on. So that is actually good news.
And I do feel like, and I think a lot of us sense this right now, 2024, there's something brewing because there is an awakening happening, right? There is, I do see people now having conversations we could not have just a year ago, two years ago, we're having the conversations...to just prepare for the unexpected, right? And that really a lot of our answers are local, right?
Local industries, local food networks, your local, your community and so on and, and growing your own food and just getting out into nature and not being on the screen all the time and disconnecting from the very beast that's trying to enslave you as much as possible. And this does feel like the, the race is, is accelerating, especially this year, especially this year.
So is there anything that you can think of that people need to know right now that they should really focus on right now that can kind of help them through 2024 to better grapple what's going on or to focus on, to give them the ability not to get dragged down?
KW - Well, I also agree with you that 2024 is a big one. There's at least three globalist campaigns that have been going on for the last couple of years and are reaching their final phase this year. One of them is in the Catholic Church. It's the Synod on Synodality....The United Nations is also doing the Sustainable Development Goals. They don't call it that anymore, [now called Summit of the Future] but it started in 2021, and now they're putting together the last few position papers, and they're gearing up for a big meeting in October or September, which is also when the Synod on Synodality is supposed to culminate.
And then the other one is the [WHO] pandemic treaty and the IHR sort of complex of things which again they started putting drafts and things out in 2021-2022 to lead towards this culmination later on in 2024.
I think the biggest thing to remember is to not throw out everything you've learned about government capacity to lie to you as the new things come at you.
For example, I think they're probably going to try to make another new pandemic type situation look like it's happening. And it would be good if people could say, I now understand that they faked a huge chunk of what they called the pandemic of COVID. They can fake it again. And I'm not going to follow all their instructions this time, even if I did follow them last time.
Instead of saying, well, maybe it's different this time. Maybe this one really is one. Don't, don't go down that road.
RS - It's the same people at the helm.
KW - It's the same people at the helm. They have the same goals. They know now a little bit more like what works and what doesn't work. They're going to adjust to that lessons-learned. But we can adjust too, because we've learned a lot about them.
RS - I think the biggest takeaway I'm getting from our conversation, and I want to leave it with this, because I think it's really, really important. And it's a little speck of hope, which I think is extraordinarily important, too, because we need that.
Like I was saying, the younger generation, if they don't feel like they have hope, you want to ball yourself up in a fetal position, is that at the state level, we can withdraw from this entanglement, correct? The WHO or the UN or whoever, from these treaties and agreements, that we can withdraw from them. But that would take us, a groundswell of pressure and momentum, to put the pressure on our legislators, who of course, don't want to acknowledge this but, I mean, all I can say is, have you seen the, from Germany, the diesel, the tractors?
KW - I've seen some pictures, yeah.
RS - It's extraordinary. It's a beautiful, hopeful sight. That's what we are capable of doing. I just want people to know that, there's a lot of darkness that we've been living through and it's been a nightmare, no doubt.
But my own sense...we've been subjected to this shock-and-awe campaign, psychological warfare, and I'm getting this feeling that 2024 is the year of activism where people are like, oh, I guess we're not going to be saved. Oh, I guess we're going to have more of the same, that I actually have to go and do something.
And what I've been looking for, because I consider myself a solutionarian, so I will look at the darkness, I'll look at all this, but I want to see like, okay, what's our way out of this? Like, what do we do? It's important to me.
And what I'm seeing is that the fact that we can actually at the state level say, no, we're not going to be a part of this is actually very extraordinary. That's actually good. It's work, but it's extraordinary.
KW - Yeah. We have an incredibly good constitution because of that Tenth Amendment, because they, the founders, the framers knew about the tendency of power to be concentrated and put in as many mechanisms as they could for the power to be decentralized again, if it started to get concentrated. And I don't think there is a country in the world that has a constitution as good as ours, if we use it.
And the other thing I think about a lot is about, you talked about withdrawing at the state level. I think it's also good to withdraw somewhat at the individual level.
I think it's good to look at what's happening and then say, sure, but I'm still — for the young people, especially, my kids are in that young people, young adult range. And I try to talk to them and pray for all the other kids in their generation to get to the point where they can think about it as, I'm still going to try to find a soul mate and get married and start a family. And I know that it's going to be weird and that the world is in a crazy place but it's still worthwhile to fall in love and make babies if you can, and adopt babies if you can't. And that family and individual process of withdrawing and sticking to what's true and what's good about being a human being and worshiping God is important.
And people can do that. They can do that even amid all of the crazy circumstances, knowing that weird stuff is happening. More weird stuff will happen, but you can still try to set up your own life as much as possible on a true foundation.
RS - And you're not feeding that beast system. It wants fear. It wants you to feel depressed. It wants you to feel completely powerless. And it does, it eats that up. And also just being joyful, and laughter and community. I mean we started holding Monday weekly potlucks at the beginning of Covid. For three years we've been doing that. There were tears, but there's a lot of laughter as well, and fun. And I thought it was one of the best things we could do against this tyranny and for ourselves.
And also I think that it's important for the young people too, to know that, and I said this at the very beginning of COVID. I said, we're going to be walking through this, you know, we're going home into our houses, we're having these stay-at-home orders.
And I said this back then, because I was mayor when COVID hit, that when we come out, we're going to be in a different world. It's just going to be a different world. I don't even know what that means, but I can just sense it's going to be a different world.
But when the systems crumble around us, that's also our opportunity to look and say, okay, well then what can we do locally? What can I do with my own property, my own yard, my neighborhood? What industries can we start? What skills can I learn?"
And you actually rebuild a local economy based on restoration and healing and local food production and things like that which also allows you, once again, to disengage from that slave system that they're trying to force on us.
So, it's really about taking action, local action, is really the big thing.
And right now the systems, these huge global, transnational systems that have had us wrangled in for a long time are absolutely falling apart. And that's actually, if you're smart, you can do this Aikido move. And you can use that and transmute that energy into something you can do locally.
So there's actually, I think we have to come at it and look at it like, no, this is actually an opportunity if we're smart about it...
I had lunch with a dear friend yesterday and I was just telling her about what was going on a little bit, because she's not really connected to all this news...and she started crying. And I said, "What happened?"
And she goes, basically, she goes, "We're doomed."
And I said, no, we're not. I said, this stuff's been going on forever. It's been going on for generations. It's been building up. I said, we are just finally seeing it.
This is the best opportunity we have to just do this and hit it at the Achilles heel. I said, this is, it's not like it just started. It's been going on. You just didn't know about it. But now that we know what it is, now we can actually deal with it. And people are waking up to it like, okay, I got to deal with it. So it's actually, as scary as it is, it's actually very hopeful in that way...
