Starting at NehmingNehms on Gab, I skimmed through a few threads posted in the last few days, documenting how far back the scientific research, by the same evil team of anti-humanists, on the gp120 HIV insert goes.
I've read all of the text of the CARES Act updates, and [obviously] the background info related to peptide fusion inhibitors. There's not a chance in Hades that the EUA will protect the government in the case of fraud; whether or not the government can pull the manufacturers into the mix depends on how the fraud is adjudicated.
The fact that peptide inhibitors were amongst the prophylactics/therapeutics completely ignored as part of the US research response is hard to dismiss, given that the WIV & Gallaher were both explicitly listing that potential pathway; it's impossible that the NIAID - with Baric and Denison and Graham, etc. - didn't think of them. Baric and Denison and even Fauci discussed them in the years leading up to the pandemic.
The only way the US government can avoid liability is by - you guessed it - successfully censoring the discussion, which is obviously why we cannot allow that to happen
I don’t think this is correct, at least under the statutes as currently written. Just finished reading Deputy AG Dawn Johnsen’s July 2021 ‘slip opinion’ and footnotes on the legality of vaxx mandates by private and public employers, and some of the guidance documents, house conference notes and other sources she references.
I’m more convinced than I was already, that the EUA system has been set up precisely to preclude any legal culpability, civil or criminal, for any government or corporate actor engaged in the deliberate, premeditated development, manufacture, distribution and forced, non-consensual administration of these bioweapons.
One key to the legal escape hatch for the government and Pharma seems to be the fact that EUA status, once granted by HHS, automatically renders the pharma product no longer legally part of any clinical investigation, no matter how experimental, untested, unsafe, ineffective or unmonitored the product may be.
If the company seeks out FDA authorization for a parallel clinical investigation, FDA might grant that, and then participants in that trial might have civil or criminal claims. But if the company doesn’t seek it out — and to my knowledge, they haven’t — and the EUA declaration marks a legal dividing line between clinical trial and not-clinical trial, then there’s no underlying clinical trial to which the fraud claim can be attached and submitted to an adversarial, evidence-based proceeding. Further the vaccinators have no informed consent obligations to recipients, once there’s an EUA, and the people to whom it is given cannot be legally construed as human subjects anymore, so there’s no one with standing.
If the US government fails to bring charges, private plaintiffs will not be permitted to bring private claims, because the willful misconduct standard built in to the statutes requires that the government first bring a claim, and private plaintiffs can only bring claims if a court finds the defendant contractor guilty/liable. Further, willful misconduct standards are higher than ordinary negligence, requiring both knowledge of the misconduct (which the government and corporate executives and researchers had, but nurses and other vaccinators did not) and proximity to the victims (which vaccinators had but corporate executives did not.)
The US government will not bring criminal or civil charges against Pfizer based on the fraud, because under the statutory framework, Pfizer representatives, as contractors, became legally identical to HHS government officials, gaining sovereign immunities from suit. the US government will not charge itself, or a contractor legally construed as an HHS employee, with a crime.
Congress might change these laws, and might try to make the changes retroactive, in order to fend off the rage of the deceived, maimed and killed population.
But under current law, I don’t think there’s any path to a viable court case past a government motion to dismiss.
I think it's the original 2005 law that waives the ability of the Supreme Court to review any aspect of the EUA approval, though not sure without looking.
The military is going to be in trouble because the Pentagon did, in fact, circumvent both the intent and the letter of the law by simply re-labeling their original EUA vaccine as 'Comirnaty,' which constituted fraud tied to the fully approved version. The purpose of this ruse was to allow the Secretary of Defense to enforce the President's order to universally vaccinate the troops.
The civilian population faces a different situation, but the situation is unprecedented for many reasons - some of which you described.
The government has gone through great lengths [and by 'gov' we can largely assume that the driving force was Fauci, Kadlec, Hahn, etc.] to suppress data related to efficacy/adverse events, because the EUA meant that they could simply ignore it in the end.
The government's problem is that the lead scientists had a decade's worth of data prior to the pandemic, as well as numerous testimonies during briefs about the strengths and weaknesses of Remdesivir & numerous other early treatments/prophylaxis completely disregarded in early 2020. Fauci withheld vital information about the features of the novel coronavirus from Trump's administration, in order to create the necessary premise for invoking the need for EUA's.
He weaponized censorship for the purpose of obstruction of justice.
I’ve been building a list of the statutes passed since 1983, when the public health emergencies section was first added to the 1944 Public Health Service Act. There are a lot of them. Planning a series of summary/analysis posts on how each one expanded federal power, appropriated more funding to build up and merge the public health-law enforcement systems and reduced accountability/liability for things that would formerly have been crimes and torts.
It’s hard to get the series underway, because every rabbit hole has dozens of other rabbit holes leading off of it, so I keep posting about specific issues that I find in the meantime.
-1983 Public Health Emergencies, Section 319, added to Public Health Service Act, 42 USC 247d
-1988 Health Omnibus Programs Act
-2000 Public Health Improvement Act
-2001 USA PATRIOT Act
-2002 Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act
-2002 Homeland Security Act
-2004 Project Bioshield Act
-2005 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act
-2006 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act
-2007 John Warner Defense Authorization Act
-2012 National Defense Authorization Act
-2013 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act
-2016 21st Century Cures Act
-2019 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act
-2020 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act
I'm all too familiar with rabbit holes within rabbit holes, lol.
In the least shocking correlation of all time, Fauci has been in charge of the NIAID for 97% of that 38 year-stretch.
I've been building up a body of evidence that explicitly highlights all of the prior knowledge held by the decision makers prior to the pandemic; I do believe that the best way to approach the liability immunity is to show that the intense efforts at censorship/negative control are unconstitutional.
The real name for the censorship is 'Obstruction of Justice," because it clearly has shown to have little connection to anything resembling informed consent or the public's interest.
But it doesn't matter b/c they NEVER follow the constitution.
I do NOT believe in the slave gov't. I ONLY believe in FREEDOM.
The legal system is just an arm of the mafia gov't meant to control us slaves. It's been that way forever.
You guys are grasping at straws. You think the evils who control the world are ever going to let you have your day in court & sit in front of a judge who has a conscious & does the right thing?
Come on people, WAKE UP, this is much bigger than the bioweapons. The evils have been planning this for hundreds of years.
Every war that's ever been (there may be a couple that weren't) have ALL been planned by the evils.
Until people admit they are slaves & stop acting like we EVER had freedom & ever won the war when we became a country & THEN say they are going to fight for freedom & that we are in a WAR, nothing will ever change.
STOP WORSHIPING THE MAFIA GOV'T. I know it's hard. You've been brainwashed to believe we can't live without a controlling gov't., but we CAN!!!
There were at least two prior versions of it, from 2005 and 2007, but this one was adopted Jan. 13, 2017, in that last week of Obama’s term, just ahead of a slew of HHS regulatory changes announced in Federal Register the day before Trump’s inauguration (Jan. 19, 2017)
I've read all of the text of the CARES Act updates, and [obviously] the background info related to peptide fusion inhibitors. There's not a chance in Hades that the EUA will protect the government in the case of fraud; whether or not the government can pull the manufacturers into the mix depends on how the fraud is adjudicated.
The fact that peptide inhibitors were amongst the prophylactics/therapeutics completely ignored as part of the US research response is hard to dismiss, given that the WIV & Gallaher were both explicitly listing that potential pathway; it's impossible that the NIAID - with Baric and Denison and Graham, etc. - didn't think of them. Baric and Denison and even Fauci discussed them in the years leading up to the pandemic.
The only way the US government can avoid liability is by - you guessed it - successfully censoring the discussion, which is obviously why we cannot allow that to happen
I don’t think this is correct, at least under the statutes as currently written. Just finished reading Deputy AG Dawn Johnsen’s July 2021 ‘slip opinion’ and footnotes on the legality of vaxx mandates by private and public employers, and some of the guidance documents, house conference notes and other sources she references.
https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opinions/attachments/2021/07/26/2021-07-06-mand-vax.pdf
I’m more convinced than I was already, that the EUA system has been set up precisely to preclude any legal culpability, civil or criminal, for any government or corporate actor engaged in the deliberate, premeditated development, manufacture, distribution and forced, non-consensual administration of these bioweapons.
One key to the legal escape hatch for the government and Pharma seems to be the fact that EUA status, once granted by HHS, automatically renders the pharma product no longer legally part of any clinical investigation, no matter how experimental, untested, unsafe, ineffective or unmonitored the product may be.
If the company seeks out FDA authorization for a parallel clinical investigation, FDA might grant that, and then participants in that trial might have civil or criminal claims. But if the company doesn’t seek it out — and to my knowledge, they haven’t — and the EUA declaration marks a legal dividing line between clinical trial and not-clinical trial, then there’s no underlying clinical trial to which the fraud claim can be attached and submitted to an adversarial, evidence-based proceeding. Further the vaccinators have no informed consent obligations to recipients, once there’s an EUA, and the people to whom it is given cannot be legally construed as human subjects anymore, so there’s no one with standing.
If the US government fails to bring charges, private plaintiffs will not be permitted to bring private claims, because the willful misconduct standard built in to the statutes requires that the government first bring a claim, and private plaintiffs can only bring claims if a court finds the defendant contractor guilty/liable. Further, willful misconduct standards are higher than ordinary negligence, requiring both knowledge of the misconduct (which the government and corporate executives and researchers had, but nurses and other vaccinators did not) and proximity to the victims (which vaccinators had but corporate executives did not.)
The US government will not bring criminal or civil charges against Pfizer based on the fraud, because under the statutory framework, Pfizer representatives, as contractors, became legally identical to HHS government officials, gaining sovereign immunities from suit. the US government will not charge itself, or a contractor legally construed as an HHS employee, with a crime.
Congress might change these laws, and might try to make the changes retroactive, in order to fend off the rage of the deceived, maimed and killed population.
But under current law, I don’t think there’s any path to a viable court case past a government motion to dismiss.
I think it's the original 2005 law that waives the ability of the Supreme Court to review any aspect of the EUA approval, though not sure without looking.
The military is going to be in trouble because the Pentagon did, in fact, circumvent both the intent and the letter of the law by simply re-labeling their original EUA vaccine as 'Comirnaty,' which constituted fraud tied to the fully approved version. The purpose of this ruse was to allow the Secretary of Defense to enforce the President's order to universally vaccinate the troops.
The civilian population faces a different situation, but the situation is unprecedented for many reasons - some of which you described.
The government has gone through great lengths [and by 'gov' we can largely assume that the driving force was Fauci, Kadlec, Hahn, etc.] to suppress data related to efficacy/adverse events, because the EUA meant that they could simply ignore it in the end.
The government's problem is that the lead scientists had a decade's worth of data prior to the pandemic, as well as numerous testimonies during briefs about the strengths and weaknesses of Remdesivir & numerous other early treatments/prophylaxis completely disregarded in early 2020. Fauci withheld vital information about the features of the novel coronavirus from Trump's administration, in order to create the necessary premise for invoking the need for EUA's.
He weaponized censorship for the purpose of obstruction of justice.
This is not exactly a mandate a question
I’ve been building a list of the statutes passed since 1983, when the public health emergencies section was first added to the 1944 Public Health Service Act. There are a lot of them. Planning a series of summary/analysis posts on how each one expanded federal power, appropriated more funding to build up and merge the public health-law enforcement systems and reduced accountability/liability for things that would formerly have been crimes and torts.
It’s hard to get the series underway, because every rabbit hole has dozens of other rabbit holes leading off of it, so I keep posting about specific issues that I find in the meantime.
-1983 Public Health Emergencies, Section 319, added to Public Health Service Act, 42 USC 247d
-1988 Health Omnibus Programs Act
-2000 Public Health Improvement Act
-2001 USA PATRIOT Act
-2002 Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act
-2002 Homeland Security Act
-2004 Project Bioshield Act
-2005 Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act
-2006 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act
-2007 John Warner Defense Authorization Act
-2012 National Defense Authorization Act
-2013 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act
-2016 21st Century Cures Act
-2019 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act
-2020 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act
-2022 Cures Act 2.0 (pending, in committee)
-2022 PASTEUR Act (pending, in committee)
I'm all too familiar with rabbit holes within rabbit holes, lol.
In the least shocking correlation of all time, Fauci has been in charge of the NIAID for 97% of that 38 year-stretch.
I've been building up a body of evidence that explicitly highlights all of the prior knowledge held by the decision makers prior to the pandemic; I do believe that the best way to approach the liability immunity is to show that the intense efforts at censorship/negative control are unconstitutional.
The real name for the censorship is 'Obstruction of Justice," because it clearly has shown to have little connection to anything resembling informed consent or the public's interest.
But it doesn't matter b/c they NEVER follow the constitution.
I do NOT believe in the slave gov't. I ONLY believe in FREEDOM.
The legal system is just an arm of the mafia gov't meant to control us slaves. It's been that way forever.
You guys are grasping at straws. You think the evils who control the world are ever going to let you have your day in court & sit in front of a judge who has a conscious & does the right thing?
Come on people, WAKE UP, this is much bigger than the bioweapons. The evils have been planning this for hundreds of years.
Every war that's ever been (there may be a couple that weren't) have ALL been planned by the evils.
America is not free - https://ourfreesociety.com/Truth-About-America & https://ourfreesociety.com/Ken-Cousens-History-World
Until people admit they are slaves & stop acting like we EVER had freedom & ever won the war when we became a country & THEN say they are going to fight for freedom & that we are in a WAR, nothing will ever change.
STOP WORSHIPING THE MAFIA GOV'T. I know it's hard. You've been brainwashed to believe we can't live without a controlling gov't., but we CAN!!!
https://ourfreesociety.com/Ready-To-Wake-Up-Natural-Law
This is one of the key guidance documents. I’ve skimmed it, to find the pages cited by Deputy AG Johnsen, but will do a close read.
https://www.fda.gov/media/97321/download
There were at least two prior versions of it, from 2005 and 2007, but this one was adopted Jan. 13, 2017, in that last week of Obama’s term, just ahead of a slew of HHS regulatory changes announced in Federal Register the day before Trump’s inauguration (Jan. 19, 2017)
That’s why we carefully make it common knowledge