Recap of Jackson v. Pfizer, whistleblower Brook Jackson’s False Claims Act case.
Recap of Jackson v. Pfizer, whistleblower Brook Jackson’s False Claims Act case.
Reader comment on yesterday’s post.
I watched the video below earlier today.
Whistleblower Brook Jackson + Attorneys Warner Mendenhall & Robert Barnes, Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, Feb. 2, 2023)
During this interview, both of Brook's attorneys talked about FDA's behavior as if there was no explanation for why they've allowed all this fraud and criminal activity to happen. They just said it was like FDA was inexplicably trusting Pfizer to do the right thing or something. They never mentioned anything at all in terms of what you and Sasha have discovered about how BARDA is the real agency in charge of regulating the cv injections, nor did they ever mention OWS, DOD, HHS or any other government agency with regard to accountability for the crimes being committed. They only talked about Pfizer being the culprit behind all the injury and death being perpetrated, and how it's such a David and Goliath battle against this behemoth, but they're going to do their darnedest to hold them to account for financial damages.
I'm curious if you've been in touch with these attorneys at all, or if you know if they're aware of the research on which you and Sasha have been collaborating and sharing?
Also, I remember hearing Sasha say that during initial proceedings in Brook's case it was DOJ attorneys who were arguing for the opposing side in court — not Pfizer attorneys. However neither Barnes nor Mendenhall ever made any reference to this. They just talked about how Pfizer has 100s of lawyers on their payroll so it's going to be an uphill battle.
Just wondering if you have any ideas about any of this?
NOTE:
I only watched about half of the discussion about Jackson’s case in the linked video, (starts at 19:00), until the audience question portion started at about 45:00. I limit my video-watching to conserve my time and attention span for text research (reading and writing), and I find Steve Kirsch’s approach to these issues frustrating and distracting, not useful.
My reply to the reader question above.
I’m in touch with those individuals and they know about the evidence and legal analysis that Brook Jackson, Sasha Latypova and I have assembled.
Jackson does talk about it publicly.
The attorneys’ reasons for not discussing it publicly are unknown to me.
The case that Robert Barnes is handling for Jackson is a False Claims Act case, filed under the qui tam provision, which can be used in a situation in which a private citizen (in this case Jackson) serves as a whistleblower, reporting her observations of fraud committed by a contractor against the US Government, to the Department of Justice.
Jackson reported her observations first to Ventavia, Pfizer and FDA in Sept. 2020, and then — after she got fired — reported the information to DOJ in or before December 2020.
In a qui tam case, the whistleblower — called the “Relator” — provides the evidence, but the DOJ is the primary litigant against the defendants, in this case Ventavia, Pfizer and ICON, because the government is (traditionally) the party being defrauded.
In this case, we now know, the infiltrators in all of the administrative agencies of the US Government — including FDA performers portraying drug regulators — are leading the American branch of the global criminal conspiracy to commit fraud on the public, to carry out a global mass murder campaign disguised as a ‘public health’ campaign.
The first federal complaint filed in Jackson’s case was filed in January 2021, by DOJ attorneys pretending to act on behalf of Jackson and the US Government, against Pfizer, Ventavia and ICON.
The case was immediately sealed by the court, and Jackson was put under a gag order. Throughout 2021, treasonous DOJ infiltrators pretended to investigate her claims, but actually did nothing. They just sat on the case and watched millions of people sicken and drop dead, because the Attorney General (William Barr until December 2020, Merrick Garland since March 2021) and other DOJ attorneys are active criminal co-conspirators in the mass murder program.
In November 2021, when the killers pseudo-authorized lethal attacks on children using the injectible mRNA/LNP slurries, Jackson violated the gag order and gave an interview, published in the British Medical Journal Nov. 2, 2021.
In January 2022, the DOJ finally notified the federal judge that the US Government had no interest in pursuing the case against any of the defendants further.
Once the DOJ stepped out of the case, Jackson had the option to hire a private attorney and pursue the case herself, which she did. She hired Barnes.
Jackson refiled the case on Feb. 22, 2022, this time as a private citizen.
Pfizer filed a Motion to Dismiss on April 22, 2022, arguing that no fraud occurred and no fraud could ever have occurred, because none of the US Government DOD contracts ever required valid clinical trials or evidence of safety or efficacy as a condition for payment.
There was some back and forth over the summer of 2022.
On Oct. 4, 2022, US Government stepped into the case again — this time taking Pfizer’s side in the dispute, concurring with Pfizer that there was never any fraud to prosecute, because Pfizer was never obligated to conduct valid clinical trials in order to receive payment for the manufactured bioweapons that they refer to as ‘vaccines.’
I corresponded with and spoke to Jackson and her attorneys during October 2022. I emailed and spoke directly with Mendenhall, and my understanding was that he was forwarding the information to Barnes and discussing it with the rest of the legal team during their litigation strategy sessions. I have never spoken directly with Barnes.
I provided the material Sasha and I had collected about the DOD bioweapons program to Mendenhall, and urged him and the other attorneys to incorporate the information into their Oct. 27, 2022 response to the US Government’s re-entry into the case.
I also published several posts about the significance of Other Transactions Authority as Pfizer’s basis for its Motion to Dismiss, including:
Oct. 19, 2022 - Other Transaction Authority (OTA) is to federal procurement contract regulation as Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is to federal drug safety regulation. They're both provisions through which Congress and US presidents pretended to legalize criminal conspiracy to produce and use weapons of mass destruction.
The attorneys declined to use the material or pursue the legal strategies suggested.
They did leave themselves some openings to begin to move in that direction later, as I wrote in my analysis of their Oct. 27 filing:
…I think it’s good that they mentioned the criminal issues.
I think it’s good that they framed the fraud-in-inducement argument in terms of “potential” influence of faked clinical data on FDA decisions. Focusing on the word “potential” was a sidelong way of getting at the fact that there was no actual, material or causal influence for the clinical trials on FDA decisions, because the FDA’s decisions were controlled by the Department of Defense from long before the trials even began.
I think it’s good that Jackson’s team emphasized the evidence from other trial sites that corroborate what she found in September 2020 at the Texas sites where she worked.
Jackson’s team generously construed the Department of Justice’s year-long case review/investigation process (January 2021 to January 2022) as evidence of DOJ’s view that her claims were well-founded from the start.
In truth, it was a DOJ stalling tactic to cover up DOD/HHS/FDA crimes while the crimes carried on. DOJ investigated nothing during those 12 months, because DOJ officials and the Attorney General were and are co-conspirators in the criminal mass murder campaign.
As of February 2023, the judge has not yet ruled on the Motion to Dismiss, but has granted Pfizer’s request for a 90-day extension for discovery, which is now scheduled to start on March 15, 2023.
My understanding, from listening to Robert Barnes’ comments in the Feb. 2, 2023 video at about 30:00-34:00, is that he interprets the US Government’s Oct. 4, 2022 Statement of Interest Supporting Dismissal very differently from how I interpret it.
Barnes — at least in this public appearance — interprets the US Government argument as: “We’re trusting Pfizer here.”
Barnes also mentioned a Congressional bill to close the “little loophole” as to “materiality” of clinical trials and data for routine FDA regulation of medicinal products and consumer safety.
I disagree with Barnes.
I think the US Government explicitly endorsed Pfizer’s April 22, 2022 argument that valid clinical trials and valid evidence of safety and efficacy were never required under the DOD contracts.
I think the US Government officials and Pfizer contractors running the bioterrorism program knew then — and still know now — that the FDA-regulated “clinical trials” and data were fraudulent; that the ‘prototypes’ under production were and still are a class of bioweapons intended to harm and kill targets; and that clinical trial evidence of safety and efficacy was not then, and is not now, material or necessary to FDA’s sham ‘review’ process or to the US Government’s decision to pay Pfizer for goods and services rendered and deploy the weapons on target populations.
I think the US Government position is made very clear in its October 2022 statement. Alongside corporate partner Pfizer, the infiltrators in the US Government would both like Brook Jackson’s False Claims Act case to be dismissed so that the contract bioterrorism program can continue and expand without delay, legal impediment or loss of funding.
Bailiwick reporting on Jackson v. Pfizer case
March 14, 2022 - Moderna’s 2013 patent on furin cleavage site, Brook Jackson’s 2020 report to FDA on clinical trial fraud, Pfizer 2021 SEC filings
May 4, 2022 - Faked Clinical Trials and 'Real World Evidence'
May 25, 2022 - Pfizer’s Motion to Dismiss the Brook Jackson, federal contracting fraud, clinical trial fraud, whistleblower case.
May 26, 2022 - Implications of 10 USC 2371b, the federal contracting provision cited by Pfizer
July 8, 2022 - Contracts
Aug. 19, 2022 - Mathew Crawford realizing that there were never any valid clinical trials; it was all fabricated.
Sept. 21, 2022 - Four American war criminals I think should be prosecuted first: Alex Azar, Robert Kadlec, Marion Gruber and Bill Gates
Oct. 12, 2022 - Secret Squirrel v. Azar, Kadlec and Gruber. First parts of draft 18 USC 2333 federal civil complaint
Oct. 13, 2022 - 18 USC 2333 cases: venue, national security, Fauci, summary judgment
Oct. 17, 2022 - Please pray for US District Court Judge Michael J. Truncale. Truncale is the federal judge in the Eastern District of Texas to whom whistleblower Brook Jackson's False Claims Act case is assigned.
Oct. 19, 2022 - Other Transaction Authority (OTA) is to federal procurement contract regulation as Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is to federal drug safety regulation. They're both provisions through which Congress and US presidents pretended to legalize criminal conspiracy to produce and use weapons of mass destruction.
Oct. 21, 2022 - Legal horror movie pitch: The World According to Darp. 'Shouting fire in a crowded theater' meets 'When did you stop beating your wife?' Starring US Government as Darpon Fink, serial-killer/arsonist.
Oct. 25, 2022 - Pharmaceuticidal tendencies. Condensing the legal nightmare for judicial review.
Oct. 26, 2022 - Synopsis of proposed Jackson v. Pfizer argument. Clinical trial documents are just props in a theatrical production; clinical investigators are fooled performers and in the fooled audience; playwright and director is DOD.
Oct. 26, 2022 -The goal is getting one good whistle-blower and one good federal judge together, through one solid, well-argued case.
Oct. 27, 2022 - How can HHS, DOD and DHS be ‘foreign terrorist organizations?’ Through the treasonous (18 USC 2381) primary allegiance of their secretaries, and other senior executives, to the World Health Organization and its conspiring globalist institutions.
Oct. 28, 2022 - Jackson v. Pfizer, Ventavia, Icon: Barnes legal team response filed Oct. 27
Jan. 18, 2023 - Repost - Other Transaction Authority (OTA) is to federal procurement contract regulation as Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) is to federal drug safety regulation (Originally published Oct. 19, 2022)
I know why the attorneys are not discussing Sasha's and Katherine's findings publicly. Aside from the fact that they can be retaliated against and have their privilege to practice "law" in the statutory courts removed, they are also bound by their oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States, which they interpret to mean "in favor of the federal government." The Constitution of the United States allows the District of Columbia to govern as an oligarchy. this document explains what the privilege to "practicing law" actually means for lawyers, Law Governing Lawyers (https://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/adjunct/dstevenson/2019/Restatement%203rd%20Law%20of%20Lawyers.pdf)
Lawyers are licensed by the State Courts, where State means the District of Columbia, federal territories, and possessions. In other words, they are limited to practice law in the inchoate States, not the American States of the Union. They are limited to Roman Civil Law, Admiralty, and Maritime Law---all District of Columbia jurisdiction. They have been very busy as a profession making false claims in commerce about the American People by misidentifying us as "legal persons' thereby removing us from the national jurisdiction of the state and putting us into the federal jurisdiction of the United States. This is how they can circumvent the constitutional restrictions.
It is all the work of the lawyers. They are all civilian contractors of the Military. It is not a secret folks. The Depart of Justice is an executive agency of the US government where US means the government of the District of Columbia, federal territories, and possessions.
I am relatively new to your content, and I'm not a lawyer (but I am in law school, FWIW, 1L) so if my question has already been answered somewhere in your content or seems redundant, forgive me.
Is it possible that they (govt) don't mind allowing Pfizer to take the "fall" publicly, and this is the plan?
Also, so if this is DoD which means our own govt is harming us... do we suspect our govt is working in the interest of another adversarial (to us/U.S.) govt?
Is there someone beyond our govt running this show? I am aware of WEF, WHO, etc... I'm just having trouble figuring out who is ultimately at the top and what the exact end goal is, or if we even know that, yet ...