Tomorrow, July 15, the U.S Senate will take a rare and courageous step toward truth and accountability in our nation’s vaccine policies.

Led by Senator Ron Johnson, the U.S. Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations will conduct a hearing titled “Voices of the Vaccine Injured.”

This hearing will give voice to those whose lives were forever altered by vaccine injury.

Among those testifying are Polly Tommey and Dr. Brian Hooker, who will share their personal stories. They represent every parent, child, and family, who has faced denial and silence for too long. This will be more than a hearing, it’s a turning point just like the dismissal of Dr. Kirk Moore’s health/conscience charges last week in Salt Lake City.

Ensure this announcement makes to your personal Elected Officials and ESPECIALLY those sitting on Health District Boards. Urge them to attend and watch the hearing, listen with open minds, and commit to policies that prioritize transparency, informed consent, and true justice for the vaccine injured.

FIND YOUR U.S. ELECTED OFFICIALS

FIND YOUR UTAH ELECTED OFFICIALS

CALL AND REQUEST YOUR HEALTH DISTRICTS ATTEND (UTAH INFO)

WATCH AND SHARE WITH FAMILY, FRIENDS & NEIGHBORS AT:

childrenshealthdefense.org starting at 3 p.m.

Share the link now with friends, family, and colleagues so they can witness this powerful testimony firsthand.

Dr. Moore's Announcement of Saturday 12 July 2025.

Dr Kirk Moore, the face of a Federal freedom of conscience suit, and co-defendant Kris Anderson stood on principle and refused to take a tempting plea deal. They are true patriots and heros.

Dr. Moore, it appears, has talents most other doctors, five years past 2019, still do not possess: skepticism of medical markets, enduring wariness, critical thinking skills, openness to medical research, willingness to examine vaccine development history, independent ability to interpret vaccine adverse event data, ethic to ignore bribes, self-confidence to resist peer pressure, strength to stand against medical tyranny, tenacity to demand constitutional freedom of choice & conscience, and integrity to the Hippocratic oath to do-no-harm.

Thanks, 2025 DOJ, for landing on this decision.

@Moore22K

Press Release: Press Conference to Demand Justice for Dr. Kirk Moore at Utah Federal Courthouse

Press Conference with Supportive Rally for Dr. Kirk Moore

Friday, July 11, 2025, 9:00 AM – 10:00 AM

Utah Federal Courthouse, 351 S West Temple St, Salt Lake City, UT 84101

There is 2-hour, on-street parking nearby

Hosted by We ARE the People and Died Suddenly:

We ARE the People and Died-Suddenly call on media and the public to attend a Press Conference to address the urgent case of Dr. Kirk Moore, a Utah plastic surgeon and Navy veteran facing 35 years in federal prison for resisting COVID-19 vaccine mandates. A supportive rally will follow. The event is set for Friday, July 11, 2025, from 9:00 AM to 10:00 AM at the Utah Federal Courthouse, 351 S West Temple St, Salt Lake City, UT 84101.

BREAKING NEWS: Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi has refused to dismiss Dr. Moore’s case, ordering Utah prosecutors to proceed with the trial, despite calls for justice from supporters nationwide. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene has committed to personally intervene to secure the case’s dismissal, amplifying the urgency of this event. In a July 8, 2025, X post, Greene called Moore a “hero, not a criminal,” announcing she is “writing a letter to the DOJ asking all charges be dropped.” She stated, “The Covid vaccine kills and injures people, but this brave doctor, who is a veteran by the way, is being prosecuted for helping people avoid tyrannical vaccine mandates under Democrats.”

Dr. Moore faces charges of conspiracy, fraud, and destruction of government property for allegedly wasting $28,000 worth of COVID-19 vaccines, issuing 1,937 falsified vaccine cards, and administering saline shots to children at parents’ request. His trial, which began July 7, 2025, under U.S. District Judge Howard Nielson, has galvanized medical freedom advocates.

Died Suddenly, a co-host, reported on X on July 9, 2025, that Moore thanked supporters for “praying and spreading the news about his selective prosecution,” noting his son’s tearful plea for freedom outside the courthouse and labeling the trial a “kangaroo court.”

The trial, expected to last 15 days, drew dozens, including Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz, on July 7, 2025. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. tweeted in April 2025, “Dr. Moore deserves a medal for his courage and his commitment to healing!”

Jason Preston of We ARE the People urgently calls on President Trump, RFK Jr., and Pam Bondi to stop this unjust trial now!” said Preston, host of the We ARE the People podcast, known for exposing Utah corruption. “Dr. Moore stood for truth against mandates. Bondi’s refusal to dismiss this case is an outrage.”

•Learn More:

http://wearethepeople.org or http://diedsuddenly.info

Join us to demand justice for Dr. Moore.

We ARE the People: A Utah-based advocacy group and podcast exposing systemic corruption and empowering communities.

Died Suddenly: An organization advocating for medical freedom and raising vaccine concerns.

I pause my work on the structure of elections, again, because the liberty of a fellow citizen, veteran-patriot remains in immediate danger due to an unrighteous prosecution based on DOJ propaganda associated with these new Covid ‘vaccines’. This doctor, who is a combat veteran, would easily recognize friendly fire on an overseas battlefield… and he has seen it here in Utah on the medical playing field.

In the course of his medical practice during ‘Covid’ he recognized many shocking adverse events associated with the untested COVID EUA countermeasure serums. (Technically, the serums are termed military ‘countermeasures’ by the Department of Defense under whose contracts they are produced for battlefield use.) Starting in 2021 the countermeasures were being administered to the populace at large as ‘Covid vaccines’ with various simultaneous threats of disenfranchisement for those unwilling to take them. With mandates that conflicted with his oath to do no harm as a doctor, Dr. Moore relied on his judgement as a licensed physician and conducted his practice as directed by his conscience.

It is written in Article 1 Section 4 of the Utah Constitution that:

The Rights of Conscience shall Never be Infringed,…

Never!

but Dr. Moores’ ARE BEING INFRINGED in Utah by the US Dept. of Justice.

Dr. Moore’s Federal trial began on Monday, July 7, 2025, in Salt Lake City where the courtroom and an overflow courtroom were both filled to capacity. Per Security, phones are not allowed in the courtrooms and lockers are provided for stashing them at the entrance foyer but, for the first time the security guards could remember, the lockers were all used up because of the intense interest in this trial. People had to return to their cars to get rid of their phones.

Dr. Moore is being targeted by the US Department of Justice with the objective of imprisoning him for 35 years. His trial magistrate, Judge Howard C. Nielson, appears to be working with the prosecution to set up a faux trail by establishing ground rules similar to those used in the tainted Tina Peters election fraud trial in Grand Junction, Colorado of 2024. In that trial discussions of election fraud (which initiated any and all of Tina’s actions) were prohibited in court by Judge Matthew D. Barrett.

The Colorado trial and this Utah trial mirror each other. Information has recently come out that though Tina’s trial was a Colorado District Court trial the Federal DOJ was assisting. Dr. Moores’ trial could have been developed in Utah courts... but we see the Federal DOJ are stepping into Utah’s parochial medical commerce apparently with the blessing of the Utah attorney’s office.

If Dr. Moore’s trial follows in-step with the jury selection rules he will not be allowed to discuss vaccines, covid-19, medical-misinformation or other details about the intentions or safety concerns which guided his actions. This structure of trial is not whole or complete. It is, for the jury, like working in an office while someone in the building is popping popcorn. They know there is popcorn, they can smell it, but they won’t be allowed to ask about it. Many questions from the jury at Tina Peter’s trial were put aside by Judge Barrett as being out of bounds.

Designing a trial this way will deliberately bias the outcome against Dr Moore. The prosecution is concentrating on enforcing laws unrelated to health or medicine so they can rule those discussions off limits while ignoring important law and trampling on rights of conscience. This is exactly the technique used to jail Tina Peters last year… ignoring election cheating and conjuring absurd and trivial non-election offenses to pursue. Tina is 71 years old, is a gold-star mom, and has been jailed for nine months now. Those who put her in jail are intent on keeping her there.

News reporting on the trial of Dr. Moore is being done by the good people at @Died Suddenly_, who say that “the prosecution seeks to exclude testimony from patients harmed by COVID-19 vaccines, silencing crucial voices and denying the jury critical context.” Such actions, if continued, will put the trial on cruise control for injustice. @DiedSudddenly_ thinks this is an orchestrated attempt to suppress testimony from patients harmed by COVID-19 vaccines. This manipulation of the justice system will deny the jury balanced context. @DiedSuddenly_ says, “Such actions suggest not justice, but an orchestrated attempt to suppress evidence that might validate Dr. Moore’s ethically driven decisions.”

Follow the trial at: https://x.com/DiedSuddenly_

Subscribe to them! They are dedicating weeks or their time to this singular trial.

This truly is one of the most important trials in Utah history. In-person attendance is strongly encouraged: Federal Building on 351 South West Temple over the next couple weeks. You will always be able to talk to your kids about a pivotal trial for freedom of conscience in the fight against tyrants wielding mandates and syringes. Take your young adults in for a hour, too. You can park nearby for two hours for free. Hopefully, it’ll be the only trial your kids will ever need to attend. It will be a badge of honor for you and an eternal memory for them.

It is nice to have a US Representative on Dr. Moore’s side and speaking up: A big THANK YOU TO Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene from Georgia!

Utah has some great politicians. Regardless, all of Utah’s politicians are a product of a an electronic voting syndicate which is controlled by the Lt. Governor. Until we get back to hand-counted, paper-ballots I’ll be calling them acting in office and not legitimately elected.

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 4 hours 8 minutes

Our next presenter is Mr Philip Kruse. Mr Kruse is a Swiss lawyer who has been practicing law since 1998. He specializes in tax and in constitutional law. He has his own law firm in Zurich and is admitted to all courts in Switzerland. Mr Kruse.

Thank you very much, Senator, for hosting this important witness-hearing and, thank you very much for inviting me. It's a honor to give an overview on the key points of concern with the WHO's new pandemic regime, and I will do so from a purely constitutional and fundamental law and international law perspective. Now first, as already mentioned, by Rob Roos, member of parliament of Europe, When analyzing WHO's new pandemic legal regime, we need to consider two different international treaties that are about to be negotiated as we speak. Number 1, a completely new international convention, the so called new pandemic treaty, and Number 2, amendments to the already existing international health regulations.

Both of these legal instruments shall be adopted already in May 2024, this is 3 months from now, at the next World Health Assembly by WHO's 194 member states. I will take them together, for the reason of time, and focus on the consequences for democracy, for the constitutions of every member state, and for the people. Now this is the information that is hidden from the people and that everybody must know with respect to these new pandemic agreements.

Number 1, general remarks. Both of these legal instruments are technically international agreements. They are included between 194 member states, but they involve and has as a target and objective the World Health Organization as a third party.

Number 2, these agreements are negotiated without taking into consideration the massive and undeniable amount of data and of scientific evidence about the collateral damages of the global pandemic management of the WHO. And the WHO; as probably most governments are still today in a state of total denial with respect to these collateral damages. There's no learning. Even worse, this new pandemic legal regime will legalize all the methods of this pandemic period under COVID 19 that have proven to be harmful or wrong.

3rd General Remark': On the basis of these two legal instruments, member states will transfer constitutional powers to the WHO in ex… in an extent never seen before. WHO will be given full discretion to set up conditions under which all kinds of mandates, including injections of experimental substances, can be made mandatory on a global scale. I come now to the details.

Number One: WHO's already existing authority to declare a public health emergency of international concern will become massively extended. They will be allowed to declare all kinds of public health emergency under any given reason without any, responsibility to clear standards. This will come under the title and concept of “One Health”, so whether to fight a human influenza with a new subtype or to reduce rising level of CO2, or to respond to the loss of biodiversity, or to fight climate change, all of that can give rise to the next pandemic. Public health emergency of international concern, and I refer to the amendments to the article 12 of the International Health Regulations.

This is pure arbitrariness. This is the opposite of the rule of law, and it comes without a, a mechanism to correct or to stop this declaration of emergency, and this is the first point where member states will give away control over their country.

In addition, linked to that, in the national legislation, regulatory legislation of the member states, with the declaration of a public health emergency comes the abolishment of ordinary safety standards for medical products.

Point Number 2: WHO will be authorized to issue recommendations with legally binding effects. This is legislation. This is legislation directed, directly affecting every human being. We are talking about mandatory testing methods by useless tools, mandatory travel restrictions, mandatory lockdowns, mandatory vaccinations with predefined experimental products, mass quarantines, and so on.

This doctrine of mandatory one-size-fits-all will deny all human beings the individual treatment, the right for individual treatment they deserve. It will also hinder medical doctors to truly care about their patients. This doctrine is totalitarian by design, and we have to oppose it. It is a blank check to literally violate bodily autonomy of every human being and humiliate people on a global scale.

Point Number 3; censorship. As WHO has already done under COVID 19, this international organization will be granted the global supreme authority to define truth and science, and to eliminate free speech and free exchange of information under the title of 'info-demics'.

Now, as we all should know, free speech and free information are among the founding principles in every democracy in every constitution. Without free speech and free information, by definition, there can be no free science, there can be no fair justice, and most of all, there can be no democracy. But this is not all. With this global health censorship, people will never learn and never know about the dangers that are associated with these mRNA based products and other countermeasures.

So they will be mandated to take experimental injections without an informed consent, and this is, ladies and gentlemen, an example of cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment as it is absolutely prohibited under mandatory international law as it is written down in the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 7, a breach of which can never be justified.

Point Number 4: In the same time, the new pandemic treaty is a basis for a state directed economy under the vague concept of equity, and it will allow, even create, cartels for the pandemic industry that will enjoy guaranteed profits without any liability for the damages they cause, just as we have seen that already under COVID.

Point 5: All of the above will become reality without any mechanism to effectively control or stop the WHO. So there will be no checks and balances, but full discretion and arbitrariness to the benefit of WHO. Even full immunity and no accountability. And here again, checks and balances is another of the founding principles in every constitution, which comes here under attack.

So let's speak about Point Number 6: The next point, fundamental rights, well, that is easily responded. We see some lines in the new pandemic treaty, claiming fundamental rights to be the basic principles of WHO. But I ask you, with such a strict regime of unnecessary promoted emergencies with censorship and with mandatory medical treatment, How will it be possible to protect human rights for a judge who only hears one side and is not allowed to consider even the other side from those brave scientists who most of them who many of them are here in the room. It will be impossible by design. And associated with that is the fact that the governments will always try to, comply with their international law obligations towards WHO.

[Senator Jonson]: And, Mr Cruz, I… I need, we need to move on. But let me just say, I'm thoroughly convinced. Yeah. Okay. This is this is something that needs to be defeated. Unfortunately, in the US, it's like so many things, it's partisan issue. I offered an amendment to make any agreement… deemed, deem, deem any agreement a treaty. They have to come before the senate for ratification, two thirds approval, and that was voted down on party lines. So just a quick question before we have to move on. How many nations are gonna vote on these amendments? What what's what's the count?

It's 190 nations. 194 nations are the members of the WHO. And and what is the prospect that it will pass? I mean, are, I mean, what what's the political dynamic here? Are smaller nations in favor of this? I mean, is there greater greater skepticism or as Mr Roos was saying… well, people think that The Who is a good organization and this is gonna just fly through passage.

Yeah. We can only feel, little, hints and see little hints that behind the scenes, nations are many nations are not happy with these agreements, but for other purposes than we talk here about, and that's about business, the one part of the nations want to have more money from the richer countries, and the richer countries do not want to share their patents and or money, to the benefit of these nations. Again, we we need awareness. This has to be defeated.

So, again, thanks for your for your, testimony.

Time: 4 hours 20 minutes

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

Special thanks to patriot Senator Ron Johnson for hosting this Senate panel on the Covid-Cartel.

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 4 hours

[Senator Ron Johnson from Wisconsin]: Our next presenter is Mr Rob Roos. Mr Roos is a member of the European Parliament. He garnered worldwide attention for his viral video of a hearing with Pfizer executive Janine Small, making her admit that Pfizer's vaccine had not been tested on stopping the transmission of the COVID 19 virus. First of all, job well done. Thank you, Mr Roos.

Well, thank you, Senator, for, for having me here. The topic of today is: What are they hiding… and I will speak about the WHO Pandemic Treaty.

On December 1st 2021, the 194 members of the World Health Organization agreed to move quickly on a treaty agreement or other international instruments on future pandemics. The power of the WHO and, in particular, the power of the director general to monitor, to coordinate, and to direct would be significantly expanded. The European Union is pushing for a legally binding pandemic treaty, but that would require a two thirds majority here in the US senate. Negotiations are ongoing. I have the draft right here, but it's probably... but it's unlikely that it would pass worldwide.

Simultaneously, however, negotiations are ongoing on more than 300 amendments to the International Health Regulation, They were originally submitted by the Biden administration, and they will be subject to a vote by the general assembly of the WHO at the end of May. These amendments would not have to be ratified by any national parliament, thus enabling the WHO to circumvent national democracy. Thereby, they form the true imminent danger to freedom worldwide.

Tucker Carlson made an informative segment in a show on Fox in 2022, warning the public against this global pandemic treaty. It makes total sense because this is catchier than amendments to the International Health Regulation. However, as we can see from the original amendments, if adopted, they would already give the WHO a leading, convening, and coordinating role in the operational aspects of an emergency response to a pandemic.

So in short, the pandemic treaty is indeed worse, but the amendments are the true imminent danger. And the WHO seems to be in a hurry. In May 2022, there was a vote on two significant changes to the procedure of adoption, a significant reduction of the periods provided for under Article 59 of the 2005 IHR in two regards.

First of all, the procedure for entry into force is changed. Under article 59, paragraph 2 of the amended IHR, there is a reduction from the original 24 months to 12 months for the entry into force. 2nd, the period for rejection or expressing reservations on amendments to the IHR is reduced from 18 to 10 months. The vote for this change of the IHR was performed in violation of the WHO constitution due to lack of a proof of consent. There was no vote and no record of who was present.

With other words, basic procedural rules for the correct formation of a vote have been violated. The democratic process has been sabotaged. By letter, I have I have this letter over here, I have requested the director general, Tedros, for proof of simple majority, but I have not received any response yet. It would surprise me, however, that something like an illegal procedural change is going to stop the WHO general assembly from adopting the Biden amendments to the IHR in May. If they are adopted, democracy will be sidelined in the event the WHO decides to declare a pandemic.

Experts believe the WHO could then in practice, impose lockdowns, enforce medical interventions, and dictate medical protocols. Such a one size fits all response to a pandemic crisis is foolish in geographical zones characterized by vastly different parameters, and it is, of course, totally undemocratic. Instead of a central bureaucratic process, we need local democratic decision making. The WHO cannot be trusted at all. It is funded by China, by big pharma, and by philanthropic, philanthropists.

I call them oligarchs, by the way. They… there are enormous conflict of interest. Further amendments threaten free speech and seek to increase censorship of differing opinions, potentially transforming our nation into totalitarian-like states. Conclusion, defenders of freedom on both sides of the Atlantic need to stop these amendments from coming into pass. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mister Ruse. Just one quick question. What what is the attitude toward these amendments, in the European Parliament? Are are are you an outlier or is there a great deal of resistance?

Well, I think there's a, a big problem. The, the people believe that, the WHO is a neutral government organization, which [it] is not. And 80% of its funding is is coming from voluntary contributions, 80%, and [that] nobody knows.

People, they do believe; that [it] is a neutral government organization. So there is no awareness, and, and, and I think that is the problem. So in the European Union, it's not really a topic at this moment. So I'm very happy that you are organizing this hearing and that we can raise this awareness.

So… no. We need awareness. There's no doubt about it.

So, thank you, Mr. Roos.

Time: 4 hours 8 minutes

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 3 hours 50 min

Our next presenter is Dr Sorin Titus Muncaciu. Is that pretty close? But, the doctor is a doctor and a member of Romanian parliament. He specializes in orthopedics. He works as a foreign graduate for Virginia Hospital Center. He specializes in the da Vinci surgical robot. Doctor.

Thank you very much, Senator. It's a great honor for me to be here. And, what I'm gonna speak about is the fact that we are 4 years in this saga, and we can look back to what happened. And I can give you the perspective of the Romanian experience.

We are a party having probably 10% of the votes we got in the parliament in 2020, and we, from the very beginning of this pandemic, we decided that the rights of the people to decide if they accept or not a experimental drug should be, should be respected. Therefore, we start a fight in the parliament. And like I said, we are only 10% of the vote. So first, it was they come to us to a, mandatory vaccination law that they kept in the drawer for, from 2017. Now, I main I, I mentioned that because I found out that one of their strategy is is called like, a mouse trap. In other words, they put pieces of legislation in place. And people are not aware of what those pieces of legislation means, but all of a sudden they declare an emergency and the trap closes. And then we found our ourselves in the trap. And that's what, WHO is gonna do, in May. So we oppose that. After that, we start alerting the population that something is wrong with Corigin. Corigin doesn't look like it's, it's benefited anybody. So, what strike me was, and our party, was the fact that when they start the vaccination-campaign they put military on the streets. That doesn't really ring democracy to us. So we fought it. We got people involved and we start fighting.

Now the coercion was done by the European Union. I mean, they came up with the pass, the green pass. And that was to force people, if they wanna travel or they wanna go to the mall, to the bank, to have this green certificate. However, the crucial piece of legislation was green certificate at the workplace, which means from 18 to 65, the active population, they want to vaccinate that population. And we fiercely opposed that. We did everything in the book that we could to stop that and we stopped it. And, as as a consequence to that, the Romanian rate of vaccination was probably less than half of what the other European countries experienced or United States, Canada and, Australia. And, therefore we can compare now the low rate and the excess mortality. And that's the best proof I can bring to the table is the fact that having a relationship between a low rate of vaccination and low excess mortality, which is right there you see it on the, Romania is the last country on the right which means we have negative excess mortality while all the other countries in Europe have positive excess mortality. Some of them go to 20.

I was appalled by the figures, Mr Dell gave. I truly believe in those. It's, it's excess mortality is coming up in Europe in in great figures. And I think all western countries are facing the same situation. If you have a high rate of vaccination, it's a synergic relationship with, excess mortalities in the year following that.

And, to be honest, at this point I think, we should have been aware of the fact that they are hiding for us all those figures. Not only that but it took us a lot of energy and effort to to get the, the contract, the Pfizer contract. The Pfizer contract looks exactly like, like the paper you show. It's black. Everywhere it's a secret in in those contracts.

And, we forced the European Union to tell us exactly what was happening with the vaccination during the same day, the day of the vaccination. Well, it's European Union has, roughly more than 400,000,000 people and lots of them were vaccinated, but the day they have the vaccine, 12,000 people die the same day. And that should tell something about how criminal this endeavor is. Because you can, you can say, well, 12,000 people died. I mean, it's not a small figure, right?

And, I believe to the bottom of my heart that this was a great crime against humanity. That these companies were doing by promoting and by executing this, vaccination. And, unfortunately, it happened and, looking back we can see what happened.

[Sen Johnson]: So so Doctor, in the in the short time remaining, how would you explain Romania's ability to resist versus the rest of Europe and the United States? What's… is it cultural? Was it, just your your ability to convince people or what?

Yeah. This is the subject of hesitancy. Remember, they took steps to avoid, to… to contra-balance hesitancy. Therefore, they deny the right for, repurposed medication. They try to, the, they have a media cartel, the trusted news initiative who actually purposely decided not to, I mean to, to facilitate the vaccination but to counter the other measure which were, repurposed drugs. And, and I, it's my belief that because they did that, now we are facing this situation.

It's a… hesitancy was something that they tried as much as they could to, to counter. But in Romania the problem they face is that we are 40 years after a communist dictatorship, 30, 34 years after a communist dictatorship. And it's in our genes, it's in our... to distrust the government because we knew every time a communist government is saying anything or is directing anything, we knew that's a lie, that's something that we should not trust or we should not follow.

When the European Union started behaving like the USSR with those commissars coming to us and Mr Barnier came to, Romania. This gentleman was the commissioner for, internal affairs of the European Union and pushed us, pushed the Romanian parliament to, to vote the green certificate at the workplace. I, I definitely opposed that and I knew they have no scientific base for that. And I asked him in the Romanian parliament, if you ask us to vaccinate people from 18 to 65, you better have a scientific proof that that will, it's what we are looking for. We are to have a proof, a scientific proof to… to justify that. And he said no, it should be apolitical. You belong to European Union. You should follow that directly. Well, guess what? We did not.

Well, I I think more people around the world are taking more of a Romanian attitude toward trusting their government. I think that's a good thing. Thank you, Doctor.

End time: 4 hours

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

we have got a suite of intolerable acts coming towards us. The central bank digital currencies, the WHO pandemic treaty, the bio/digital convergence, the 15 minute cities, the global warming, all of these, I can best describe as another con.

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 3 hours 40 min

Next presenter is Mr Randy Hillier. Mr Hillier served in the Canadian parliament for 15 years and was the first member to publicly oppose his government's response to COVID. Probably didn't go well, did it? He is being threatened with a 3-1/2 year prison term for his support of the Canadian truckers. Mr Hillier.

Thank you very much, Senator and, thank you also very much for your commitment to truth, freedom, and faith in your endeavors.

I was elected to the Ontario parliament on 4 different occasions and served 15 years. Ontario is Canada's most populous province and largest economy. In on March 26, 2020, I became the 1st elected representative in any Canadian parliament to publicly oppose the state of emergency and the lockdowns and then the mandatory mass and mandatory jabs.

The police in Ontario charged me 25 times for not abiding by the mandates and hosting no more lockdown rallies across the province. 20 charges have been withdrawn. I still have 5 of those yet to win. I have also been charged with 9 criminal offenses for being in and advocating for the Freedom Truckers Convoy in Ottawa, February 2022. The crown attorney is seeking a three and a half year prison sentence for my words of encouragement at the truckers convoy.

Senator, today we're under the… and democracy is under these bright lights here in this room for all to see, and thank you. But there is a much more to government that is not under the bright lights. There is a dark side to all governments. This investigative committee is seeking answers to: what did they hide. It would be a much shorter committee if it was: what did they not hide. However, I'll provide one short firsthand story that reveals what the political leadership in Ontario hid from everyone's view and I believe it was neither unique nor confined to Ontario, but ubiquitous throughout the western world, including here in the USA.

During the last week of April in 2020, my position opposing the government's preposterous and outrageous mandates were well known to everyone and to all my colleagues. I knew at the time there was about a dozen dozen other legislators who shared my views, but not one of them would be public about their position. Although I was no longer in the government caucus, and I had declared myself to be an independent member of the legislature, one day I was approached by four senior staff members from the premier's office. The premier would be akin to a state governor here in the United States.

They had a singular question they wanted to discuss with me as they knew that I would give them an honest answer. And the question was… and we did this quietly… and discreetly… not underneath the the bright lights of of of democracy. But they did want an honest answer, and the question was, “Randy, how do we get out of this mess?” They knew that the virus and its harm and its lethality was highly exaggerated. They knew that the state of emergency was entirely unnecessary and harmful.

They knew that the lockdowns were exceptionally harmful, but they also knew that the 24/7 media hysteria was out of control and had created a fearful, anxiety ridden mob. They also knew that the premier's closest, most influential advisors were lobbyists for pharma and tech, and that they saw the pandemic through a very, very profitable lens for themselves and for their clients. They also knew from the extensive daily polling that appealing to the mob's fear was politically beneficial. They feared however, these four staffers feared, the long term damage would be horrendous to themselves, to their families, and the province. And my answer to them was very simple.

I explained that they needed to be honest with with the premier and his advisers. Explain that to the public; that the premier had acted out of the abundance of caution to the uncertainty, but the facts were now known and proved that the virus was far less dangerous than first expected… that the modeling was highly fictitious and exaggerated… and that the consequences of the lockdowns were unbearable and far more dangerous than what COVID ever would be. And to simply ask for the people's understanding and forgiveness for the needless harms that were done. And in simple terms, I told them that to get out of this required them to be honest and truthful.

But they told me that the truth could not be told. They could not accept that. That, it would cost them all their jobs.

So what did we hide? We hid the facts, and certainly we had to hide the context. We disguised all the data and all the stats, but we also abdicated our responsibilities. And instead of providing leadership, we became followers to the very mob we had created and helped to create. And then we concealed our motivations… but also many politicians also were victims of this con-job called COVID.

We hid the truth. We feared honesty, and we had broken God's commandment and our covenant… and, we disguised once again that political interests, political party interests always trump the public's interest. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr Hillier. It strikes me though there were a lot of COVID tyrants around the world. Your prime minister was one of the more more oppressive. Does he still have public support?

Say that again? Does prime minister Trudeau still enjoy great deal of public support in Canada? No. He, his best… before date is near at its end, and I'm sure he will not survive another electoral cycle if he even makes it to the next election.

[San Johnson:] I'm glad. I, I love Canada. I love Canadians, like, fishing for your walleye up in Lake of the Woods. Can can you describe, you know, some of the persecutions of the truckers? Because I thought, I thought that was it was very, it was very difficult to watch and they inspired a trucker movement here in the United States as well, but it's really the Canadian truckers that had the courage to step forward and and protest and they they were treated savagely. Weren't they?

Oh, absolutely. There was trucks vandalized by the, by the authorities. There was physical abuse and and violence. But then there was the the lawfare that was applied. And as the, chief of police in Ottawa said, he said we were gonna hunt you all down, during the convoy. And and they have.

There's people here this weekend that were, hunted down and, charged a year later, who had trucks in Ottawa. And charged with what? Charged, with mischief, obstruction, generally very trivial, catch-all criminal charges, but, as we know, Senator, we can… when you use the law with malice, you can make due-process due-punishment very quickly, and and that is what our authorities are doing in Ottawa. They're not using the justice as a shield to protect individual freedoms and liberties. They're using it as a weapon, to destroy people's liberties.

Did, did they seize bank accounts, shutdown credit cards, that type of thing?

Many people had: their bank accounts frozen, their credit card accounts eliminated, mortgage accounts revoked. Many, many people were put in exceptionally, dire financial straits for being at the Freedom Convoy. Just a few weeks ago, the authority that Trudeau used to seize those assets (so: the cash and the bank accounts and the credit cards)… that decision was overturned or it was/has been ruled ultra-vires and unconstitutional, and that there was never a threat to the security of the nation during the truckers convoy… because, indeed, it was the most joyful, most family friendly, most exuberant, most happy time that the city of Ottawa has ever seen in its history.

[Sen Johnson:] So so that's one victory, but it again, it's a warning against things like government controlled digital currencies. Correct? Say that again, please. It's, you know, your experience in terms of what the government did to people's bank accounts, their, you know, their assets, would argue against things like government controlled digital digital currencies.

Oh, listen. Yeah. We're, we're, we have got a suite of intolerable acts coming towards us. The central bank digital currencies, the WHO pandemic treaty, the bio/digital convergence, the 15-minute cities, the global-warming, all of these, I can best describe as another con. And, 250 years ago, the American colonials, saw a whole bunch of coercive intolerable acts perpetrated by authorities and they, stood up and rebelled. We've got far, far worse coercive acts coming to all countries in the western world.

[Sen Johnson:] I think the founder founders have to be spinning in their graves. But anyway, so there's an example of what happened in Canada. Now we'll turn to Romania.

End time: 3 hours 50 minutes

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

The Majesty of Righteous Power:

“Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. -John 18

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 3 hours 30 min

Our next presenter is Dr Brett Weinstein. Doctor Weinstein is an evolutionary biologist with a PhD from the University of Michigan. He's a fellow at the Brownstone Institute, co-author of the New York Times best selling book, A Hunter's Gather's Guide to the 21st Century and host of the dark horse podcast. Dr Weinstein.

Thank you, Senator Johnson. Ladies and gentlemen, I believe we must zoom out if we are to understand the pattern that we are gathered here to explore because the pattern is larger than federal health agencies and the COVID Cartel. If we do zoom out and ask what are they hiding, the answer becomes as obvious as it is disturbing. They are hiding everything. It will be jarring for many to hear a scientist speak with such certainty.

It should be jarring. We are trained to present ideas with caution as hypotheses in need of a test. But in this case, I have tested the idea and I am as certain of it as I am of anything. We are being systematically blinded. It is the only explanation I have encountered that will not only describe the present but also in my experience predicts the future with all but perfect accuracy.

The pattern is a simple one. You can see it clearly and test it yourself. Every single institution dedicated to public-truth-seeking is under simultaneous attack. They are all in a state of collapse. Every body of experts fails utterly.

Individual experts who resist, or worse in an attempt to return their institutions to sanity… they find themselves coerced into submission. If they won't buckle, they are marginalized or forced out. Those outside of the institutions who either seek truth alone or who build new institutions with a truth seeking mission face merciless attacks on both their integrity and expertise, often by the very institutions whose mission they refuse to abandon.

There is a saying in military circles, once is a mistake, twice is a coincidence, three times is enemy action. I have no doubt that given an hour, the people on this panel could point to a 100 examples of the pattern I have just described… while finding even a handful of exceptions would pose a significant challenge.

We are left in a fool's paradise. Our research universities spend huge sums of public money to reach preordained conclusions. Professors teach only lessons that are consistent with wisdom students have picked up on TikTok even when those lessons contradict the foundational principles of their disciplines. Once proud newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post only report important stories after they have become common knowledge. Morticians must now raise the alarm over patterns missed by medical examiners.

The CDC has become an excellent guide to protecting your health, but only for people who realize you should do the opposite of whatever it advises. The courts, the last holdout in this ongoing inversion of reality, are now regularly used as a coercive weapon of elites against those who threaten them. We have literally witnessed the Department of Homeland Security attempt to set up a truth ministry and declare accurate critique of government as a kind of terrorism.

To my fellow patriots in the West, the pattern is unmistakable. I cannot tell you with any certainty who they are or what they hope to accomplish, but I can tell you that we are being systematically denied the tools of enlightenment and the rights guaranteed in our constitution. We, those who remain dedicated to the values of the West, must fight this battle courageously and we must win. For if we do not stem the tide, the result will be a dark age that differs from prior dark ages only in the power and sophistication of the coercive instruments wielded by those who will rule us.

So, Mr Weinstein, I've seen… or Dr Weinstein, I've seen a number of interviews that you've done. Very interesting as well as your podcast. Now I, I kinda wanna ask you, I I describe my eyes being opened up, certainly during COVID to a number of things. Can you just describe your own I, I… even in the description, I said you're gonna talk about being red-pilled. Can you just describe your your journey here?

Well, I think we are all on a similar journey. I did not think that I was naive seven years ago, and then I learned that I had been very naive and I keep learning that lesson. Each new discovery reveals that I was missing something that was right in front of me, and I think that's actually the hallmark of the exact pattern I'm describing.

We are in something that I have called a Cartesian crisis where the failure of all of these truth seeking mechanisms have left all of us in the dark. There's very little that we can establish with any certainty, and the problem is that the human animal will be driven crazy by such a state. You you can only drive so long after you've put on a blindfold before you hit a curve, and so that is not a healthy condition and it is certainly not a long term plan for our survival. So I do mean that we have to win this battle because, the existence of the west certainly and possibly the existence of our species depends on it.

[Sen Johnson:] Prior to the last few years, I would have said the greatest threat facing this nation was our death and deficit which we're exacerbating. We're not fixing it at all. Currently, I think the greatest threat is our division. And I try and point out that the good news is we're not a naturally divided people, not nationally, not globally. As human beings, we all want the same things. Safety, security, enough opportunities for prosperity to take care of ourselves and our family. So you have to ask the question, what what is dividing us? And I, I would argue there are… there are… there, there are groups, there are individuals who are purposely dividing us. Would would you agree with that, and can you identify that?

Absolutely. Our division is necessary in order to keep us from restoring our capacity to understand and to plot our course in a rational way. So it is clearly serving someone's interest. I'm much less certain about who that someone is, and I don't I'm not sure it even matters. The the primary job that we have is to rebuild the basic tools that allow us to function as a society because as much as our society may have had substantial defects, it is at least the prototype for what we must build if we're to continue indefinitely as a prosperous species.

[Sen Johnson:] During this process, I've gotten to know Robert Kennedy, Jr. I think he's a very good person and I think the discussions we've had we've talked about in order to unify this nation, to to end the division, it's gonna take, you know, individuals from both sides, maybe from the far sides, to come together, recognize the truth, and start conveying the truth. Would would you agree that's what's gonna be necessary?

Yes. And I think we have to do it immediately. I know that personally, I have many ideological beliefs and I have put them all aside. The defense of the West is paramount. And to the extent that we differ over how society is to be managed in some small way, let's fight about that later. We we have to save the west.

[Sen Johnson:] So I would think that would be one of the appeals of this panel. Again, I one one thing I've found out in these discussions, you know, the doctors I've been dealing with generally were not from the right. They generally weren't Republican, they were Democrat. But we what we have in common is our eyes are open to this. Our eyes are open to the danger. And we've we've set that aside because we need to heal and unify this nation. We we need to convey the truth. So anybody listening to this, and I realize this is a reasonably long session but I think incredibly important one, that that ought to be one of the primary takeaways is this is what we must do as a nation. We need to set aside that the and it there are so many in so many instances, petty political differences and understand what what made this country and what made progress around the world possible and that's called freedom and the higher value of the truth. But, Dr Weinstein, you know, Weinstein, thank you for for coming here and for your powerful testimony. Thank you.

End time: 3 hours 40 minutes

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

Jesus Christ speaking to Nicodemus:
Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

“what we were witnessing was the emergence of a fully-fledged totalitarian system”

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 3 hours 22 min

Dr Mattias Desmet. He's a professor of psychology at Gent University. He has a PhD in psychology and a master's degree in statistics. He's currently investigating the psychological effects of propaganda. Dr Desmet.

Thank you, Senator Johnson. Unlike most of my colleagues here, I didn't really focus or not so much focus on the question what they were hiding.

I, I rather focused on the question how it was possible that so many people refused to see what they were hiding. And, in the beginning of the crisis, I, I studied, the statistics a little bit, and I immediately got the impression as a statistician that, for instance, the [COVID disease] mortality rates were overrated by a factor 10. And and and, a few months later, by the end of May 2020, it was actually clear for everyone who wanted to see it that, indeed, the mortality rates had been dramatically overrated. Like in a small country such as Sweden, the initial models predicted that over 60,000 people would die if the country didn't go into lockdown by the end of May 2020. And the country didn't go into lockdown, and only 6,000 people died.

And then even, like, the people who who built the initial models, in a hearing for the the the British House of Commons admitted that the mortality rates had been dramatically overrated in the beginning of the crisis, and still the story continued as if the models had been right. The media continued to disseminate the same narrative, and the people continued to buy into it. And that, for me, was the moment when I decided to take the perspective of a of a mass psychologist and to try to show the people what what psychological mechanisms could explain, how how an entire society was in the grip of a narrative which, was utterly absurd. And, the more I studied, these these psychological mechanisms, the more I I I noticed that what we were witnessing was the emergence of a fully-fledged totalitarian system, in our society, a totalitarian system which is always based on what Hannah Arendt called a diabolic pact between the elite and the masses.

You need two things for a totalitarian system. On the one hand, you need an elite which excessively and relentlessly uses propaganda to to keep control over the population. And then you need a part of the population, 20 to 30%, usually, to go along in that in that propaganda and to buy fanatically into into the narrative. And we we've seen, I think, both components of a totalitarian system in this in this, in this crisis. And, I I I think, like, if we want to know, what we, can do against such a totalitarian system, then it's crucial, I believe, to really understand and to feel, what, psychological mechanisms are at work, both at the level of the elite and at the level of of the population.

In a nutshell, I I I believe that, what is crucial to understand how such a phenomenon can happen is that a society of the population should be isolated, should struggle with lack of meaning making, should be anxious, frustrated, and aggressive, and if under these circumstances, propaganda is used, then there is a good chance that propaganda which disseminates the narrative in the population, which offers an object-of-anxiety and a strategy to deal with that object-of-anxiety, a virus in lockdowns for instance, then there is a good chance that the anxiety in a population will attach to the object-of-anxiety in the narrative and that a major part of the population will be willing to participate in a strategy to deal with that object-of-anxiety even if the strategy is utterly absurd.

And it's, like, perfectly comparable. It's identical, actually, to hypnotic state and to, prevent the hypnosis to go deeper and deeper and deeper, you need some people, not too much, some people who continue to speak out in a sincere and truthful way as possible and to continue to do so even if that means that they will lose a lot in the world of appearances. And, I, I, I I hope and I'm confident that, there'll be enough of us who, will continue to do so.

Dr Desmet, in your written testimony, you talked about the enlightenment and how science was gonna prevail and lift humanity out of despair. Eisenhower, in his farewell address, talked about the dangers of public funding of science and how it produced an elite group of scientists and technologists that are gonna drive public policy. Seems like that's kinda where we're at and it's that elite group that has been driving public policy and and quite honestly, been driving the propaganda. Can you speak to that at all?

Yeah. Of course. I believe that what we've witnessed throughout the last, 50 years, I think, is a radical perversion of, of academic discourse. In the beginning, science was a pure example of truth speech. It was the the the discourse of a minority who went against a majority and who risked everything to articulate that discourse in society. But slowly, as science became the dominant discourse, it got perverted as usually happens when the discourse, a truthful discourse of a minority, becomes dominant. And, just before the corona crisis, the academic world was in a terrible state. We often forget that. But, like, 15 years before the corona crisis, we've seen, the the replication crisis in the sciences showing that up to 85% of the academic papers, for instance, in the medical field cannot be reproduced and that many of them are are fraudulent. And, so that was the background, I think, against which, like, an entire academic community could collaborate with, this this this narrative that seized control of society in the most destructive way, imaginable, I think.

So what drives that fraud? I mean, is the is the grants, is the funding coming from, you know, a source that's gonna want a particular outcome of the research?

Funding is one thing, but it is not everything. There's something else as well. Something is a more profound psychological factor, which is indeed funding is definitely not everything. And I know that because, like, in in the academic, field of psychology, funding doesn't play a major role. But still, most studies cannot be reproduced, and many are fraudulent. I think we have to see it in a… as money is important, but there is something more important. And it is this this, rationalism, I believe, that is typical for the enlightenment tradition. The tradition of enlightenment replaced the religious human mind in the world by the materialist human mind in the world. And, it started to believe that rational-understanding should be the guiding principle of our of our society, rather rational-understanding rather than ethical principles, and that was a fundamental mistake. Such rationalism as this, for instance, conveyed by people like Yuval Noah Harari now, such rational rationalism in the end always lapses into radical irrationality. And that's what we are seeing now, I think. We are seeing how a world, marked by the hubris that rational-understanding could be the guiding light of of of not only individual human existence, but also of, human living together in general. It's, it it it just proves that, the state we find ourselves in now proves that rational-understanding can never grasp the essence of life, can never, be the ultimate guiding principle of a society, and that in the end, it has a dramatic effect that people lose all ethical awareness, and that is exactly what we have seen in every totalitarian system that emerged, whether we are talking about Nazism, communism, or the contemporary, trans-humanist, technocratic-totalitarianism. It always starts from the the idea that on the basis of rational knowledge knowledge, a new paradise will be create… will be created. And, as Hannah Arendt said, the only problem with this totalitarian paradise is that it looks suspiciously like hell.

Thank you, thank you, Dr Desmet.

End time: 3 hours 30 minutes

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

Mosiah 3:19-21

19 For the natural man is an enemy to God, and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit, and putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, even as a child doth submit to his father.

20 And moreover, I say unto you, that the time shall come when the knowledge of a Savior shall spread throughout every nation, kindred, tongue, and people.

21 And behold, when that time cometh, none shall be found blameless before God, except it be little children, only through repentance and faith on the name of the Lord God Omnipotent.

Censorship is what actually caused these deaths. It was the lie that assured us it was safe when it wasn't, and it still isn't. The lie killed them as much as the vaccine because it tricked them into taking it.

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 3 hours 10 min

Our next presenter is Mr Rodney Palmer. Mr Palmer is a Canadian was a Canadian journalist for 20 years. He worked as an investigative reporter for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and he was a foreign correspondent for CTV News in India, China, and the Middle East. Mr Palmer.

Thank you, Senator Johnson, for assembling this expert team today. I'm gonna talk about censorship in television news particularly because it is a new super weapon aimed at the citizens of this country. TV news suppressed the voices of learned scientists who sounded the alarm about COVID vaccines, and many of them are in this room right now. This censorship was critical to executing a massive fraud, and it couldn't have been perpetrated without the collaboration of the news media that we all trusted. If the news reporters did their jobs instead of reporting propaganda, this fraud would have been exposed from the outset.

In Canada, our government websites currently list 488 dead citizens reported to be killed by the vaccines. According to Health Canada, since last year, an average of 6 Canadians are still reported to be killed every month from COVID vaccines. But our news media continue to censor this fact every day. Instead, they lie to us and call them safe and effective, as though no one is dying, as though it's not a game of Russian roulette, as though they're not killing people by lying to us.

Censorship is what actually caused these deaths. It was the lie that assured us it was safe when it wasn't, and it still isn't. The lie killed them as much as the vaccine because it tricked them into taking it.

In America, it's much worse. The vaccine companies are allowed to sponsor the news directly. They can't do this in Canada. To a visiting Canadian, the news here looks like one big ad for pharmaceutical products. It's a bit of a culture shock when you turn on the TV. There wouldn't even be a new a US newscast without pharma ads. So the reporters on your newscasts are all conflicted. They can't bite the hand that feeds them. They can't possibly investigate the most important stories of our time. Gain of function laboratories, FDA regulatory capture, the World Health Organization's plan for an international pandemic treaty. They can't possibly do investigative reporting on these stories that affect every American.

The good news is no one believes the TV news anymore. Only 15% of Canadians, 15% are getting the boosters. We're onto them. We understand they're lying to us. Alternative media now is the only news we have because the mainstream is dissolved into propaganda drivel. Canada's broadcaster of record, the government funded CBC News, laid off a 130 people in 2020 just when we needed journalism the most. This month, they announced another 800 layoffs. At the same time, they paid themselves $14,000,000 in performance bonuses. These are public servants whose only performance seems to have been dismantling the CBC.

Canada's largest private news network, CTV News, laid off 1300 jobs last year. It closed most of its foreign bureaus, where I worked as a foreign correspondent, from 1996 to 2004. This month, CTV's parent company laid off another 4,800 staff, the largest single corporate layoff in Canadian history. It it's now canceled lunchtime news hours. It's canceled weekend newscasts. After these reporters are laid off, we'll only be left with the trusted favor of the trusted faces of our favorite news anchors, delivering the propaganda of the day, instead of the news of the day. But when those trusted faces are telling us lies, they're like a super weapon aimed directly at us. The news anchors are now the finger on the trigger in that game of Russian roulette.

When the news is poisoned, so is democracy because we've stopped debating about what's right and instead we waste our time arguing about what's true. We've never seen anything like this before. It's an unprecedented moment in history and it requires an unprecedented remedy to fix it. Most every other country is letting this happen, but where goes America, so goes the world. You have a unique role in setting the moral tone for Western democracies.

So I respectfully recommend that the senate investigate the role of American television news networks, including with pharmaceutical advertisers to skirt the FDA laws that require them to declare the known risks of a pharmaceutical product. This investigation should extend to any reporters, news anchors, editors, and executives who lied to their audience about the safety of of the COVID vaccines. And I also recommend investigating the total prohibition of pharmaceutical advertising on television in alignment with almost every country in the world. Thank you.

Mr Palmer, Palmer, you've, obviously had years of experience in the news business.

At what point did it shift from being, I'd assume when you were there, higher integrity to what we have now? I mean, when did that shift and how and why?

My main, the the main media I consume is CBC Radio, which is kind of the the record, in Canada… and I heard it creeping in. I heard pharmaceutical/biased-advertising creeping in on the weekend newscasts. I remember hearing a story that vitamin E was actually no good for men. And I thought, well, who let that slip in? And and who they they credited… some institute from, Western Ontario that I'd never heard of, and I thought, well, that's a really easy way to slip in and, a press release because there's only 3 people working on the weekends, and they I kinda understood the mechanism by which you could get that in. But then I saw an entire investigation, was that, what... that was around… I'd say, 2010, 2012… and then about 2014, there was an investigative report slamming the science of homeopathic medicine.

And I thought, well, why would you go after a a whole branch of medicine that's a 120 years old? It didn't make any sense and and particularly, they were ridiculing it. And I'd never seen that level of bullying before because this the new censorship has a few tiers to it. It's not just suppressing the learned scientists you see around this table. It also is aggressively bullying them and shaming them and ridiculing them, and then it also elevates a lie. So it has these three aspects.

You… but you're talking about, obviously, the impact of pharmaceutical intrusion in the news. Again, I know this is I'll try and keep this nonpartisan, but from my standpoint, you know, the left has infiltrated our universities, you know, the graduating journalists who are more of the left, obviously, than the right. So this is broader from my standpoint than just pharmaceutical infiltration, or would you disagree with that?

No. I don't disagree with that at all. I think that that I started noticing the focus on transgenderism, particularly on CBC radio, to the point where they were announcing a new artist was a, bisexual or a new a new singer was a, they would announce their sexuality. And I never thought that I heard, you know, David Bowie announced as a transsexual singer. He was just the greatest rock and roll singer I ever heard in my life. You know, you never heard that before. You never heard about their private lives or their identity. It wasn't it it it began to be I'd say about 5 years ago, it began to creep in as the primary focus of their reporting rather than a secondary focus or something that we weren't interested at all.

So what what baffles me is generally the left has been very critical of big pharma and the profits they, make. Now you almost have a melding of the two. I mean, can you explain that?

I think there's a confusion about traditional understanding of left and right. It used to be an economic focus largely, and now it's something that's that's very, very different. You know? You're seeing this this woke mentality, I would call it, and it's widely understood to be versus the common sense approach to life. And I think that that is blurred the lines of traditional left and right as we used to see it.

In the news media, you get your more right brained creative people into it and not your more left brained scientific people. This is because you're I'm I'm more of a linguist and more of a a speaker. So I I didn't excel in the maths and the science. So then you get a you get a pack of people like that. And the better they are, the higher up they go. So you get somebody at the very very top and they don't they don't have much understanding of science. So they can easily be manipulated. They can easily be be, be tricked.

Okay. So I see Dr Gortler has a question for you.

I I just had a quick comment to say that you you'd mentioned it was a 15 point something. Like, 15% uptake in, sorry, 15% acceptance of the boosters in Canada right now. Oh, it was 15%. I I just wanted to point out that that's actually about 4 times more than what it was in the United States. We had an October 31st deadline for for both COVID and for influenza… and for the… by the October 31st deadline, it was only 3.4%. And for influenza, it was only 4.8%. It's usually a bit over 50%. So it's that, at this point, a lot of Americans, they're they're they're not trusting any vaccine. So some of the some of the messages is actually getting out.

What I heard, what I noticed myself, I I my, awakening to it was because since I left journalism I've been working in a health related field and I've been… I go to medical lectures and particularly doctors dealing with chronic illnesses and they speak a certain way. Every word is spare. It only means one thing. It's from the diagnostic approach to to language. But on the radio, I heard very clearly people with corporate media training. They sounded more like, salesman. So I knew that something was up there. And I knew also that when our prime minister announced, don't worry, Canada, we've invested in vaccines, I thought, well, how long am I hiding in my kitchen? This is gonna be a decade. So I knew that that that that something was up. But slowly slowly, they first incentivized out of fear, age related deaths, and then they incentivized with these ridiculous rewards, and then they, mandated and then they coerced and then they took away our freedoms and then you're in in return for a vaccine you got a conditional turn of your rights as a citizen of the country. And we all know somebody who's injured. So I think they don't trust the media. They're looking… and we all know somebody who's injured. So I think they don't trust the media. They're looking around and trusting their own eyes now.

Thank you, Mr Palmer.

End time: 3 hours 22 minutes

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

National Citizens Inquiry is a fantastic organization that presented compelling evidence over 24 days with 94 experts and 325 citizens… all of which ran contrary to Canadian government messaging and media hype. Personal stories of loss and suffering, and heart-breaking accounts of how COVID policies negatively impacted the lives of Canadians. NCI invites, even invitingly-challenges, people to watch any 3 witness testimonies from their action-packed website.

Blind Bartimaeus (Mark Chapter 10) ignored the voices of the crowd surrounding him. They charged him to hold his peace and cease crying after Jesus. Exercising faith, he cried the louder to the Savior for mercy.

Should we place faith in television media that shouts “vaccines are safe and effective” when they are conflicted by their salaries which are directly reliant on massive payments from the pharmaceutical industry? Shouldn’t their statements be considered advertisements? Shouldn’t they be required to declare cautions about adverse effects the same as the pharma advertisements do? When you consider the source of their funding, can television media possibly be unbiased in coverage of gain-of-function laboratories, regulatory-capture or plans for an international pandemic treaty?

County health departments are led by hired-directors… and Boards of Health were created to manage Health Directors. Both Boards of Health and county commissions have the power per state law to direct, and the obligation to replace failing directors.

The Director position is not a slot created for the welfare of the Director and his family but the welfare of the public. The director is a tool to whip the health department into line, drive them down worthy paths and keep them from wandering in forbidden fields.

Public volunteers are ostensibly on our boards to keep directors from marching to the call of the pharmaceutical industry, becoming spell-bound to the wishes of the established medical communities or following entrenched politicians into political cabals.

A few months ago our local Health Director rebutted my public comment that adverse events on the COVID vaccines were showing a danger signal that should not be ignored, and also, that the numbers of deaths for the COVID vaccines are highly dependent on which Lot-Number the deceased received and therefore the manufacturing process for the COVID vaccines is not well controlled. She wrote up a big, easily-refutable report that unfortunately pacified The Board. Her report was based mainly on an almost-insane article in an embarrassing medical newsletter the equivalent of the Huntington-Post of medical magazines.

In short, and to their credit, The Board ordered the Director to write a letter to the Governor and to the State Health Director saying that there should be no use of an experimental vaccine pushed-out with an EUA (Emergency Use Authorization) when there is no declared emergency. What The Board did not realize is that the letter would be written not-in-the-interest-of-public-safety, which would upset the greater system, but was crafted carrying the same message but in a way to help the State continue-the-vaccine-program in a way to minimize public vaccine-hesitancy, or in other words to prolong and promote continued vaccine use… to perpetuate vaccine adverse effects. This angle kept the Director from overtly ruffling feathers with the State, the Board or his staff and made the Health Board think he was taking a stand for the District.

Boards were created to keep an eye on health district operations. At the March meeting there was probably more time spent by an elected commissioner trying to commit everyone into attending a two-day overnight offsite gathering than anything else on the schedule. It should probably be common knowledge that the Boards’ citizen volunteers exist to keep an eye-on and an arms-length-relationship to each other member of the Board… to protect the public from potential Health-Board cliques and to be able to put chains on the fearsome powers of the Health Director, if necessary.

See an index to transcripts of Sen. Ron Johnson’s health tyranny conference here:

26A-1-109.  Local boards of health (in Utah)

Some of the powers of a Utah Health Director:

establish, maintain, and enforce isolation and quarantine, over an individual

establish and operate reasonable health programs or measures… or the promotion or protection of the public health and the control of disease… to ameliorate the major risk factors associated with the major causes of injury, sickness, death, and disability

close theaters, schools, and other public places and prohibit gatherings of people

exercise physical control of property to abate nuisances…

accept, use, and administer… private donations (remember Zuckerbucks)

prepare, publish, and disseminate information…

investigate the causes of morbidity and mortality

investigate suspected bioterrorism and disease (sadly… could have been… and could be using this power now in a good way by researching all the 911 calls related to vaccines)

enforce all ordinances, standards, and regulations pertaining to the public health of persons attending public and private schools;

exclude from school attendance any person, including teachers, who is suffering from any communicable or infectious disease, whether acute or chronic…

control the production, processing, distribution, or sale price of local food in response to a public health emergency.

Declare a public health emergency or issue an order of constraint without approval of the chief executive officer of the relevant county…

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 3 hours 3 min

Our our next presenter is Mr Jason Kristoff. Mr Kristoff is a mind-control, brainwashing, behavior-modification-propaganda researcher who has become who has been presenting on cov… covert and overt systems of public control for over 20 years.

Mr Kristoff. Thank you. Thank you, senator. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

Thank you, senator. It's an honor to be here and, honor to be with the contributors here today. In regards to what's being hidden from the public, what's being purposely hidden from the public is any sort of visual or auditory input that would offer a counter-narrative to the political gospel preached by the ruling group. We are indeed encountering massive censorship in this exact way, yet what looks like censorship is the documented hijacking of the subconscious mind pathway, which has proven the primary modality by which humans determine what behaviors and beliefs they will adopt as their own in order that they find safety in the bigger group. The statistical proof of this psychic hijack is every other statistic that will be offered here by the speakers on this panel.

In order for humans to walk off a cliff en-masse in this fashion, information manipulation will always be at the heart of the operation. In order for all these speakers to be here today, with each proving that something extremely devilish is afoot… my area of research had to come first and is the primary building block of everything else being currently addressed. You cannot produce any of these death-centric results in this many areas without this primary cornerstone being in place first, which is information-manipulation and modern high-tech censorship. Modern censorship isn't just about hiding the truth or creating spin for one political agenda or another. Modern censorship is part and parcel of hijacking the genetic group pressure mechanisms and group affiliation software, which all humans hold within each cell in their bodies.

Human behavior is determined to be either an exact mirror reflection of the environment in which they live or very close to it. What we see is what we'll be. What we hear is what we'll make clear. Humans are proven to copy, mimic, emulate, and mirror the most repetitive content of their environment as a way to find safety with the bigger group and to achieve increased security. If we see morality, we become moral in most cases. If we live within a den of thieves, we can easily become a thief.

He who controls the environment in which a human resides controls the perceptions, beliefs, and behaviors of that human. Modern censorship today is clearly about up-regulating, empowering negative content and turning-down empowering positive content. In the way censorship is used in our modern time, it's not simply about hiding truth. Today's censorship is weaponized to define and create an inverted and extremely dark reality inside which no human can ever be happy, healthy, or prosperous for many generations to come.

This new reality based on negative, dark, and disempowering repetitive content appears anti-human at its very core, and that should obviously concern each and every one of us. As for proof of government failures, I see none. As what we observe, galloping today, is not a systematic failure by any stretch of the imagination. Each inversion we've witnessed, more so over the past 4 years, has been executed to precision by a small group hiding inside government and big business. To call a brilliant execution of premeditated planning a failure, instead of a smashing success, is to be intellectually dishonest.

With this type of censorship, which is intended to firmly impregnate the public with strong inverted beliefs, ideas, and behavior; personal freedom for the members of the general public and for medical professionals alike is frankly not possible. We need a full about-face at this point, with each and every citizen dedicating fully to the founding principles of this great nation. Thank you.

So in the short period of time we have, who do you think that small group of people are?

That's hard to say, senator, but you can tell it does not reflect the will of the people. It does not increase the the wealth of the people. It does not increase the health of the people. They're trying to take the once powerful human lion and turn us into an easily-ruled and easily-farmed human lamb.

But, but somebody or some organizations are pulling the strings on this. Do do you have any idea whatsoever?

I, I, I couldn't say for sure, but they're well above government. I think the solutions, the solution will revolve around each and every citizen taking their own personal power back within their own home, becoming ethical, becoming moral. You can't, you know, you can't rule… you can't farm lions, only lambs… and we've been dumbed down… and our health is being removed to the point… we're very easily ruled at this point.

Do you think technology is going to help us convey the truth or do you think it's gonna be impediment? Because it's obviously used both ways.

I think we, I think all the systems that are used to rule us today can be used for good as well. Mind control can be used for good as well, but it's being used for negative today. I think all the systems we have in place, if they're in the in the hands of moral and ethical people, we can definitely turn this around.

End time: 3 hours ten minutes

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

How to kill a journalist without murdering them==> Cancel Culture.

Text is mostly un-highlighted in this transcript because if I emphasized the important points the whole talk would be highlighted.

Start time: 2 hours 50 minutes

Our our next presenter is Miss Lara Logan. Lara Logan is a award winning investigative journalist, former 60 Minutes correspondent and chief foreign correspondent and chief foreign affairs correspondent for 60 Minutes and host of the rest of the story with Lara Logan. Miss Logan.

Thank you, senator Johnson. Hello everybody. I was asked to testify on media censorship and, the first amendment, the importance of free speech. And I do wanna say that it is an honor and a privilege to be here with all of you and with you, Senator Johnson. Thank you for hosting this, rogue committee.

It's, it's important to all of us because of everything discussed today that we address the, the vital principles and values that exist really only in the United States of America. And that said, these are the worst of times for the media in this country. We live in the age of information warfare, where propaganda is not simply a weapon it is the entire field of battle.

This is a war for our minds that is aided by advanced technology and we have never been here, not in all of human history. It is a moment when we as journalists should stand together united and regardless of politics, we should fight for the truth and we should fight for freedom. Yet not very long ago we allowed one of our own, Tucker Carlson, to be branded as a traitor simply for doing his job. In fact, there were many so called journalists who were leading the charge against Tucker, accusing him of treason for the simple fact of interviewing the president of Russia, Vladimir Putin. And to my knowledge, there was not a single legacy media institution that spoke up.

This was more than a politically motivated attack on one man. It was a betrayal of the most sacred principles of a free press. And my media colleagues know this to be true no matter what they say. My fear is that they either no longer care or that they lack the moral courage to be honest, including with themselves. I have worked at the highest levels of the media as a full time correspondent for 60 minutes, chief foreign correspondent for CBS News, chief foreign affairs correspondent for for CBS News. That was my home for 16 years. And as a journalist, I have sat down with world leaders, mass murderers, and terrorists. And I have held people on both sides of the aisle accountable. I have seen suffering and I have faced evil and I have walked through the fires of hell on distant battlefields. I faced my own death at the hands of a mob of some 200 men in Egypt when I was gang raped and sodomized and beaten almost to death while on assignment for 60 minutes. And yet for almost a decade, I have been targeted and falsely branded and accused of many things that I did not do. They have attacked my work, my character, my sanity and my marriage. And I am not alone. We are many. And we will not give up and we will not give in.

To those who wish to censor the idea of free speech in America and all over the world. Media companies, institutions, and journalism schools have failed all of us. And for too long we have allowed nonprofit organizations to masquerade as nonpartisan media watchdogs when in fact they are little more than highly paid political propagandists and assassins whose entire reason for being is to crush anyone who stands in their way and along with them, the long held and cherished ideas of free speech, free thinking, and free minds. This is a blood sport for them, their political allies and their puppet masters. They know how to kill a journalist without murdering them. We call it cancel culture. In truth, it is a death sentence. And they get away with it because they have information dominance. Some were strong enough to survive but only a few like Glenn Greenwald, Tucker Carlson, Matt Taibi, only a few like them are able to reach greater heights and thrive.

These non-profits that I'm talking about are part of a vast censorship network that includes government agencies. They use deception to mask their actions with lofty goals like preventing the spread of misinformation, disinformation, hate speech. They use phrases like 'protecting democracy' and make no mistake, words matter. The media is collaborating with government agencies and operatives to censor and shape the information battlefield, to justify certain actions.

For example, when the president of the United States threatens the unvaccinated saying "our patients is wearing thin" and accuses them of putting communities at risk. His words are designed to justify hatred, censorship, and intimidation. And when the vice president compares January 6 to 911 and Pearl Harbor, it is a predicate to silence the opposition and justify the weaponization of the justice system.

We are already witnessing another shaping operation to influence the outcome of the 2024 election. This time with the false claim that if one side wins, it will be the end of democracy. This lie contrived to ensure a particular outcome and to sabotage free speech yet again. Overseas taxpayer funds from hardworking Americans are being doled out by contractors under the Office of Transition Initiatives at USAID or the State Department Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. These contractors, many of them ideological zealots who are not even US government officials often make over a quarter million dollars a year and are outside the reach, Senator, of yourself and committees like this. They hand out taxpayer dollars to programs that are shaped by highly partisan NGOs who hide behind terms like inter-religious dialogue when in fact they are funding muslim schools that train islamic terrorists like they did in Malaysia.

Another example is Humanist International. Through them, the state department is funding atheism grants that actively cultivate an atheist advocacy network in Nepal. This is not just to attack religion and manipulate foreign politics. It is an attack on free speech, faith, and God.

While propaganda and censorship are not new, technology means unprecedented power and reach in the hands of a few. Companies like Facebook, Instagram, and Google, as you have heard many times today, have been allowed to amass monopoly power, and as a result, they not only reach billions of people across the world every second of the day, they have absolute control over what we see and what we hear. Imagine those tools in the hands of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler.

When I became a journalist more than 35 years ago, we went to emergency restrictions in apartheid South Africa. And I was 17 years old. Public safety and security were the weapons of state census. Ours was the truth. We had no bill of rights, no constitution, no first amendment, no declaration of independence. And journalists would have to hide their footage from the security police sometimes sewing the tapes into their mattresses at home so they could not be seized and used to identify and target the protesters that we had filmed. The light of freedom that set fire to our hearts in South Africa was lit thousands of miles away. It was lit right here where we sit today in the United States of America.

When the founding fathers put freedom of speech first, it was not by chance, it was by design. The rights that followed were in part created to protect the First Amendment. Without it, they knew that freedom itself would perish.

I am reminded today of the words spoken by the British foreign secretary, Sir Edward Gray in 1914 at the beginning of the First World War. He said, "the lamps are going out all over Europe, we shall not see them lit again in our lifetime." We are once again watching the lights of freedom. They're going out here and all over the world and it is up to us to determine if they will be lit again ever. Thank you, Senator Johnson. I'm ready to take your questions.

Thank you, miss Logan. We're we only have a few seconds. Can, you said you've been targeted over the last 10 years. Can you describe what precipitated you're targeting?

Yes. Reporting the truth about Benghazi. I was attacked by one of those NGOs that masquerades as a nonpartisan watchdog in violation of its 5013c status. It occupies a highly partisan position. I'm talking about Media Matters for America. I'm sure there's many doctors in this room, scientists who've been attacked by the same people. The same people that run that, David Brock, for example, another political assassin now runs an organization called Facts First USA which is designed to make sure that your research, Dr Hassan, never reaches, never reaches the people or the public.

There are other organizations like Deficitisinfo which claims to be a PAC that goes after disinformation particularly set up to target COVID and throughout COVID with General Stanley McChrystal and the other people that advised that organization. But what, Senator Johnson, it's not a secret that these organizations exist. What is not widely known and talked about is that it's paid for by us. It's paid for by the taxpayers. In your omnibus spending bills that get shoved through the house and the senate against the will of the people of this country.

They are there are cutouts for these NGOs. And what they do is they launder this money. They pass it from one NGO to the next. And in the name of preventing the spread of disinformation, they censor, silence, intimidate, and punish. I said that this is a death sentence for journalists. It's how you murder a journalist without killing them. It's how you murder a scientist without killing them. It's how you murder a doctor without killing them. It's how you murder the vaccine injured when they haven't died yet. It's how you finish them off and everybody else in their family, and it's time for people in this building who come to work every day here to serve us. This is the only country where we the people are the government. This is a government for the people, of the people, and by the people. And the same is said for so called journalists.

Del Batory, this man has been targeted for simply going to the FDA hearings and filming them when they approve vaccines. Just filming them. Not doing a thing and putting that, putting that out and showing people there is no real approval process. They didn't actually do their jobs. And for that, he's been targeted for years, long before COVID ever hit.

So it's time now for us to stop taking taxpayer funds to slit our own throats.

Thank you. One of the many reasons I generally vote ‘no’ on those, but thank you, Ms Logan.

End time: 3 hours 3 min

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 2 hours 40 min

Our next presenter is Dr. Ralph Lataster, PhD. He's a bachelor of pharmacy, PhD lecturer and researcher on misinformation, now mostly on COVID. Typically, at the University Sydney and running [a Substack called] okthennews.

Dr. Lataster. Thank you for your efforts, Senator, including your endorsement of intellectual humility. We all understand the challenges that you face, and I ask you that you please persevere because what happens in the US affects us all around the world. All right. To give you a little bit of context, global policies around COVID 19 vaccines were, of course, dictatorial and discriminatory, leading to the persecution of unvaccinated people such as myself and also leading to vaccine injuries.

These policies were justified via claims about the vaccines as effectiveness and safety. Now recent research published in major medical journals reveals that these claims were highly exaggerated, particularly four articles by BMJ Editor Peter Doshi of the University of Maryland and myself, University of Sydney, in the Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. The last of those articles was published just last month. Now I summarize, a lot of the findings here for you now. Exaggerated effectiveness and safety in observational studies.

So we have found in the studies varying definitions of fully vaccinated and unvaccinated. And, generally, what we find with the term fully vaccinated is that they are ignoring COVID cases, COVID infections, in the partially vaccinated. So this could be a few months' worth of time where, someone who's received the injections has a COVID infection, possibly because of the injection, as we've heard from other speakers today with immuno-suppression and so forth, and yet it's not counted. It's completely ignored. And that effect was found to be up to 48% using data from Pfizer's trial as an example.

Redoing the data again to factor in a definitional issue of what an unvaccinated person is and counting the partially vaccinated, the infections in the partially vaccinated in the unvaccinated group, that figure can go up as high as 65% or more. We can't be sure what the actual exaggeration is because we aren't supplied with all the data. So it's impossible to actually know. But it looks like there are huge exaggerations of effectiveness because of such what you could call manipulation of the data.

Now, adverse effects in the observation study, so relating to safety, a lot of these adverse effects are overlooked due to very narrow counting windows, including starting too late. So, again, not counting what's happening in the partially vaccinated and ending too early, usually just a few months when we know there are long term effects such as myocarditis and so forth. Now we then turned our attention to the clinical trials, and we did not expect to find all of these issues there. What we found was actually worse.

So going to the clinical trials, focusing here on the mRNA vaccines, Pfizer and Moderna, regarding effectiveness, once again, COVID case counting begins in the vaccinated group, begins after full vaccination. We did not expect that. We thought it would be better in clinical trial, but we found that, too. 7 days, 14 days, even 21 days after the second dose. So all the cases happening in the COVID, vaccine infected, in in the vaccinated group being ignored. Right?

So different case counting windows also were used at different times. Coincidentally, whichever gave the best result that was needed right there. Also many trial participants were lost to follow-up. We're talking hundreds of people, thousands of people lost to follow-up. So what happened to those people? We would like to know.

But even worse, there are thousands of suspected COVID cases that were unconfirmed, and these suspected cases were split roughly evenly. So if these were included, or if even just some of these were included, we could have an effectiveness of the vaccines of around 10%. Right? And in any case, you can argue that figure, it is well below the 50% required for approval.

Furthermore, looking to safety in the clinical trials, adverse effect counting windows are again incredibly short. Being only a few months, there is no long term safety data. There is also a very concerning reliance on unsolicited reporting for adverse effects. Now if you die from the vaccine, you're obviously not in position to call them and say, I'm dead. It's really hot down here. Report it. I will see you soon.

So long term safety analyses are impossible also because the groups were effectively merged. (It became an ethical concern that, “these vaccines are obviously effective, so we must offer it to the placebo group”),… and then they've made it effectively impossible to have the long term studies that we we definitely need.

Now even the limited safety data that we have is already hugely concerning. Looking at the Framan, et al, study, which includes Peter Doshi as well, and the Benn, et al study, they review an excess of serious adverse events of special interest and deaths, an excess of deaths in the vaccinated groups. This is from their own trials with with data that already looks to be incomplete and manipulated.

Quickly, give a note on myocarditis and negative effectiveness. Now, myocarditis is typically overlooked in such studies because it often is a longer term adverse effect. When I critiqued a John Hopkins team in the American Journal of Epidemiology on why their analysis omitted incriminating evidence about myocarditis. They said that this evidence is limited and it's from another country. So, apparently, the vaccines work differently in different countries. That's what we're expected to believe.

Now to your first question of the session about, what manufacturers may have known before approval, Pfizer, Moderna, they already knew that there were extra cardiovascular deaths in their own trials. And their excuse was, well, this has nothing to do with the vaccines. First of all, they don't know that.

We now know that the vaccines do cause cardiovascular problems, but also that goes against the whole point of a randomized controlled trial. Right? If there's a discrepancy between the treatment group and the placebo group, we attribute that discrepancy to the treatment. They do not have the right to say that's something else. If they want to claim that, they have to acknowledge that their RCT is fraudulent. It's it's bogus, and we cannot accept the conclusions.

So here, and in a response to the for the British Medical Journal, I found that myocarditis alone appears to be a far greater risk than the benefits for the jab in the young and healthy, utilizing British government data. Aligning with Dr Hooker's comments and adding also to, Mr Bigtree's excellent points on rarity, maybe we can say that such effects are rare. Maybe. But in any case, severe COVID in the young and healthy is rarer still.

Now Pfizer also admits that they're still trying, this is a quote, "to determine if Comirnity is safe and effective and if there is a myocarditis/pericarditis association that should be noted.” That's on clinicaltrials.gov still right now. They're trying to find out if it's safe and effective right now!

There is also increasing evidence of negative effectiveness, which you're probably already aware of. This is where there is some evidence now in multiple studies, multiple sets of government data that the jab increases the chance of COVID infection, hospitalization, and death. This also appears to be dose dependent, tying in nicely with Dr Rosa's comments on IgG4 and tolerance and Dr Hazan's groundbreaking work on immunosuppression and the microbiome.

Now, in conclusion, in the best case, I think that we cannot know that the vaccines are effective and safe and the approvals and the mandates are not justified. In the worst case scenario, the effectiveness is nil or even negative, and the vaccines are otherwise unsafe and potentially deadly. Now this, again, is from their own data as is, which is limited, has conflicts of interest, and looks to be manipulated. And this says nothing about the fraudulent practices that were reported in the BMJ, conflicts of interest as Dr Kory noted, and much more we could talk about.

A final note, the clinical trials concerned the deadliest original strains. The figures now would be even less impressive or much more alarming given that less lethal strains are now dominant and have been for some time. Thank you.

Thank you, doctor. We hear claims, for example, they awarded Nobel Prize to doctors and say saying that their development of the mRNA technology saved 14 million lives. I don't know the exact figure they used in the House subcommittees hearing but they had other, you know, similar types of claims. Have you seen any study that backs up those claims that the vaccine saved X number of lives?

Absolutely not. In fact, what I have seen is a study that I've just been invited to partake in to refute that, or a paper to refute that. There are many problems. We found over 12 issues with how the data is utilized and estimated. For one thing, it's a model, and the map is not the territory.

Okay. So pre… predetermined outcome model. No doubt. So when it was proven, when they finally admitted that it didn't prevent infection, I mean, that was one of the lies, you know, you're not gonna get sick, you're not gonna get hospitalized, you're not gonna die. So when it's proved that it wouldn't prevent infection, they shifted their narrative to say it would reduce severity of disease or reduce the number of deaths. Any data, any studies that back those claims?

That well, there is purported evidence for that. But going through all the studies that we have started to do, it looks like all those studies are, are incorrect. One thing you want to look at with these studies is do they provide definitions of what a vaccinated person is, what an unvaccinated person is, and the majority don't seem to do that. Such a very basic thing that you would expect to see. And when they do give the definitions, they don't pass the smell test. Okay. Well, thank you very much, doctor.

End time: 2 hours 50 min

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

"Any time you look at the evidence behind claims that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective, check for the definitions of the unvaccinated and the vaccinated. If there aren’t any the studies are invalid. If there are definitions, ensure that the definitions pass the smell test. If these definitions ignore what’s going on in the ‘partially vaccinated’ and/or assign COVID cases or adverse effects in the vaccinated to the unvaccinated then the studies are invalid. As of right now it appears that almost all of the studies backing up the claims about the COVID-19 vaccines being safe and effective are indeed invalid." - by Dr. Ralph Lataster, PhD

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 2 hours 30 min

Our next presenter is Dr. Christian Perronne, MD and PhD. He is a professor of infectious disease in Paris. He was chairman of official committees on vaccination and communicable diseases. He was vice chairman of the European vaccination group at World Health Organization, Dr Perronne. And tell me how to pronounce that if I'm pronouncing it incorrectly.

Thank you, senator. So, I at the very beginning of the COVID crisis, I realized that dissenting opinions were subjected to pressure and even frame freights… and I experienced that myself, because I was considered at that time, because during 15 years, I, I was working with the different, ministers as a nice guy and a competent expert. And, from one day to another, I was, they wanted to suppress my voice, and I was a dangerous person. And in 2020, we published with colleagues of my department our fantastic experience with the combination of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin.

With, we had the lowest mortality in all the Paris area, and the lowest in France. Just like, did you know DF Rauch in Marseille? So that was unacceptable for the authorities. They may pressure my colleagues. We had to they were threatened for their career. We had to withdraw the article. For me, it was terrible. And, as a reward, also I was fired from my position of head of the infectious disease department of my hospital position, which I occupied for 26 years. And at that time, I saw that many fake data and even fraudulist articles were published. Even in the major medical journals. For me, it was really a terrible problem. And you all know about the first big scandal, the so called Lancet Gates. Where the Lancet journal published a so called huge study demonstrating that hydroxychloroquine was not effective and very dangerous. It appeared rapidly that it was fraudulent. It was also acknowledged by the authors, by the journal.

But our minister of health at that time, Olivier Veron, so day after the publication of the Lancet study, signed a decree, I don't know the name in English, a decree, something like that, to to forbid the prescription of hydroxychloroquine in France for GP's. And when a few days later, it was published worldwide that the article was fraudulent. He never suppressed, his, what he had just signed before. So I said in the French media, at the end of June 2020, that the government was responsible for around 25,000 excess deaths in France due to the the lack of the lack of possibility to prescribe hydroxychloroquine. So, of course, we wanted to to, to block my voice in the media and they succeeded.

So with some experts from different backgrounds we created an association, non-profit association called bonsens.org. ‘Bon sens’ in French means ‘common sense’. Because we analyze all the medical publications. And when we saw data that were not, realistic, fake data, or also fraudulist articles, we responded by publishing articles in peer reviewed journals. And it was much more powerful to protest that way, just to shout in the, on the TV.

And we did that and I thank all my colleagues who did that. And also, we filed complaints, so legal actions to attack some decisions of the government to support the victims of the so called ‘vaccine’. The problem is when a fake information is present in the medical journals, all the public media relay that in the worldwide. But when we publish a counter expertise with the truth, nobody speak about it. Obviously, oh no, it's just, fake information.

So, now our goal is to keep the possibility to have good communication because now I'm I'm censored in all the mainstream TV. You know that in France there's an agency called ARCOM was created to, protect the transparency, independence of media. But they made a press release more than 2 years ago to say if you invite, continue to invite, Professor Perronne, you'll have a huge fine. And this one TV channel was, had a fine because they invited me. Now they don't invite me anymore.

So I'm going on alternative media. But also my Facebook Facebook page was closed during 1 year and a half. And now if I appear on on YouTube on a video, on an interview, usually when they say my name, in less than 24 hours, it is suppressed. So fortunately, some alternative media, support our fight, and I want to thank Francois. It's a nice French newspaper created during World War 2 by French resistance during the war. So that, this journal [Francois] is very active and there are a few alternative media who help me.

And I would like to end by a word about the the, now the French authorities are reinforcing their fight against freedom and especially freedom of speech. So in December 2023, very recently, President Macron created presidential, presidential, not national, the presidential council, for science. Now, he can decide what is science or not. That's surprising.

And and just recently, a few days ago, a vote was passed in France, to condemn people who don't follow the current medical knowledge or the medical consensus. And you can, the penalty could be present 1 to 3 years, And a huge fine between €15,000 €45,000. And the senate, because here we are in the senate in France, rejected the law, but it came back to the national assembly which voted it. But as a reverse of the United States, in France, the national assembly like the house of representative predominates on the senate. So it's a pity but it's like that.

So that's the words I wanted to say, and we we have to keep united. It's a symbol of liberties here in Washington and, with friends. We have old relationship and, with all other countries who have to continue this fight for freedom.

Thank you. So, Dr Perronne, I mean, so you were, you had held, just 36 years and because you treated patients, you had the courage and compassion to treat patients, you were fired.

Yeah. And we we've we've heard that before here in the states. I think the assumption here is we have these vaccine manufacturers here that have a lot of power. They spend billions of dollars to control the narrative. But that's not necessarily the case with the COVID vaccine in France.

I mean, you've got, you know, two big ones here in the States plus BioNTech in Germany. What was the powerful interest sabotaging early treatment in France? The powerful the the powerful interest. I mean, you, if it wasn't the vaccine manufacturers, which you don't have in this case in France, I mean, is it the media? Is the World Health Organization?

I mean, what what elite group created the environment to, first of all, pass that obnoxious law against free speech? What's happening in France? I mean, who's who's pulling the strings there? What's happened is the media completely, under control of the authorities. So, all the dissident voices are suppressed and they favor on the TV all some, so-called, key opinion leaders, who are, some of them corrupted.

And, so, along with a few, colleagues, we it's very difficult to fight… to fight against this… this whole of an environment.

So do you view that just as a global movement that also has an impact in France? And and and you've

It's global. It's not only France because we could see that the same decisions were taken the same day, in France, in Australia, in Sweden, everywhere. And I I wrote 3 books also, so that was embarrassing for my government, about the COVID crisis. They were bestsellers in France. And in one of the books, I say that, the McKinsey company had the employees inside the ministers. And I I had the proof of the minister of health. And they, you know, they have official letters with Mr X, civil servant of the of the ministry. And, in fact, they they are not civil servants. They are paid by McKinsey. And McKinsey is writing and the other council companies are writing, many official texts. So I wrote that in my book. I was never attacked because I had the proofs. So.

Okay. Thank you for having the courage and compassion to treat patients.

End time: 2 hours 40 min

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

Share Gold Ballots

See the foe in countless numbers,
Marshaled in the ranks of sin.
Hope of Israel, on to battle;
Now the vict’ry we must win!

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 2 hours 20 min

And our next presenter is Dr Pierre Kory. Dr Kory is the chief of critical care services at the University of Wisconsin.

He's the former chief University of Wisconsin who cofounded and serves as the president and chief medical officer of the Frontline COVID19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC). Dr Corey.

Thank you. It's an honor to be here. Since its founding, the FDA has approved approximately 32,000 medicines for practically every condition known to medical science. This massive library of treatments is actually a gift to humanity. But like all libraries, it also contains secrets. We are only now beginning to understand that many long established drugs have multiple mechanisms and can be used to effectively treat diseases with either similar or even different pathophysiologies. Further, the longer they've been in use, the more well known is their safety profile.

Thus, there's an enormous potential for repurposing this massive sort of back catalog of well known drugs that the FDA has already deemed safe. So why on earth aren't we systematically testing them for potential new uses? The ugly truth, as Dr Hazan and others have, referred to, is that it's not profitable to do so. Big pharma makes money on complicated new drugs and it effectively controls numerous levers of power. Nearly half of FDA's budget is bankrolled by the drug industry and its tentacles are deep in media, academia, medicine and other regulatory agencies like the NIH.

And for decades, it has waged war on safe, effective, off-patent treatments for numerous diseases and I would argue none more damaging than its decades long war on Vitamin D. Big pharma's main tactic is valuing randomized controlled trials as the infallible gold standard while dismissing positive results of other kinds of studies such as observational studies or smaller randomized controlled trials. But here's the unfortunate reality, these large randomized controlled trials, that's the only currency now to get approval, well they are not, they are not objective, and they are not without bias because they cannot overcome the bias of the massive funders that are that are bankrolling these trials. I would argue that the only thing controlled about them is their results as we saw numerous times in the pandemic. Meanwhile, observational studies, which are far simpler and cheaper to perform,… they can be done by independent investigators, nights and weekends just doing chart reviews.

Well, a little known fact is that those kind of trial designs actually produce results that, where they compared 10,000 randomized control trials and observational trials and they looked at their results and they concluded on average there is little evidence for significant effect, estimate differences between observational studies and randomized controlled trials. Can you show my first slide?

And I would argue that this belief, this heralding of the randomized controlled trial, is largely the result of massive disinformation… I always remind my readers (I wrote a book called The War on Ivermectin which is literally a case study in these modern wars on repurposed drugs)… and they do that using disinformation.

And I would, I would invite the audience or listeners to read this article. It's not a long article but it details the numerous tactics, and I would say the most damaging is the one I have on the screen. It's called the fake, and it consists of 3 different actions that they take. One is that they design and conduct trials with predetermined results. They did that repeatedly in the pandemic, particularly negative studies to show that hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin didn't work.

And then they only… they selectively publish only those negative studies and they censor positive studies. This cynical manipulation of evidence based medicine is not a secret. As far back as 2009, Dr Marsha Angel, the long time editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, issued this prescient warning. Quote, “it is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. No one knows the total amount of money provided by drug companies to physicians, but I estimate from the annual reports of the top nine US based drug companies that it comes to tens of billions of dollars a year in North America.” End quote.

This creeping decades long war on off-patent drugs went into overdrive during the pandemic when big pharma turned its guns against early treatments for COVID. Using their control over the high impact medical journals, they consistently publish studies designed to show predetermined negative results. With the size of these studies and the control over the journals, they managed to convince the world of a lack of efficacy using only a handful of studies despite hundreds of others concluding efficacy. Further, these studies numerous fatal flaws were ignored.

For example, to prove, to prove a medicine didn't work, they consistently used the lowest doses for the shortest courses while enrolling patients as late as possible into these while including only the mildest pay cases. They did the exact opposite actions when they were trying to prove something was effective, like PAXLOVID. The those those trial designs were mirror images of each other. They were opposites. Can you show the next slide, please?

This is what's called the forest plot that shows 43 effective medicines in COVID. I've circled the only ones that were, approved for use in United States. And actually the circles are off but if you look, you probably can't see it, but if you look at the cost, the only things approved in United States all cost in the many hundred if not thousands of dollars. Every zero dollar, $1, $2, $5 medicine was completely ignored and never would reach regulatory approval. Further, when they did not get the result they wanted, in several instances… they were forced to change the original endpoint, a supposed never event in research science.

And despite these manipulations, each of these study publications launch massive negative PR campaigns and recommendations from health agencies against the use of these inexpensive, safe, repurposed drugs. Last slide.

If you look, this is just a little summary of the evidence base as we sit here today. As of, today, there have been 420 controlled trials studying hydroxychloroquine in in COVID that includes over half a million patients. With Ivermectin, there have been a 100 controlled trials with over to 125,000 patients.

And summary analyses of these evidence-bases all show large magnitude, statistically-significant benefits in all important outcomes. Yet, in this country, Ivermectin is considered an ineffective horse dewormer and hydroxychloroquine, the drug of fringe, quack, right wing anti-vaxxers.

So what's the way forward from here? We need to create a framework to test off-patent and off-label drugs and model their clinical benefits and cost savings. A public private partnership of diverse independent, unconflicted stakeholders accountable to congress could conduct sustained independent systematic studies of repurposed drugs that would complement FDA review, clinical practice, and the role of natural immunity in health.

It won't be easy, but if physicians, healthcare leaders, and politicians unite behind this call to action, we can push the system towards greater accountability and help more people in the process.

Thank you. Thank you, Dr Kerr. I remember in December of 2020, I specifically asked Francis Collins, this is after your hearings in November and you in December. What is the NIH doing in terms of exploring these molecules, these generic drugs? These all… Spent it… we we spent hundreds of millions of dollars exploring this. And I said, well, good. Send me the information on it. Wouldn't surprise you that, I never got that information.

What, what can what can doctors do? I mean, what resources can they research? Quite honestly, what can patients do to find this information, find doctors who actually, you you know, think outside the box and do something other than what big pharma tells them to do? I would say the best answer, as of right now, would be my non-profit organization, co-founded by professor Paul Maric. We have done immense amount of work at looking at the role of safe available repurposed medicines in in a number of disease models.

And I think, I think that would be the start of a resource. But, you know, we're just a little nonprofit. This is a major issue that affects a massive population, not only in the US, but around the world. And, clearly, we need more resources put to this, to the study of these medicines. And as my colleagues have alluded, there's just no financial incentive to do that (for those that control literally public health and and medicine in general)… they're the... this is the enemy. This is the Achilles' heel of the entire pharmaceutical industry. They they are terrified of repurposed drugs. You will never get a repurposed drug to, to reach, regulatory approval if there's, more profitable, alternatives.

Mr McKiernan has a question.

Yes. I just wanted to highlight the asymmetry in the publication that's going on here because Dell brought up this great paper of 99 million patients. If you go to that paper, it was funded. It was a ten million dollar study, and it was funded by the CDC and HHS, which both have, I mean, HHS has 400 million [dollars] in vaccine royalty, and CDC, we heard from Brian Hooker, has… has vaccine money, and yet their paper is heralded all over the place. And if you look at that paper, it says data not available.

I worked in the Human Genome Project with taxpayer funded money. We put data public every 24 hours when we did this. And then folks like yourselves, Sabine and Jessica and Pierre, you put data out and you get retracted, and your data is available. So there's just a massive asymmetry in peer review right now that is also captured and is a topic that needs to be addressed.

Thank you all.

End time: 2 hours 30 min

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

I began collecting stools of my colleagues that were at home and started going into the hospital. And I said, can I get your stools before and after you get vaccinated? Because to me, this new technology of vaccines, I wanted to see what it was doing on the microbiome.

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: 2 hours 10 min

2 hours 10 min

Dr Hazan. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. It's an honor to be here. The microbiome, our microbes in our guts, is our immunity and tells the story, and will tell the story of COVID 19.

And this is why as a gastroenterologist, I stepped into the pandemic. Through my experience, I will show you how difficult it was to conduct research and publish when the research goes against the national public health narrative. Interference and delay in research happened and affects all of us. In early 2020, my research genetic sequencing laboratory was the was the 1st lab to document the entire sequence of the virus in the stools as opposed to the PCR which is just a little piece of the virus. We discovered that the virus lingered in the stools for up to 45 days.

It took 6 months to publish this publication at a time where everybody needed to know that it was in your stools. My lab also showed that COVID-19 in the stools was killed by hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. But unfortunately, azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine killed the microbiome. So therefore, vitamin c, d, and zinc was added. Three protocols were submitted to the FDA from our findings.

Three studies were also put into clinicaltrials.gov in full transparencies to help doctors more effectively treat COVID because I knew data that nobody knew. April 2, 2020, FDA gave us an exempt letter for doing a clinical trial. In other words, we did not need to do a clinical trial on Hydroxychloroquine, Zpack, Vitamin C, D and Zinc as Treatment, or Hydroxychloroquine, Vitamin C, D, and Zinc as prophylaxis. April 4th, somebody must have called the FDA and said, um… I got another letter saying, I'm sorry, Dr Hazen. Exemption is denied. You must do a full-on clinical trial. Here's the letter.

System pressures delayed us. And we got a green light to start recruiting by May 2020. By then, the media created fear around hydroxychloroquine.

It was impossible to recruit. This drug was safely given for years for arthritis and lupus with no problems. My clinical trials companies were also banned and censored from advertising on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. Remember I do clinical trials for a living and never as a clinical trial doctor have I not been able to advertise to recruit for a trial on social media.

I kept collecting stools of patients and noticed that patients with severe COVID had a certain bacteria that was missing compared to people that were highly exposed to COVID but never got COVID. That bacteria is called bifidobacteria. Bifidobacteria is an important and key microbe for immunity. It represents your billion dollar industry of probiotics. In fact, when you turn the bottle and you see the ingredient, it says bifidobacteria. It is present in newborns.

This is why your newborns did not get a problem from COVID at the beginning, and it is absent in old people. The process of aging is loss of bifidobacteria. We published this paper, the lost microbes of COVID 19. It took 8 months to publish. If you follow the bifidobacteria like I did, you will notice, and we did notice anyways, that Vitamin C actually increases bifidobacteria.

This is why Vitamin C is important when you take when you take care of viruses. And, you know, you've all experienced taking Vitamin C for a cold. Well, we published this data where we showed Vitamin C, if we give it to patients before and after, it increased the bifidobacteria.

Ivermectin was also an interesting drug because Ivermectin, we noticed, also increased the bifidobacteria within 24 hours of taking it. Why Ivermectin? If you look at what Ivermectin is, it is a fermented product of a bacteria that is similar to bifida bacteria. In fact, they're in the same continent of microbes. They live, they're like sisters, brothers in the microbiome. So I published.

I knew that Ivermectin increased bifidobacteria, but I said, nah, I can't go out there and start publishing that. That's going to be too controversial. So I published a hypothesis that maybe what I was observing on the front line treating patients with COVID, noticing that their oxygen saturation was increasing from Ivermectin, was basically maybe… Ivermectin increased bifidobacteria. The hypothesis on Ivermectin was the most read hypothesis in the pandemic and was retracted after 8 months of being on. When we cannot make a hypothesis, this is not science.

December 2020, at the same time that I was treating patients with COVID, I began collecting stools of my colleagues that were at home and started going into the hospital. And I said, can I get your stools before and after you get vaccinated? Because to me, this new technology of vaccines, I wanted to see what it was doing on the microbiome. I discovered that messenger RNA vaccines killed the bifidobacteria. I knew I would never be able to publish this because it goes against the narrative.

So I submitted it to my college, the American College of Gastroenterology and presented it in October 2022. This abstract won a research award at the American College of Gastro beating 6,000 abstracts. That's from academic centers like Harvard and Mayo Clinic and MD Anderson. This abstract got the attention of 18,000 GI doctors who, all of a sudden, started realizing maybe killing bifidobacteria is why I got COVID after my vaccine to begin with. Worse than that, and another abstract we presented, was the persistent damage of bifidobacteria from the vaccine. What is going on here that the vaccine continues to kill the bifidobacteria?

At the same time, we presented a link between loss of bifidobacteria and Crohn's disease, loss of bifidobacteria in Lyme disease, and loss of bifidobacteria in invasive cancer. It is nearly impossible to publish data that goes against the national public health narrative. If doctors cannot publish the data, they cannot find solution to fix the problems. So in conclusion, I will finish with showing this.

This represents clinical trials that I've done for pharmaceutical companies prior to COVID. Amongst them are vaccine studies.

Yes. I brought vaccines to the market. Proton pump inhibitors, cardiac drugs, biologics for all sorts of conditions. First postpartum depression drug. Drugs that never made it to the market because they killed people.

Clinical-trials-doctors follow guidelines that allows the industry to provide safe drugs. These guidelines were not followed during the pandemic. And because of that, everyone is affected. COVID should have been a time where humanity joined forces together and doctors needed to come together. It's a shame that it didn't happen.

Interference with research affects all of us. This should not be political. Science is a story that evolves. It's a multitude of experiments that allow us to see medicine, to give hopes to patients, skepticism, challenging the current state of knowledge. Having an open mind must be allowed if we have any hope of moving science forward. What I saw this pandemic was not science.

Thank you. Thank you, Dr Hazen. We're out of time. Yes.

If if you wanna take 5 seconds to name who you think sabotaged your research.

It used to be that pharmaceutical companies were working with the doctors. Now, unfortunately, pharmaceutical companies are captured by, the the price of the stock. You know, venture capitalists own pharmaceutical companies. They own the CR, the Clinical Research organizations. They own the site. They own the institutional review board. They own the advertising, the marketing. They influence the the through the media. And so, unfortunately, there's a big, it's a, it's a loaded question, but it's a big market, and what we saw this pandemic was the price of the stock mattered more than the price of a life.

End time: 2 hours 20 min

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

Mr Bigtree recommends being skeptical of the ‘safe and effective’ labeling of childhood vaccines: none of the 14 routine vaccines on the CDC recommended schedule, which are delivered in approximately 72 doses, were ever put through a long term, double blind, placebo based safety trial prior to license.

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: Two hours

Our next, presenter is Mr Del Bigtree. Mr Bigtree is the CEO of the non-profit Informed Consent Action Network, which has won lawsuits against HHS, CDC, NIH, and FDA in the effort to bring transparency to the science of vaccination. He is also the transparency to the science of vaccination. He was also the host of the medical talk show, The High Wire. Mr Bigtree.

Senator Johnson, I wanna thank you for this opportunity to be here. It's really an honor to be, you know, surrounded by so many talented, brilliant scientists, doctors, experts. I would just want to approach this really from a journalist perspective and a layman's perspective, which is what I have. There's plenty of people here who can give you reasons why. I just want to state the obvious, which is just this past week, news headlines described a massive study of 99,000,000 people who received the COVID vaccine.

The Daily Mail headline says it all. Largest COVID vaccine study ever finds shots are linked to small increased risk of neurological blood and heart disorders. And it adds on to the title, but they are still extremely rare. Every article about the study went out, of its way, described injuries as rare. But what does rare actually mean? 1st slide.

This is the graph that was in the Daily Mail's article. In terms of this study, what they're saying is rare includes a 3.78 times risk of swelling in the brain and spinal cord. This means you are increasing your risk of brain and spinal swelling by 378% over someone who didn't get the vaccine. There was also a 2.86 times risk of Guillain Barre syndrome, which is a paralysis, 6.10 times risk of myocarditis, and a 6.91 times risk of pericarditis (swelling of the heart issues).

The question no one in the media seems to be asking, I think, is if each of these potential injuries is rare, is it still rare when you add them all together? Take the Moderna vaccine, for example. In the standard 3 shot regimen, based on this study, a person is increasing their risk of brain and spinal swelling by 378% with the first shot. They're also adding a 348% risk of myocarditis with that same first shot, a 610% increase of myocarditis for the second shot, and another 201% increased risk of myocarditis with the 3rd shot. And these are just the adverse events that were the focus of the study.

Talking about cancer and all sorts of other things that we should be looking at.

When the CDC was creating the VSafe app, app to track the health outcomes of the first ten million people who received the COVID vaccine, they had a list of adverse events of special interest. These were injuries that the CDC had reason to believe could be caused by the COVID vaccine. That list includes acute myocardial infarction, anaphylaxis, coagulopathy, death, Guillain Barre syndrome, Kawasaki disease, multisystem inflammatory disease, narcolepsy, seizures, convulsions, stroke, and transverse myelitis. Now, let's just assume that all these issues are rare.

And since we know that the rare is currently being described, at least in this study, as anything between a 200% increase to a nearly 700% increased risk, then what is the actual risk when you add all these potential adverse outcomes together? Further still, how high is the risk when you multiply all of these risks by 5 doses of the COVID vaccine? Are we still in the ballpark of rare? Now imagine multiplying all of these known risks by 72 doses. Now you've just considered the amount of risk that every child is facing with the CDC recommended schedule.

The CDC childhood schedule has been the focus of my nonprofit, ICAN’s, work since the end of 2016 when it was founded. Through FOIA requests and lawsuits against our regulatory agencies, we've uncovered many inconvenient truths. Perhaps the most significant finding is that none of the 14 routine vaccines on the CDC recommended schedule, which are delivered in approximately 72 doses, was ever put through a long term, double blind, placebo based safety trial prior to license. Since this type of trial is really the only way to establish that a pharmaceutical product is safe, it is misinformation to state that the vaccines are safe. We have skipped the study that would allow you to make that statement scientifically.

Most people don't realize that there's a list of known side effects on the information sheet provided with every vaccine that is shipped. Here is just a partial list of printed adverse events for just one of the hepatitis B vaccines, Engerix B. Here are the side effects. Herp B, zoster, meningitis, thrombocytopenia, anaphylaxis, hypersensitivity syndrome, atralgia, arthritis, urticaria, erythma multiforme, encephalopathy, swelling of the brain just like the COVID vaccine, multiple sclerosis, neuritis, hyposthesia, paresthesia, Guillain-Barre syndrome, paralysis, Bell's palsy, optic neuritis, paralysis, paresis, seizures, syncope, transverse myelitis, conjunctivitis, keratitis, tinnitus, vertigo, tachycardia, apnea, bronchospasms, including asthma like symptoms, dyspepsia, alopecia, angioedema, eczema, and Stevens-Johnson Syndrome.

That's just one vaccine. That vaccine manufacturer has all these side effects in the warning list because why? It is stipulated by the FDA that there is a reasonable belief that they are causally related to the vaccine. That's why they're there. They're not adding them just because they think they should, because they have to. The warning label lists nearly 50 potential side effects, many of them serious.

And that is just the first vaccine given to a baby on their 1st day of life. By the way, the safety study for that hepatitis B vaccine was only 4 days long and had no placebo comparator. That is not science. That's insanity. We currently have a lawsuit trying to have that vaccine removed until they do proper safety testing.

Every one of the childhood vaccines has a similar list of side effects. Though they are considered rare, how rare is it when you multiply roughly 50 potential side effects 72 times, which is the total number of doses given to a child by the time they're 18. The revelations from the recent study of the COVID vaccine explains what we have been saying for years. Vaccines are not completely safe, and those side effects are rare. What happens when you add them altogether? Perhaps it looks like this. Last slide.

This is what Brian Hooker is talking about. In the 19 eighties, when we were giving 11 doses of about 3 vaccines, the chronic illness rate, which includes neurological and autoimmune disease, was 12.8%. Once we passed the 1986 act and we had the gold rush of vaccines, it exploded to 53 doses, as I said, 72.

That's 53 shots, 72 doses. You watch the chronic illness rate, neurological and autoimmune disease skyrocket 54% of our children. And by the way, that study was finished up in 2011, 2012. We had have no idea since then how bad this has gotten. But what you were looking right at there is the greatest decline in public health in human history.

Never have we watched that many children in just a few decades have their immune systems start fighting their own bodies and swelling brains. And when you look at the numbers that Brian Hooker just showed you, they match exactly what we're seeing them call ‘rare’ in this COVID study. Five times rate of neurological disorders. Vaxxed versus unvaxxed showing about 4 times rate of autism in people that got the vaccine compared to those that don't. So it's rare, but it's possible, and it's real.

And when we look at those rare numbers stacked up, especially with autism, we're now at 1 in 45. That's conservative. Many say 1 in 35 children is being diagnosed with autism. Roughly 1 in 20 to 24 boys. Is that still rare?

Sure. Sure. It's just a couple per 100. But what we can never say again after this study and what we all now know is that: ‘vaccine injury isn't happening’; that's a lie.

It is. And we all have a threshold, and we should figure out what that threshold is because millions of children are being injured all around the world.

Nothing to see here. Right? Nothing to see here.

Can't can't ask the questions. Dr Malone has a question.

Mr Bigtree, regarding the recent vaccine article, that's not paper-published yet but came out electronically that you were citing, as the, source for those, quote, rare events listed. My recollection was the study was restricted to only events that occurred in the first 45 days after administration. So it neglects to address anything that occurs longer, such as autoimmune disease, cancer, other other things. Did I understand that correctly?

That's my understanding too. And it's really what we see in all of these studies. It's why we keep arguing we need full, double blind, long term placebo studies to license these vaccines. I mean, look at what a vaccine does just by nature. You stop someone on the street and say, what does a vaccine do? Well, it tricks the immune system into thinking it's had a disease, like a killed virus or something like that. So everyone would say you're tricking the immune system. Well, what is this crisis? It's an autoimmune disease crisis that we're seeing in this country like we've never seen before.

So somehow, the immune systems of our children and our adults now are confused. They're attacking the own our own cells and our own bodies. And so when people say, well, how do you know it's vaccines? How do you know it's not the air? How do you know it's not the food? How do you know it's not the water?

I'd say, well, first of all, all of those issues, all the chemicals in our food, our water is being approved by the same regulatory agencies, so they should be investigated. But of all of those things, there's one product that by design is designed to trick your immune system into thinking it's had a disease. And we're not tricking it one time or two times or 5 times or 10 times or 20 times or 50 times; 72 times! No one in this room has been through that. Not one of these adults. We say, oh, I'm doing the same thing to my kids that I did [as I got]. No. You're not. This is destroying the health of our children, and we need to get it on top of the right way.

Time: 2 hours ten minutes

Thank you, Mr Bigtree. And talking about our immune system, our next presenter is Dr Sabine Hazen. She's been practicing gastroenterologist for the last 3 decades while concurrently conducting over 200 clinical trials for pharmaceutical companies including vaccine studies. Her research genetic sequencing lab is spearheading the study of the gut microbiome and is linked to several diseases with 57 clinical trials.

End time: 2 hours ten minutes

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video

Share

Senator Johnson displaying Anthony Fauci’s redacted emails (which Johnson is entitled to read). What are they hiding? These redacted records were only released by taking the CDC to court.

Senator Johnson displaying Anthony Fauci’s redacted emails (which Johnson is entitled to read). What are they hiding? These redacted records were only released by taking the CDC to court.

Text highlights in the transcript are mine. Start time: one hour and fifty minutes.

Our next, presenter is Dr Brian Hooker.

Doctor Hooker has been researching vaccine safety for the past past 23 years. He coauthored the New York Times best selling book, Vax-Unvax, Let the Science Speak with Robert Kennedy junior. Doctor Hooker. Thank you, Senator Johnson. My name is Dr Brian Hooker, and I am a vaccine safety scientist serving as a chief scientific officer of Children's Health Defense.

I'm also the father of a severely, vaccine injured adult son. Next slide, please.

This slide shows the expansion of the infant child vaccination schedule since 1962 as recommended by the CDC. Multivalent vaccines are counted based on the number of disease antigens. For example, the MMR vaccine counts as 3 doses.

In 1962, children received 5 vaccine doses, and in 1986, the schedule expand to 25 doses of 5 different vaccine formulations. Shortly after the passage of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, the law was amended to essentially erect a liability shield protecting vaccine manufacturers, and the schedule expanded dramatically. By 2023, 73 doses of 16 different vaccine formulations were given to children up to age 18. The FDA approved these formulations individually only with minimal and inadequate safety testing, and the CDC has never tested the cumulative effect of the vaccine schedule on childhood health outcomes. However, independent researchers have assessed the outcomes of vaccinated versus unvaccinated children. Next slide, please.

This slide shows the results of a paper that Neil Miller, a medical journalist, and I published in the journal, Sage Open Medicine, in 2020. Here, only vaccines given during the 1st year of life were considered. Any child who received one vaccine or more during the 1st year of life was considered vaccinated, and any child who received no vaccines during the 1st year of life was considered unvaccinated. The identified records were taken directly from 3 medical practices in different locations within the US.

The odds ratios or likelihood of a diagnosis is shown on the graphic. This demonstrates that vaccinated children were at least twice as likely to be diagnosed with developmental delays, ear infections, and gastrointestinal disorders. The likelihood of an asthma diagnosis among the vaccinated group was 4.5 times higher than the unvaccinated group. Next slide, please.

Affirming and extending these results is a study completed by Joy Garner of the control group that was published in the International Journal of Vaccine Theory Practice and Research in 2022.

Here, a control group of over 1800 unvaccinated children recruited from 46 different states in the US were compared to the national average rates of the listed disorders. The national averages represent a population of children where 99.7% of the participants are vaccinated. Incidents of each disorder is shown as a percentage of each group of children on the graphic. For each of the autoimmune, neuro-developmental, and other disorders considered, the unvaccinated group fares much better with incidence rates between 4 & 20 times lower than their vaccinated counterparts. Next slide, please.

This is a comparison of the myocarditis diagnosis rates following the COVID 19 mRNA vaccines given during the pandemic. The, It shows the incidence of myocarditis and pericarditis diagnoses within 7 days of receiving either the first or second dose of the Moderna vaccine versus the unvaccinated control group for males between 12 and 39 years of age. The second graphic on the slide is from a paper published by Mavorak, et al in the New England Journal of Medicine in 2021. It shows the incidence of myocarditis within 30 days of receiving the second Pfizer vaccine in the general population as well as for 16 to 19 year old boys compared to unvaccinated controls. Myocarditis is a serious disorder, and 76% of all cases following COVID vaccination as reported by VAERS requires emergency care and or hospitalization. CDC significantly downplays myocarditis as a side effect of the vaccine. Vaccine injury is neither minor nor rare.

The 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act requires that the Department of Health and Human Services report to congress on the state of vaccine safety in the US every 2 years. It's been almost 40 years since the 1986 act was passed, and HHS has never submitted a vaccine safety report to congress. Federal authorities are derelict in their duty to protect the people of the United States from debilitating and often life changing vaccine adverse events. Thank you.

Doctor Hooker, I became aware of you from a excellent documentary I would also recommend Vaxxed, Mister Bigtree also produced or is part of. In there you you you obviously are a medical researcher and with the vaccine in your child and you actually founded whistleblower inside the agency to but I I wanna give away the plot of the but very very excellent documentary but difficult to watch. Right. Very difficult to watch.

But in your research, I mean, are you aware of the fact, does do the federal health agencies do they have records of vaxxed versus unvaxxed children? Absolutely. They have the records. The CDC has a database called the vaccine safety data link. It's over ten, ten million… excuse me, individuals with two million children from 10 participating HMOs.

There are vaccinated children. There are unvaccinated children. I would I would say that within that database, there were at least 10,000 unvaccinated children that can be studied.

Do they publish the results of that information? No. Neither do they they do not publish the results, neither do they let any independent scientist in to look at that information. They refuse to publish that results and they really know why. It's because the bloated vaccination schedule is responsible and is, I would say, in part responsible for the pandemic of chronic disorders that we see in children in the United States. We obviously find that the agencies are completely opaque and cooperative with congressional oversight. Right.

Takes a court order, FOIA request, that type of thing. What what types of attempts have been made to obtain that data? I've, submitted over 120 FOIA requests directly to the CDC. There's a 12 step group for me too. But, I would I I would say I have repeatedly FOIA'd. I've actually gone through congressional representatives to get the vaccine safety data link itself. It is, it is simply something that they will not do. They they probably say you're just not persistent enough.

Mister McKiernan has a question for you. Brian, can you explain the finances down there? Do they not sell vaccines at the CDC through a, a vaccine distribution program? Is there money coming to the CDC for for this?

There there's a tremendous amount. That's a really good question, Mr McKernan, and they, the CDC buys and sells, five billion dollars worth of vaccines a year through the vaccines for children program. They also spend a half a billion a year, that's $500,000,000 a year, advertising and through public relationship campaigns for vaccinations in general as compared to a woeful budget of $50,000,000 that is being used for vaccine safety every year. Doctor, have you looked at the cost or the risk benefit ratio of the COVID vaccines in children?

Now this to me, you know, there's limited information and I and I and I bowed to Jessica Rose regarding VAERS and her analysis. But when I do the analysis, I see that for every one child that is saved, from death, from COVID 19, there are 30 deaths 30 child deaths associated with the COVID 19 vaccine. So the risk to benefit ratio in in terms of mortality is 30 to 1.

You your the book you coauthored, Vax-Unvax, right? Some of those charts were taken from that book.

I always hear the statistics of the dramatic increase in chronic diseases throughout our population. Right. Do do you have a basic statistic on that? The basic statistics around that, there was a lot of good work done by Joy Garner and the control group. The incidence of chronic illness, individual chronic illness excluding obesity in the United States is now 27%.

The incidence of multiple chronic disorders, in the United States is around 6%. That that is compared to a much lower percentage. I don't know the numbers off the top of my head of chronic diseases and disorders in the 1800 children that they looked at. So that's a dramatic increase. Correct.

And I think the question is, why can't we ask about it? What what are our federal health agencies doing to research this dramatic increase in chronic diseases? That's the 64 million dollar question. And you can look at everything besides vaccines, to answer that particular question. But you cannot look at vaccines.

You're not you're not able to access the vaccine safety data link, which has almost 30 years worth of research from these HMOs, and it should be open to the public.

Yeah. We bought and paid for it. It's what the federal government owes to the American public. Thank you, doctor Hooker.

Two hour mark.

Sen. Ron Johnson’s Conference in Washington, D.C. on the 28th of February 2024 entitled “Federal Health Agencies and the COVID Cartel: What are They Hiding?”

Conference Video