Psychopathic Pfizer CEO Pushes for 4th COVID Injection, Says 3 Doses ‘Not That Good’ Against Infections

/

From [CHD] Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla on Sunday told CBS “Face the Nation” a fourth dose of its COVID-19vaccine will be necessary to maintain manageable levels of hospitalizations and mild infections.

The company plans to submit data on a fourth dose to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and is working on a vaccine that protects against all COVID variants for at least a year.

In an interview on “Squawk Box,” Bourla said:

“I think we’re going to submit to FDA a significant package of data about the need for a fourth dose, and they need to make their own conclusions, of course, and then CDC also. […] to see that clearly  there is a need in an environment of Omicron to boost the immune response.”

Bourla said a fourth dose is “necessary for right now” because protection after three doses of Pfizer’s vaccine is “not that good against infections” and “doesn’t last very long” when faced with a variant like Omicron.

Bourla said Pfizer is making a vaccine that covers Omicron and all other variants and is optimistic about the preliminary data he’s seen so far.

“There are so much trials that are going right now, and a lot of them we’ll start reading by the end of the month,” he added.

Bourla told CBS he foresees Americans needing to prepare themselves every fall for a COVID booster just like they do with the flu vaccine. [MORE]

Massa’s Media Angry Kevin Durant Would Dare to Question Their Master’s Genocidal COVID Injections and NYC's Science-Free COVID Mandate, Overseen by the NYC Mayor, Their Black StrawBoss, Safe Negro

/

According to FUNKTIONARY

mass media – “Massa’ Media. Massa’s media plus (+) Mass Hypnosis = Mindless Masses. 2) The “Mess” Media. 3) wholesale retale— retelling the whole tale (propaganda) exactly as you’re told, consistently and relentlessly. How can you possibly relate when you are framed by the very debate wherein you are an unwilling spectator? Let’s be perfectly clear on this. There’s no counteroption or outlet to vent when you’re under the controlled thoughtform of mass-think manufactured consent. “Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one.” ~A.J. Liebling. (See: Media, T.V., Mass, Alienation, Spectacle Society, NEWS, ABCTV, Propaganda, Legislation & The New God Economy)

On Saturday, Barbaric Authorities in Saudi Arabia Murdered 81 People in the Largest Mass Execution in Modern History. The Dependent Media and US Puppeticians Silently Support Repressive Dictatorship

/

From [EJI] Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior announced that 81 individuals were executed on Saturday in the country’s largest mass execution in decades.

Human rights groups have widely condemned the executions, which follow Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s promises to reform the country’s criminal legal system and limit its use of capital punishment. Earlier this month, the crown prince reportedly told The Atlantic that a “high percentage” of executions had been avoided through settlements with victims’ families.

“Just last week the Crown Prince told journalists he plans to modernise Saudi Arabia’s criminal justice system,” London-based advocacy group Reprieve tweeted on Saturday, “only to order the largest mass execution in the country’s history.”

In a statement published by the state-run Saudi Press Agency, the government did not identify the 81 individuals executed and did not say where or how they were put to death. CBS News reports that people sentenced to death are typically beheaded in Saudi Arabia.

The number of people executed on Saturday exceeds the country’s two most recent mass executions—47 people were executed in 2016 and 37 mostly minority Shiites were beheaded in 2019—and surpasses even the 1980 mass execution of 63 people convicted of seizing the Grand Mosque in Mecca.

The government said the executed individuals were convicted of crimes ranging from killings to belonging to militant groups. It did not specify the charges in each case but acknowledged that they included nonhomicide offenses like “pledging allegiance” to foreign terrorist organizations and traveling to conflict zones.

Reprieve said that several of the executed men were convicted of nonviolent offences related to attending protests.

“There are prisoners of conscience on Saudi death row,” the group said in a statement, “and others arrested as children or charged with non-violent crimes. We fear for every one of them following this brutal display of impunity.”

Ali Adubusi, the director of the European Saudi Organisation for Human Rights told CBS that some of those executed had been tortured and faced trials “carried out in secret.”

The watchdog group said it had been unable to identify or track most of the cases “due to the lack of transparency in dealing with execution cases, threats, and intimidation of families and civil society,” but in the few cases it could document, “the charges did not include any serious charges.”

“These executions are the opposite of justice,” Mr. Adubusi said.

Saudi Arabia has faced international criticism of its use of the death penalty, including for children.

Despite the kingdom’s pledge to end capital punishment for childhood crimes, Reprieve reports that Mustafa al-Darwish was executed last year for attending protests when he was 17 years old, and Abdullah al-Howaiti, who was just 14 when he was arrested and tortured into signing a false ‘confession’, was resentenced to beheading last month.

Saudi Arabia is among the small group of outlier countries that continue to execute people in contravention of the global trend against capital punishment. Worldwide, 144 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or practice, in contrast with 55 retentionist countries.

Excluding China, just four countries—Iran (at least 246), Egypt (at least 107), Iraq (at least 45), and Saudi Arabia (27)—accounted for 88% of all known executions in 2020, according to Amnesty International. The U.S. followed Saudi Arabia with 17 executions in 2020.

The number of executions in Saudi Arabia declined sharply in 2020 (from 184 recorded in 2019), likely due to the Covid-19 pandemic and the kingdom’s decision not to carry out executions while hosting the G-20 summit.

Amnesty International reported that Saudi Arabia continued to impose death sentences despite failing to meet international fair trial standards in 2020, and that the kingdom was one of four countries known to have used “confessions” that may have been extracted through torture or other ill treatment to convict and sentence people to death.

7-Year-Old Died of Cardiac Arrest 13 Days After Pfizer Shot, VAERS Data Shows

/

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to March 4, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:

9,009 adverse events, including 213 rated as serious and 5 reported deaths.

The most recent death involves a 7-year-old boy (VAERS I.D. 2152560) from Washington who died 13 days after receiving his first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine when he went into shock and suffered cardiac arrest. He was unable to be resuscitated and died in the emergency department. [MORE]

From [CHD] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) today released new data showing a total of 1,168,894 reports of adverse events following COVID vaccines were submitted between Dec. 14, 2020, and March 4, 2022, to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). VAERS is the primary government-funded system for reporting adverse vaccine reactions in the U.S.

The data included a total of 25,158 reports of deaths — an increase of 331 over the previous week — and 203,888 reports of serious injuries, including deaths, during the same time period — up 3,557 compared with the previous week.

Excluding “foreign reports” to VAERS, 783,282 adverse events, including 11,505 deaths and 75,286 serious injuries, were reported in the U.S. between Dec. 14, 2020, and March 4, 2022.

Foreign reports are reports foreign subsidiaries send to U.S. vaccine manufacturers. Under U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations, if a manufacturer is notified of a foreign case report that describes an event that is both serious and does not appear on the product’s labeling, the manufacturer is required to submit the report to VAERS.

Of the 11,505 U.S. deaths reported as of March 4, 17% occurred within 24 hours of vaccination, 22% occurred within 48 hours of vaccination and 60% occurred in people who experienced an onset of symptoms within 48 hours of being vaccinated.

In the U.S., 554 million COVID vaccine doses had been administered as of March 4, including 327 million doses of Pfizer, 209 million doses of Moderna and 18 million doses of Johnson & Johnson (J&J).

Every Friday, VAERS publishes vaccine injury reports received as of a specified date. Reports submitted to VAERS require further investigation before a causal relationship can be confirmed. Historically, VAERS has been shown to report only 1% of actual vaccine adverse events.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to March 4, 2022, for 5- to 11-year-olds show:

The most recent death involves a 7-year-old boy (VAERS I.D. 2152560) from Washington who died 13 days after receiving his first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine when he went into shock and suffered cardiac arrest. He was unable to be resuscitated and died in the emergency department.

  • 17 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis (heart inflammation).

The CDC uses a narrowed case definition of “myocarditis,” which excludes cases of cardiac arrest, ischemic strokes and deaths due to heart problems that occur before one has the chance to go to the emergency department.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to March 4, 2022, for 12- to 17-year-olds show:

The most recent death involves a 14-year-old boy (VAERS I.D. 2148498) who experienced a cerebral aneurysm leading to death one day after receiving his first dose of Pfizer’s COVID vaccine.

  • 69 reports of anaphylaxis among 12- to 17-year-olds where the reaction was life-threatening, required treatment or resulted in death — with 96% of cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.

  • 650 reports of myocarditis and pericarditis with 631 cases attributed to Pfizer’s vaccine.

  • 161 reports of blood clotting disorders, with all cases attributed to Pfizer.

U.S. VAERS data from Dec. 14, 2020, to March 4, 2022, for all age groups combined, show:

The Fully Vaccinated Make up the Vast Majority of COVID Cases, Hospitalizations and Deaths in the UK. Triple Jabbed Account for 8 in Every 10 COVID Deaths in England

/

 From [HERE] Data from the United Kingdom show that Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) deaths among the unvaccinated have plummeted, while COVID-19 deaths from the country’s vaccinated population continue to surge.

This claim is confirmed by a report from the U.K. Health Security Agency (UKHSA), a government agency less than a year old that was formed to be the British government’s health improvement and health protection agency.

As part of its duties, the UKHSA regularly published COVID-19 Vaccine Surveillance Reports. These reports contain data on COVID-19-related cases, hospitalizations and deaths. The reports also group the information based on the vaccination status of the patient or the deceased.

One of the agency’s latest reports, published March 3, proves that the fully vaccinated and those who have received booster doses of the vaccine make up the vast majority of COVID-19 cases in the United Kingdom.

“[The report] does absolutely no favors for Pfizer and the claimed efficacy of its COVID-19 injection,” wrote the Daily Expose in an article covering the latest UKHSA report.

It should also be noted that the U.K. is dealing with a surge in COVID-19 cases. On March 6, the government confirmed 71,259 new COVID-19 cases, the highest number of new cases in over a month and up by 56 percent from last week.

The government also recorded 1,406 new COVID-related admissions into hospitals on that day, up by a third from last week and it is the seventh day in a row where COVID-19 hospitalizations have risen week-on-week.

Seventy-nine percent of the British population has received at least one dose of the vaccine. Seventy-three percent are fully vaccinated and 57 percent are fully vaccinated and boosted.

Children likely getting infected by fully vaccinated parents

The UKHSA’s March 3 report covers cases, hospitalizations and deaths by vaccination status in England between Jan. 31 and Feb. 27.

It shows that, of the nearly 1.1 million COVID-19 cases reported in England during this period, 846,616 – or 77 percent of all cases – were vaccinated and only 244,313 were unvaccinated.

Of the vaccinated cases, 67,669 were partially vaccinated, 162,998 were fully vaccinated and a whopping 615,949 were fully vaccinated and boosted.

The data also shows that more than half of the unvaccinated COVID-19 cases – 169,482 – are under 18 years old. This means children are most likely getting infected with COVID-19 through their fully or triple-vaccinated parents, other loved ones or possibly even their teachers. (Related: Fully vaccinated individuals are SHEDDING GRAPHENE and infecting the unvaccinated, causing serious health complications.)

UKHSA’s report shows that between Jan. 31 and Feb. 27, there were a total of 7,931 confirmed COVID-related hospitalizations in England. Of those, only 1,832 were unvaccinated and the remaining 6,099 were vaccinated. Among the unvaccinated hospitalizations, 812 were among children.

Of the vaccinated hospitalized COVID-19 cases, 363 were partially vaccinated, 1,178 were fully vaccinated and 4,558 were fully vaccinated and boosted.

A similar situation can be seen when looking at COVID-19 deaths during this time. There were a total of 3,939 confirmed COVID-19 deaths in England. Unvaccinated individuals only account for 397 of these deaths. This means that the vaccinated individuals account for 90 percent of all COVID-19 deaths in England.

Among the 3,542 vaccinated COVID-19 deaths, 113 were partially vaccinated, 725 were fully vaccinated and a whopping 2,704 were fully vaccinated and boosted at the time of their death.

Instead of looking at this data and using it to push for an end to vaccinations in England, the government is preparing to administer the fourth dose of the COVID-19 vaccines later this month. The first groups eligible for this second booster include people over 75, care home residents and people with weakened immune systems.

Data Shows Fully Vaccinated Individuals in UK, New Zealand are Developing AIDS

/

From [HERE] Data recently released by the New Zealand government showed fully vaccinated individuals developing acquired immunodeficiency syndrome or AIDS, showing major degradation of the immune system.

Just like other governments before, the New Zealand Ministry of Health only provides a cumulative total of Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) cases from August 16, 2021, showing misleading numbers considering that the nation is currently experiencing its biggest outbreak to date.

However, this is not the only problem when it comes to New Zealand’s reporting. On August 16, 2021, the date the Health Ministry has chosen to provide a cumulative total, only 18.4 percent of the population was considered fully vaccinated.

Infections have been increasing, with 20,632 new infections reported on average every day. This is around 99 percent of the peak average reported on March 7.

New Zealand has administered at least 10,757,940 doses of the vaccines so far. Assuming every person needs two doses, that number is enough for 109.4 percent of the country’s population. However, only 78 percent are considered fully vaccinated.

The data presented by the government showed that the real-world two-dose COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness between January 6 to February 11,  proved to be in the negative at -94.4 percent. However, between February 12 to 24, the numbers declined further, with effectiveness estimated to have fallen to -281.35 percent. This means the fully vaccinated are 3.8 times more likely to be infected with COVID-19 than the unvaccinated or single-dose population.

Much of the data that is being released also showed that the shots are slowly giving the population AIDS, which is a complete degradation of the immune system. When this happens, even the slightest cold could be detrimental to their health, as their immune systems will be too weak to fight off the virus. (Related: Dr. Zev Zelenko: Anyone with immune deficiency can die from a cold.)

UK data shows similar evidence

The U.K. government also recently released more documentation that showed strong evidence of the COVID-19 vaccine causing AIDS. According to compiled data, vaccine immunity is not supposed to wane. The human immune system, however, can get damaged or degraded.

Vaccine effectiveness, as it turns out, is not the measure of a vaccine per se, but a measure of its effectiveness in terms of the recipient’s immune system performance compared to the immune system performance of an unvaccinated person.

The first time the body encounters a germ, it can take several days to make and use all the germ-fighting tools needed to get over the infection. After, the immune system remembers what it learned about how to protect the body against the disease.

Vaccines, on the other hand, help develop immunity by imitating an infection. Once the imitation goes away, the body is left with a supply of “memory” t-cells and antibodies that will remember how to fight the disease in the future. So when authorities say that vaccine effectiveness weakens over time, they really mean that the immune system is the one that is weakening.

In taking the case rates found in previous reports, tracking the real-world vaccine effectiveness and immune system performance is easy based on previously published data.

Based on the information given, the 40 to 49-year-old age range had the worst immune system performance, which was recorded at -60 percent by January 2. It declined further to -67.7 percent by January 30.

With the information given, it can be gauged that COVID-19 death rates per 100,000, by vaccination status in England, calculated from the number of deaths found and the size of the double-vaccinated population, it seems that the double vaccinated population has the highest death rate per 100,000 in every age group except for the 18 to 29 and 40 to 49-year-olds. However, it is expected that the rate could switch up in the coming weeks.

Dr. John Campbell: Court Ordered Release of Pfizer Documents Provides No Factual Basis to Support FDA and Pfizer Claims that the "Vaccine" is Safe and Effective

/

From [KIRSCH] and [HERE] a former advocate of the vaccine, trusted by millions of people, has now realized he’s been deceived and he’s not happy about it at all.

Dr. John Campbell published a video entitled “The Pfizer documents” where he steps through just one of the 150 released Pfizer documents in detail: the ADVERSE EVENTS OF SPECIAL INTEREST (AESI) document (aka the “5.3.6 document”). 

One of the most disturbing findings was that the number of doses shipped was redacted from the safety document. The (b) (4) designation in the video snip below is a FOIA redaction code that means “Trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a person and privileged or confidential.”). Wow. The number of doses shipped is a secret?! Dr. Campbell was justifiable upset by this redaction, as he should be.

But even if we knew the number shipped, we still wouldn’t know the number of doses actually administered which we’d need to calculate the safety profile of the drug.

Dr. Campbell correctly points out that there is no way to assess safety if you don’t know what the denominator is. 

He wonders out loud, why on earth would they redact that? It can’t be proprietary. 

Indeed, I believe that the only reason you’d redact such a number is if you are trying to hide something. 

The underreporting factor

More troubling is that nobody has talked about the underreporting factor, including Dr. Campbell. This is the factor that you multiply the reports by in order to get the number of events that actually occurred. Voluntary reporting systems often have an underreporting factor of 10 to 100 or even more depending on the severity of the symptom.

There was no attempt whatsoever to calculate the underreporting factor (URF) by Pfizer in the report. Are you surprised?

I guarantee you, all of these event reports are unreported. But Pfizer is silent on this and of course the CDC is never going to calculate this number because they don’t want anyone to know it either. If you ask them for it, they stonewall you and never provide it. So nobody can do a proper risk benefit analysis, including the CDC. This is not a problem for them since they are not required to produce such a document. Have you ever seen it? What URF did they use? Answer: they assume that VAERS and everything else is fully reported and never bother to calculate the URF. They know this is wrong. This is intentional. Their job is to push the vaccine and ignore all the safety signals.

Because our health authorities, mainstream academia, mainstream press, and members of Congress don’t want to know the underreporting factor (since if people knew that, they’d realize the vaccines are unsafe and it would create vaccine hesitancy), it’s up to the so-called “misinformation spreaders” such as myself to calculate this number.

I’ll do that three different ways, just to show you how large the number is. The smallest URF is 89 (for serious events). The largest URF is over 163 (for less serious events).

To make this article shorter, I’ve moved the three URF derivations to my Pfizer article.

Overall safety data

Dr. Campbell never even considered the underreporting factor at all in his analysis. He assumed everything was fully reported and even with that he was appalled. The absolute numbers are way too high for a safe vaccine. 

He concludes “This has just destroyed trust in authority” (watch @21:55).

I couldn’t agree more. I’ve been saying that for almost a year now, since I first blew the whistle on the vaccine safety story on May 25, 2021.

Now, can you imagine how he’s going to feel when he realizes it is nearly 100X worse than he thought??

The FDA wanted to hide all of these documents from us for over 75 years

Dr. Campbell never mentioned the fact that the FDA, who knew all of this, believed it should be kept hidden from the public for over 75 years.

Doesn’t that erode trust in the authorities as well, Dr. Campbell?

Unelected Authorities at CDC Admit Collecting and Harvesting People's DNA if They Took a COVID Nasal Swab PCR Test - Without People's Consent to Do So

/

From [HERE] The Centers for Disease Control published a controversial post on Twitter, admitting that Americans who took a Covid-19 nasal swab PCR test may have had their DNA harvested.

“Remember that #COVID19 nose swab test you took?” the post reads. “What happened to the swab? If it was processed with a PCR test, there’s a 10% chance that it ended up in a lab for genomic sequencing analysis. Learn more about the process and its importance.”

Linked in the CDC Twitter post is a video by tech website Wired explaining how nose swabs detect new strains of SARS-CoV-2.

The video report says the alleged “10%” of samples collected are sent in for genomic sequencing testing, claiming the scientists only look at the genetic makeup of the viruses and not the DNA of the humans connected to each sample.

The sequencing is done with cooperation between local, state and federal agencies as well as academic and clinical labs.

While they claim there’s a “10% chance” of samples being tested, the number is surely much higher.

Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA) asked on Twitter, “Did the CDC get permission from people to take their DNA?”

Talking with Newsweek, a professor of Epidemiology and Nutrition at Harvard named Albert Ascherio downplayed the “conspiracy” that anyone’s DNA is being collected by the government or any labs before going on to admit it is actually possible.

“There is no need to test human DNA, but of course, it will be on the swab so it could be tested, which is probably what people may worry about if they are in [a] conspiracy mood,” Ascherio said.

There is a precedent to suspect a government would seek to build a database of human DNA.

The U.S. government has been collecting DNA samples of nearly every child born in the nation’s hospitals for decades now.

According to the left-leaning ACLU, “The DNA of virtually every newborn in the United States is collected and tested soon after birth… It used to be that after the screening was completed the blood spots were destroyed. Not anymore. Today it is increasingly common for states to hold onto these samples for years, even permanently.”

In December of 2019, the Pentagon warned all military personnel not to take mail-in DNA tests.

Forbes questioned at the time, “Could this genetic information lead to genetic surveillance, tracking, and grave privacy concerns for military personnel and others who use these kits?”

Report Says ICE Secretly Surveilled and Collected Records on 200 Million American Money Transfers without Obtaining a Warrant for at Least the Last 12 Years

/

From [HERE] Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has secretly surveilled and collected records on 200 million American money transfers without obtaining a warrant for at least the last 12 years (article available here(link is external)).

The surveillance program collected records of any money transfer greater than $500 to or from Mexico from anywhere within the U.S., Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) said in a letter sent to the DHS inspector general. It also collected information on domestic or international transfers exceeding $500 to or from the states of Arizona, California, New Mexico and Texas.

Officials at the Homeland Security Investigations unit at DHS provided staffers for Mr. Wyden with details about the surveillance activity last month after the senator’s office first contacted the agency seeking information about the previously undisclosed program. The briefing was the first time Congress was made aware of the program’s existence.

It couldn’t be determined exactly how authorities were using the data at issue, which appeared to solely involve money-transfer services rather than banks. Such services are popular among people who don’t have bank accounts and are commonly used to send money abroad, such as to family members back in an immigrant’s country of origin.

The surveillance program’s origins date to at least 2010, when the Arizona attorney general’s office began collecting similar data from Western Union.

Under the program, ICE investigators collected approximately six million records of international money transfers from Western Union and Maxitransfers since 2019. The data includes names, addresses and identification numbers of the money transfer senders, as well as names and addresses of the recipients.

Although ICE has agreed to stop using its summons authority, it—along with U.S. Customs and Border Protection—still uses the data made available through TRAC for investigations.

"Given the many serious issues raised by this troubling program, I request that you investigate the program's origins, how the program operated, and whether the program was consistent with agency policy, statutory law, and the Constitution," Senator Wyden wrote to DHS Inspector General Joseph Cuffari.

Liars at Bank of America Face Class Action Filed on Behalf of Customers who Claim the Bank Refused to Honor Promises to Refund Overdraft Fees to Customers w/Financial Hardship During the Plandemic

/

From [HERE] Bank of America Corp (BAC.N) is facing a lawsuit seeking class action status filed on Thursday by two customers who say the bank refused to honor promises to refund overdraft fees to clients who faced financial hardship during the pandemic.

Anthony Ramirez, a truck driver living in California, and Masako Williams, an 85-year-old retiree living in Texas, say they asked the bank to refund them for several hundred dollars worth of overdraft and nonsufficient funds fees (NSF) that they were charged in 2020 and 2021 when they experienced a lack of work for themselves or the family members that support them.

Like many banks, Bank of America pledged at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic to provide needy customers with financial assistance, and to refund certain overdraft and NSF fees, according to the lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Northern California.

Bank of America spokesperson William Halldin did not comment on the case directly but said that the bank "provided tens of millions of dollars in fee waivers during the height of the pandemic in 2020."

Banks are already facing increased scrutiny from regulators over overdraft and NSF fees. The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is exploring new guidance aimed at curbing banks' reliance on the fees, and is seekingtestimonials from customers about these and other "junk fees."

Bank of America said in January it would reduce overdraft fees to $10 from $35 starting this May, and that it would stop charging a $35 nonsufficient funds fee for things like bounced checks and automated account withdrawals that the bank rejects.

Ramirez and Williams say bank representatives repeatedly denied their refund requests and that it appeared the bank did not have an adequate system in place to grant the refund.

For example, Williams was once denied a refund by a bank representative who said "the computer program used would not allow" it, according to the lawsuit.

"Bank of America told people, 'If you have a problem, call us and we will refund your overdraft fees,'" Hassan Zavareei, a founding partner of the Washington, D.C.-based law firm Tycko & Zavareei, told Reuters in an interview.

"They made that promise but they didn't create or implement any systems to take advantage of those promises."

Akron reaches $900k settlement After Psychopathic White Cop Shot 2 Black Men Over and Over as They Surrendered in Unprovoked Attack. Cop Not Charged b/c Authority is Not Accountable Unless It Says So

/

From [HERE] Two brothers who were shot more than a dozen times by an Akron police officer nearly five years ago have agreed to settle their lawsuit against the city.

Jamon Pruiett and Latrent Redrick will receive a total of $900,000, according to attorney Sarah Gelsomino. The suit had been filed in U.S. District Court.

"This marks the end of Latrent's and Jamon's years-long battle for justice in the wake of this reckless and dangerous shooting that left them forever damaged," Gelsomino said in a statement.

During the early morning hours of Oct. 1, 2017, Pruiett and Redrick were outside a downtown Akron nightclub when a passerby began taunting them, causing Redrick to show them a gun in his waistband. Moments later, an Akron officer began firing his own weapon at both Redrick and Pruiett, with Pruiett picking up his brother's gun and shooting back after allegedly not knowing it was a cop.

Gelsomino says the pair were hit by a total of 13 bullets, and both were taken to the hospital with "severe" injuries. Additionally, they were each charged with felonies in the incident, but Redrick pled down to a misdemeanor and Pruiett was acquitted.

"We disagree with the verdict in this case and believe the evidence, which shows the defendant picking up and firing a handgun in the direction of an officer, supports a conviction," then-Akron Police Chief Kenneth Ball said at the time. Was he on LSD or just trippin off his magical power of authority?

It is not known if the officer involved, whose name has not been released, faced any discipline in connection with the shooting. 3News is reaching out to the city for further comment.

"Just because you [are] black with a gun does not mean you are a thug," Redrick told WKYC back in 2018, "because me or my brother [have] never been charged."

Unable to Decline Compulsory "Public Service" or Fire Unwanted Cops or Charge Them w/Crimes, Citizen-Servants Beg Their Public Masters to Fire the Boynton Beach Cop who Killed a Black 13 yr Old

/

From [HERE] The family of Stanley Davis III is renewing their call for the Boynton Beach Police Department to fire one of their own, immediately. It's all tied to the late December dirt bike crash of the 13-year-old after an attempted traffic stop by Officer Mark Sohn.

Attorneys, family, friends and community activists rallied outside police headquarters Friday.

"We picked this day specifically, March 11, because we understand that it was 20 years ago that this police officer was hired here as a police officer and for 20 years, based on a lot of evidence from this community, has terrorized Black people," family attorney Ben Crump said.

A review of Sohn's personnel record shows a history of reprimands. In 2004, the department suspended Sohn for 57 hours for violating at least 12 different rules and policies in a vehicle pursuit.

Since then, he has been disciplined two other times for unsatisfactory performance in a vehicle pursuit.

"He has a rap sheet that shows it. He's abusing the community and he has to go," family attorney Sue-Anne Robinson said. "He has to go today."

Despite the violations, Sohn was also nominated for officer of the month and in 2016 was given a police duty medal.

His actions on the day of Davis' December crash near Federal Highway and Boynton Beach Boulevard remain under investigation by the Florida Highway Patrol.

"Why do you chase that kid?" Crump said. "What is it about our children that you feel they are so dangerous that you got to use excessive force to detain them."

The teen's mother, Shannon Thompson, said her son's death is "like a nightmare that I'm not waking up from, unfortunately."

She said she's still on a desperate search for answers and demanding Sohn be held accountable for her son's death.

"Nobody can give me answers as to why I had to watch my son lie in a pool of blood right before my eyes," she said. "That's what replays in the back of my head and knowing that's all I had. I have nothing."

WPTV contacted the Boynton Beach Police Department on Friday for an update on the investigation and the agency released the following statement:

The Florida Highway Patrol still has an open investigation into this accident. In addition, the attorneys for the young man’s family have advised the city that they intend to file a lawsuit against the city concerning this accident. Pursuant to the advice from the attorney retained by the city and its insurer, no further comment will be made until the investigation concerning this accident is completed.

No Charges for Lakewood Cop who Shot Said Joquin to Death after Traffic Stop. White Prosecutor Reminds Blacks; If You Possess a Gun Cops Can Execute You Regardless of Whether You Pose a Threat

/

From [HERE] A Lakewood police officer who fatally shot a Black man during a traffic stop will not be criminally charged.

Pierce County prosecuting attorney Mary Robnett said in a letter to the Lakewood police chief Wednesday that she will not file charges against officer Michael Wiley in Joquin’s death on May 1, 2020. 

“Officer Wiley’s use of deadly force, in reaction to an immediate deadly threat, was justified and lawful,” Robnett said.

The letter discusses what she calls Joquin’s “unpredictable and dangerous behavior” by running a stop sign on a busy road in front of police, bullet trajectory evidence showing the 26-year-old no longer had his hands on his head when shot by Wiley and a handgun found on the floorboard near Joquin’s feet, The News Tribune reported.

Only Joquin’s DNA was on the pistol, the letter said. A fact that is not relevant to whether he posed a threat when the cop shot him. Per-se constructive possession of guns is not a lawful basis to execute citizens, white ones that is.

Joquin’s name has been invoked during recent local protests against racial inequality and police brutality. 

His mother and sister have filed a $25 million wrongful death lawsuit claiming Wiley is “an unnecessarily aggressive officer with a history of previously improperly and unnecessarily escalating an encounter with a young unarmed African-American man into the unjustified use of deadly force.”

An internal investigation has found Wiley’s actions in the shooting to be within policy.

White Ohio Cop Cleared by Special White Prosecutors in the Shooting of Black teenager Ma'Khia Bryant

/

From [HERE] The Columbus police officer who shot and killed 16-year-old Ma'Khia Bryant last year has been cleared of any criminal wrongdoing, Ohio prosecutors announced Friday.

Bryant was killed in April by Columbus police officer Nicholas Reardon as she swung a knife at a young woman, just seconds after pushing another woman to the ground. Bryant was Black and Reardon is white. Police were responding to a 911 call made from Bryant's foster home about a group of girls threatening to stab members of the household.

The killing led to a Justice Department review of the police department in Ohio's capital city.

Bryant was shot four times and died from her injuries. The coroner listed the cause of death as a homicide — a medical determination used in cases where someone has died at someone else's hand, but not a legal finding. It doesn't imply criminal intent.

Bryant's killing further heightened tensions in Ohio's capital city over fatal police shootings of Black people, and also cast a light on the state's foster care system.

In announcing the grand jury decision, special prosecutors Tim Merkle and Gary Shroyer noted, "Under Ohio law the use of deadly force by a police officer is justified when there exists an immediate or imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the officer or another." They said the decision followed a full review of the shooting.

The woman Bryant was attacking, Shai-onta Craig, had formerly lived at the home but had returned and argued with her that day, according to Craig's statement to police released Friday.

Reardon told investigators he didn't think using mace or a "hands-on" approach would have worked because of the knife in Bryant's hand, because he thought he was the only officer on scene and because Bryant appeared much bigger than him.

"At the time I fired my weapon, I was in fear for the life of the female in pink," Reardon said, referring to Craig.

The city will now conduct an internal review to determine whether Reardon's actions followed department policy, the Columbus Public Safety Department tweeted.

Bryant's family expressed disappointment that Reardon wasn't charged and said in a statement: "There should have been other non-deadly options available to deal with this situation." Her family also called for "full-scale changes" to Ohio's foster-care system to prevent similar tragedies.

"Ohio's foster care system is failing our children and we cannot stand by and allow this to continue," the statement said. "As the one-year anniversary of Ma'Khia's death approaches, her family is resolute in their fight for justice on her behalf."

Foster parent Angela Moore told investigators that neither Bryant nor her sister, who was also in the home, had ever displayed violence, but all the girls in the home periodically argued.

White Louisiana Cop Accused of Choking Teenager at a Gas Station and Calling Him NGHR, had History of Misconduct, suit says

/

From [HERE] A white police officer in a small East Feliciana Parish town is poised to face a jury this summer on charges that he uttered a slur and choked a Black teenager in a gas station parking lot last spring.

But as a trial looms for former Jackson Police Officer Travis Depew, a new complaint by the teen’s family in federal court argues that fault for the incident doesn’t rest solely on the officer.

By looking past earlier misconduct cases Depew racked up in the years leading up to the encounter, police leadership and town officials also bear blame for his actions, the suit argues.

Depew turned himself in to East Feliciana sheriff’s deputies in May 2021 — more than two months after he was accused of using the N-word and choking an underage Black teenager outside Main Street Market in Jackson, a town of about 3,300 people. The teenager, whom court records say was trying to buy food from the store with several friends, was neither arrested nor issued a misdemeanor summons after the incident.

Now, Depew is set to be tried on simple battery and malfeasance charges in June, according to the East Feliciana Parish Clerk of Court. He ultimately lost his job with the Jackson Police Department amid the criminal probe.

The complaint filed Feb. 22 by attorneys from Baton Rouge law firm Haley & Associates, however, says he shouldn’t have held the job in the first place.

Public records show Depew had a “pattern and practice of misusing state power and of violating citizens’ rights” years before the incident in the gas station parking lot, the complaint argues.

Police Chief Fred Allen, the police department and the town of Jackson were culpable for the officer’s actions because they “did not properly train, supervise, and/or discipline” Depew in his time with the department, the complaint says.

Allen and town administrators did not immediately return phone calls Friday.

John McLindon, an attorney representing Depew in the criminal case set for trial in June, said he was confident about his client’s chances at trial given “inconsistencies” in the witnesses’ statements.

Attorneys for Haley & Associates started requesting records about Depew’s work history in March of 2021, WBRZ-TV reported at the time.

Records they later obtained show Depew was fired by the Pointe Coupee Sheriff’s Office after being arrested for stalking and malfeasance in 2017, as described in the newly filed complaint. Chief Pointe Coupee Sheriff's Deputy Brad Joffrion confirmed Depew lost his post as a deputy in the department after repeatedly stalking a person he'd been prohibited from approaching — a warning his superiors reiterated multiple times, Joffrion said — ultimately leading to his arrest.

Records of Depew's arrest and firing in Pointe Coupee were later expunged, the suit says, after he had landed a new job in Jackson.

While he was an officer in Jackson in the fall of 2020, the suit says Depew slammed a Black man’s head into the ground during a traffic stop. Two months after that, he allegedly used a flashlight to beat another Black man during a traffic stop.

“The Town of Jackson, the Department and Police Chief Allen knew or should have known about Defendant Depew’s pattern of behavior unbecoming of a police officer,” Haley & Associates lawyer Ashley N. Greenhouse wrote in the complaint.

The suit asks for damages and attorneys’ fees in unspecified amounts and requests that a jury decide the case against the town, police chief and police department.

It’s not unusual for police departments to face blame over long standing discipline patterns in civil lawsuits about specific cases of alleged officers misconduct, like the one filed against Depew and the town of Jackson.

An ACLU lawsuit filed last fall against the Louisiana State Police and DeSoto Parish Sheriff over the brutal 2019 arrest of a Black man, Jarius Brown, named conduct within LSP that has "been present for at least a decade and has been implicitly endorsed by Louisiana State Police (“LSP”) troopers and officials."

Similarly, plaintiffs in suits against the New York Police Department after 2020's protests against police brutality have claimed department policies allowed patterns of misconduct.

In general, it’s more common for victims of officer misconduct to reach settlements in civil court than it is for officers to face criminal charges in those cases, experts say.

Lawsuit: b/c COVID Shots Don't Prevent Infection or Transmission They are Treatments Not Vaccines; and People Have a Right to Refuse Medical Treatment. Mandates Violate Rights/Equal Protection

/

From [HERE] “I take care of a lot of kids with birth defects, cleft lips, cleft palates, extra fingers, extra toes,” Dr. Devan Griner from Lehi is a pediatric craniofacial plastic surgeon. During his six years working in Utah and around the world, he estimates he’s helped hundreds of patients.  

“These are kind of like my own children.  I take care of kids from the time they are born, sometimes before they’re born, all the way until they’re 25 years old and go off. I watch them grow up, they are part of my family,” Griner said. 

The current Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services covid-19 vaccine Federal mandate has Griner scared he may not be able to continue that work because he has not received any doses of the shot. So, he’s filed a lawsuit in federal court to overturn that mandate.  

“I’ve watched over the last year, year and a half as things have progressed, where they’re going, I really want to put a stop now so I’m never in the position where I have to tell my patients and their families they need to go somewhere else or find somebody else,” Griner said. 

The historic federal suit filed in the US District Court for the District of Utah is funded by Dr. David Martin, a renowned IP underwriter and analyst. It names as defendants, President Biden, US Govt, HHS, CMS and others. The lawsuit claims the vaccine mandate is unconstitutional and violates Dr. Griner’s fundamental rights and equal protection under the law.

COVID SHOTS ARE NOT A VACCINE AND THE RIGHT TO REFUSE MEDICAL TREATMENT

The complaint states: "the CMS Mandate must be struck down because:

  1. i. The overwhelming evidence shows that the Injections do not prevent transmission, infection, or reinfection in those who receive them.

  2. The CDC Director has admitted that the Injections do not prevent infection or transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that has been identified by various public health agencies as causing the disease known as COVID-19. “[W]hat [the vaccines] can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.”1

  3. The CDC has acknowledged that the “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” are equally likely to spread the virus.2

  4. The Injections do not confer immunity but are claimed to reduce the severity of symptoms experienced by those infected by SARS-CoV-2. They are, therefore, treatments and not vaccines as that term has always been defined in the law.

  5. In fact, the CDC has actually changed its definitions of “vaccine” and “vaccination” so that the Injections would fit within the new definition. Until recently, the Centers for Disease Control defined a “Vaccine” as: “A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease.”3

  6. The CDC also previously defined “Vaccination” as: “The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to a specific disease.”4

  7. Both prior definitions fit the common understanding of those terms. To be vaccinated meant that the recipient should have lasting, robust immunity to the disease targeted by the vaccine.

  8. But on September 1, 2021, the CDC quietly rewrote these definitions. It changed the definition of a “Vaccine” to: “A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease preparation that is used to stimulate the body’s immune response against diseases.”5 It changed the definition of “Vaccination” to: “The act of introducing a vaccine into the body to produce immunity to protection from a specific disease.”6

  9. Thus, the CDC has eliminated the word “immunity” from its definitions of “Vaccine” and “Vaccination.” Upon information and belief, the CDC did so because it recognizes that the Injections do not produce immunity to the disease known as COVID-19.

  10. This is a critical factual and legal distinction. The Supreme Court has long held that the right to refuse medical treatment is a fundamental human right. Since the Injections do not stop the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 as a matter of fact, they are not “vaccines” as a matter of law. Instead, they are a therapeutic or medical treatment which Dr. Griner has the fundamental human right to refuse.

MANDATES VIOLATE FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

The complaint explains,

“Because the Injections are treatments, and not vaccines, strict scrutiny applies. The US Supreme Court has recognized a “general liberty interest in refusing medical treatment.” Cruzan v. Dir., Mo. Dep’t of Health, 497 U.S. 261, 278, 110 S. Ct. 2841, 2851, 111 L.Ed.2d 224, 242 (1990). It has also recognized that the forcible injection of medication into a nonconsenting person’s body represents a substantial interference with that person’s liberty. Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 229, 110 S. Ct. 1028, 1041, 108 L.Ed.2d 178, 203 (1990), see also id. at 223 (further acknowledging in dicta that, outside of the prison context, the right to refuse treatment would be a “fundamental right” subject to strict scrutiny).32

As mandated medical treatments are a substantial burden, Defendants must prove that the CMS Mandate is narrowly tailored to meet a compelling interest.

No such compelling interest exists because, as alleged above, the Injections are not effective against the now dominant Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 in that they do not prevent the recipient from becoming infected, getting reinfected, or transmitting SARS-CoV-2 to others. Indeed, evidence shows that vaccinated individuals have more SARS-CoV-2 in their nasal passages than unvaccinated people do.

The Injections may have been somewhat effective against the original SARS-CoV- 2 strain, but that strain has come and gone, and the Injections—designed to fight yesterday’s threat—are simply ineffective against the current variant.

Since the Injections are ineffective against the Delta and Omicron viral variants, and the original variant has been supplanted, there can be no compelling interest to mandate their use at this time.”

But even if there were a compelling interest in mandating the Injections, the CMS Mandate is not narrowly tailored to achieve such an interest.

The blanket mandate ignores individual factors increasing or decreasing the risks that the plaintiff—indeed, all healthcare workers—pose to themselves or to others.

Defendants entirely disregard whether employees have already obtained natural immunity despite the fact that natural immunity does actually provide immunity whereas the Injections do not.

Treating all employees the same, regardless of their individual medical status, risk factors, and natural immunity status is not narrowly tailored.

Moreover, the CMS Mandate fails entirely to consider other existing treatment options beyond the Injections as part of a more narrowly tailored approach. 97. Given these facts, as more fully set forth above, the CMS Mandate has no real or substantial relation to public health or is beyond all question, a plain, palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law. Alternatively, the CMS Mandate has no real or substantial relation to public health or is beyond all question, a plain, palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law as to Plaintiff, who already has natural immunity.”

Mandates Violate the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine.
The complaint states;

The CMS Mandate also violates the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine, under which the government may not condition employment “on a basis that infringes [an employee’s] constitutionally protected interests.” Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593,597 (1972); see also Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist., 570 U.S. 595, 606 (2013) (“[T]he unconstitutional conditions doctrine forbids burdening the Constitution’s enumerated rights by coercively withholding benefits from those who exercise them.”).

Unconstitutional conditions case law often references the existence of varying degrees of coercion. According to that body of law, Defendants cannot impair Plaintiff’s right to refuse medical care through forms of coercion and through this explicit mandate. See, e.g., Koontz, 570 U.S. 595 (2013). 100. (“[U]nconstitutional conditions doctrine forbids burdening the Constitution’s enumerated rights by coercively withholding benefits from those who exercise them”); Memorial Hosp. v. Maricopa Cty., 415 U.S. 250 (1974) (“[An] overarching principle, known as the unconstitutional conditions doctrine ... vindicates the Constitution’s enumerated rights by preventing the government from coercing the people into giving them up.”)

The decision whether to take a medical treatment or not is a fundamental human right which Plaintiff enjoys. Plaintiff cannot be forced to choose between his right to refuse medical treatment by the government coercively withholding his right to pursue his career as a surgeon, and his passion to heal children with congenital defects such as cleft palates.

Accordingly, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief restraining Defendants from enforcing the CMS Mandate.

Pursuant to 28 U.S. Code §§ 2201-02 and other applicable law, Plaintiffs are entitled to a declaration that the CMS Mandate is unlawful and any further relief which may be appropriate.

Violation of Equal Protection

The Equal Protection Clause prohibits classifications that affect some groups of citizens differently than others. (Engquist v. Or. Dept. of Agric. (2008) 553 U.S. 591, 601.) Thetouchstone of this analysis is whether a state creates disparity between classes of individuals whose situations are arguably indistinguishable. (Ross v. Moffitt (1974) 417 U.S. 600, 609.)

The CMS Mandate creates two classes of healthcare workers; injected and uninjected. The members of one class, the uninjected, get terminated. The uninjected cannot advance their careers. They cannot provide for their families, pay their mortgages, or make a car payment. The other class, the vaccinated, get to keep their job in their chosen profession, advance their careers, provide for their families, pay their mortgages, and make their car payments.

Yet the situations of these employees are indistinguishable because injected healthcare workers can become infected with SARS-CoV-2, become re-infected with SARS-CoV- 2, and can transmit SARS-CoV-2 to fellow healthcare workers, patients, and visitors. The Injections make no difference in these respects. Their only function is to make symptoms less severe.

Discriminating against the uninjected controverts the goals of the Equal Protection Clause – i.e., to abolish barriers presenting unreasonable obstacles to advancement on the basis of individual merit.

Pursuant to the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments, Plaintiff is entitled to temporary, preliminary, and permanent injunctive relief restraining Defendants from enforcing the CMS Mandate.” [MORE]

Dr. Griner told the media, “Morally I can’t go against what I’m feeling.  If that means the hospitals take away my privileges, then that’s what’s going to happen.  It breaks my heart which is why I want to get on the forefront of this and stop that from ultimately happening,” Griner said.