Ken is a legend. He fights for election integrity, border security, and big pharma which is why they tried to impeach him. Get your popcorn ready for discovery.

Expand full comment

Yep. Corrupt RINOs like Dade Phelan & the Bushes pushed impeachment with Abbott's passive-aggressive aid. Many pols are on Big Pharma payola. Our leaders & groups should look into Big Pharma corruption of "liberty oriented" law firms:

Is Pacific Legal Foundation on Big Pharma's payroll?

"The COVID-19 vaccine is one of the greatest advancements of medical science ever." https://pacificlegal.org/can-the-government-force-you-to-get-a-vaccine

The ecstatic bimbo author is now at the LoLibertarian Cato 'think tank'.

"Let’s get this out of the way up front: Vaccines are a brilliant, lifesaving innovation. That’s doubly true of COVID-19 vaccines, which were developed in record time and allowed Americans to return to some semblance of normalcy during the pandemic. If you aren’t fully vaccinated, you probably should be."


"Are mandatory vaccinations and vaccine passports constitutional? The answer is not so simple..." https://pacificlegal.org/are-mandatory-vaccine-passports-constitutional

For plausible deniability, Pacific Legal feigns concern that one forced or coerced injection program is bad POLICY, while doing *zip* to fight the tyranny, pretends it's constitutional, parrots Big Pharma-Big Gvt propaganda-lies, urges jabs, no attempt at honest informed consent, risk discussion etc.

IMO they're accomplices to mass murder; facilitated mandates, tricking conservatives & LoLibertarians into thinking the shots are "Safe & Effective and coyly embracing a tyrant's view of the constitutionality of forced medical treatment. I wrote these "defenders of individual liberty & constitutional rights": Crickets.

Is "Alliance Defending Freedom" on Big Pharma's payroll?

"Traditional civil rights firms have been totally useless, irrelevant, nowhere to be seen. Alliance Defending Freedom, for example. Take a look at their website. Nothing about coerced injections on the home page. It’s reprehensible. They claim to stand up for religious freedom." -Jeff Childers, 10-11-2021

ADFA hired at least 3 of the 'whistleblower' lawyers who falsely accused Paxton! IMO, they helped try to overturn the will of Texas voters who had known about the charges for many years and overwhelmingly dismissed them.

Expand full comment

when I was a student nurse, doing my psych rotation I wondered if psychosis might be contagious... That was in the '60s... Now, 55 yrs later I KNOW it is: I watched it spread around the world like a wildfire! This woman has caught it too, so should be ignored at best.

Expand full comment

The worldwide contagion had a lot of help: $$$$, Bill Gates, Google, FB, WHO, WEF, CNN, BBC, etc.

Expand full comment

Alas I know, but money doesn't affect contagion; that's strictly an internal, individual condition issue. If your immune system ( physical, psychological, and spiritual) is in good order, all the money in the world will NOT cause you to catch whatever floats by! You didn't catch, neither did I...

Expand full comment

Now we're waiting for other Attorneys General to follow Paxton's lead. I hope Florida is next!

Expand full comment

From the article's link:

"As part of the (2005 $2.3B) settlement (for fraud), Pfizer also has agreed to enter into an expansive corporate integrity agreement with the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services. That agreement provides for procedures and reviews to be put in place to avoid and promptly detect conduct similar to that which gave rise to this matter."

Apparently that earlier "expansive corporate integrity agreement with the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services" to combat future pharmaceutical fraud by Pfizer was meaningless.

And who were the beneficiaries of the $2.3 billion settlement? The federal government and state Medicaid coffers. Not the individuals harmed by the fraud.

Expand full comment

Unbelievable what they get away with. I want people in JAIL for murder.

Expand full comment

Along these same lines ... (and this is from Dr DEM, not my assessment -- I am not a SME or at all knowledgeable on the case law -- BUT --

DEM suggests that this is a civil case only... and would do nothing to pierce the EUA clause. If that proves correct, would this be nothing more than a slap on the wrist? We know that Pfizer is very "comfortable" paying hefty fines (if trending data points mean anything). It has not modified their behaviour based upon the past massive judgements found against them.

More importantly, it leaves the door open for the next EUA, required for the next (already threatened) pandemic -- and we've been warned that this one is going to be even bigger.

If the two legal actions aren't mutually exclusive, then okay, but let's not sacrifice the player on 3rd base IN HOPES of getting a runner on 1st!

WE MUST PIERCE THE EUA or we truly are cooked when "they" roll out the next PLANNED-emic!

Expand full comment

Fraud is rampant. Seems it should be a cakewalk to prove fraud and thus invalidate the EUA. The lack of tangible concrete progress on this front is as if Republican congressmen were spearheading it. 🤪

Expand full comment

It's not a Justice System if the people harmed do not get justice.

Don't *just* "stick it to them", but get the money to the people harmed by them.

Expand full comment

Not only that. The company shareholders paid the fine.

Expand full comment

I have read Paxton's PR. However, I am concerned that the crimes that were committed were crimes committed not just by Pfizer, but by agents of the DoD who are indemnified by numerous PREP acts for all the crimes they committed. The DoD and Pfizer had a contractual relationship under OTA. Under this authority there were no regulatory agencies required to study the vial contents for safety, adverse events, etc. Pfizer was merely doing what the government asked it to do. When Brook Jackson tried to sue Pfizer for fraudulent research, the case was dismissed on this basis, i.e., Pfizer just delivered to the government what they asked for, a "medical countermeasure" and were not required to study the contents of the vials nor submit the vials to any regulatory agency for safety testing.

The government and news organizations developed a Trusted News Initiative whose sole purpose was to destroy vaccine hesitancy by canceling and criminalizing individuals who were skeptical of the need for the vaccines, and skeptical of their safety. While Pfizer participated in this government censorship regime, Pfizer also gave money to news media for favorable coverage of their so-called pharmaceutical products, which in this case was a bioweapon. So Pfizer has some responsibility for giving news media money for positive coverage, but there was an overarching government system in place for enforcing government narratives and attempting to destroy scientific evidence being presented to the public and open scientific debate.

Since Pfizer did all of what it did at the behest of the US federal government DoD, and the DoD and the entire US medical hospital system were also involved in marketing the bioweapon, as well as using drugs that had high toxicity, etc., I am concerned about whether or not Paxton's case will be dismissed.

I think it is important for all who want a legal remedy to visit: https://www.bailiwicknews.substack.com

There a legal researcher has laid out every law that has contributed to the development of the biosecurity state, and how each law damaged and destroyed our protections under the US Constitution. It is only when you understand the enormity of the legal architecture in place PRIOR to the COVID plandemic, that you will begin to comprehend a legal remedy. Naturally the primary remedies involve repeal of all these legislative acts that enable genocide.

Interestingly, the one Senator who has been most interested in revealing the harms of the "vaccines" Ron Johnson, when he was shown the legislative review done by Katherine Watt, essentially decided not to go down that route of making the legal architecture an issue.

That raises the possibility that either Senators and Congressmen and women are being monitored or surveilled, or they have been bribed, or they themselves are culpable for these legislative acts, and/or making public the degree to which this program was purposeful and planned is a bridge too far for him. The question remains, why? Why can Congress look into the whole COVID debacle in committee, but not look into the legislation that made it all legal?

Expand full comment
Dec 1, 2023·edited Dec 1, 2023

Barnes did an assessment of legal action against Pfizer, I apologize for not having the link. What he said basically was that the contract the DoD gave Pfizer and that Pfizer signed repeatedly required a "safe and effective" product. Remember Fauci and company saying that constantly? Their stating the contract legal language as having been met was their way of protecting Pfizer.

Clearly such a product was not produced, further, Pfizer knew from day one that what they were producing wasn't safe nor effective. So Pfizer signed a contract and received payment in bad faith. Fraud negates all contracts. Meaning that Pfizer which keeps saying it is protected because it was doing work for the DoD, is NOT protected as it lied to the DoD.

Expand full comment

Thank you very much Frances Lynch. I have listened to videos of Robert Barnes and I think he has a brilliant legal mind. I understand from what you have written that the contract itself required a "safe and effective" product.

I have not read the contracts involved.

But from having read Katherine Watt's substack, the contract couldn't require a substance to be "safe and effective" because the contract was for a bioweapon, otherwise called a "medical countermeasure" that the government called "a vaccine," in order to hide that it was a bioweapon.

She writes:

"Also effective Feb. 4, 2020, (signed March 10, 2020, published March 17, 2020, 85 FR 15198), as amended (signed June 4, 2020, published June 8, 2020, 85 FR 35100) was Azar's Declaration Under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness [PREP] Act for Medical Countermeasures Against Covid-19, invoking and exercising HHS Secretary power to exempt all the people involved in medical countermeasures [biochemical weapons] development, manufacture, distribution and use, from legal liability for their actions (PHSA 319F-3 = 42 USC 247d-6d), and to divert all injury and death claimants into the dead-end Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP), (PHSA 319F-4 = 42 USC 247d-6e.)"


In a paper she wrote:

"But the illegal and malign offensive attack on the world's population has not yet been stopped by governments, because the bioterrorism program has been misclassified as a lawful and defensive public health program mounted by those same governments in response to a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC), using linguistic redefinition of terms in conjunction with the legal frameworks created by the WHO International Health Regulations, including amendments adopted in 2005, and implemented by participating nation-states and their political subdivisions.


So my reading of her work is that the contracts did not contain requirements for substances that were "safe and effective," because the DoD knew they were contracting for a bioweapon, not a pharmaceutical substance. In addition, because the contract was under OTA, that meant the substance contracted for was not under any federal regulatory agency requirement for safety or efficacy.

The problem with this is, a lot of people are not looking at the entire regulatory and legislative framework. They are thinking this involved a pharmaceutical contract when it is my understanding that it was never meant to be a pharmaceutical product but a biochemical weapon. You don't need to test for safety of a biochemical weapon.

I am certain that Sasha Latypova (who works with Katherine Watt) has read the contracts involved, because this is what started her on the road to figuring out the nature of the "gene therapy" bioweapon. Sasha Latypova was uniquely qualified to understand the contract as she had been a pharmaceutical manufacturer herself, and also had worked with Pfizer in the past. She knows how to read pharmaceutical contracts. She has consistently maintained that the contracts signed by Pfizer, Moderna, and the DoD were not contracts consistent with pharmaceutical products, but they were military contracts for essentially a poison.

She has said there was no mention of any kind of cGMP requirements in the contract. (Current Good Manufacturing Principles) that are required for any pharmaceutical and in every pharmaceutical contract.

The contract asks for Pfizer to manufacture a "prototype." You can learn more from her substack at https://www.duediligenceandart.substack.com

So I guess I'm stumped as to what Robert Barnes was referring to in terms of the Pfizer contract. He's not someone who would talk without really understanding what he was discussing.

Expand full comment

If the contract was to create a "bioweapon" and such are illegal (in international law, at least), then the contract is void on that basis. You cannot contract to do something illegal.

Expand full comment

That is a question that was brought up and discussed a couple of years ago, as to whether it is "legal" for the DoD to contract with companies to create biochemical weapons, even though the US is a signatory to the international convention against bioweapons.

There have been multiple presentations at both Katherine Watt's substack and Sasha Latypova's substack, here is one:


Basically the problem is that the legislative acts put in place starting with the first public health laws in the US have, over time, made "legal," the US DoD programs for biological, chemical, and radiological weapons research. In addition gain of function research to make organisms more lethal to humans has also been legalized by our government (Congress).

If you study all the laws that Katherine Watt found, they are like an interlocking system of laws that override our system of justice and our Constitution.

The PREP acts, of which several have been passed, are only the latest in these. But if you go to Katherine's website you can see just how much there has been purposeful effort to indemnify not just everyone working in the biosecurity state, biochemical research, etc. but also everyone in hospitals during the plandemic who treated patients: all of them were indemnified AS LONG AS THEY DID WHAT THEY WERE TOLD. They were even told they could not be sued, even if patients died as LONG AS THEY DID WHAT THE GOVERNMENT TOLD THEM TO DO.

These laws essentially turned doctors into murderers.

We can say "this can't possibly be legal." But think about Nazi Germany. It was legal during World War II to experiment on human beings in all sorts of ways, to kill people just because they were old and infirm, etc.

When there are genocidal people who created a legal framework for genocide inside the US and then put it into action, there is not much we can do until we repeal the entire framework, end gain of function research, and end the bioterrorism programs here in the US.

To do that, we need as many people as possible to understand how they were able to pass these laws unbeknownst to the American people. How did they do this, and who were the Congressional representatives and senators who created these laws?

All this needs to be investigated and the American people must learn about every aspect of this.

There are some who say, "Well, it all happened because the FDA didn't regulate these substances properly." No. The FDA didn't regulate these substances because the substances didn't require FDA safety and efficacy studies from the beginning. The FDA gave Emergency approval as a way to make the public THINK these substances were pharmaceuticals instead of bioweapons.

Would anyone have gotten an injection if they knew these substances were never tested for safety and the FDA hadn't studied them for safety or efficacy? Not many. That's why they put through the FDA emergency use authorization.

The American people were lied to about everything.

Here's an interesting article:


Expand full comment

Nazi Germany is the apt comparison:


"Just following orders" is the defense that failed those at Nuremburg. It is not and has never been a valid defense. Both the order-giver and the order-follower are responsible for the morality of their acitons.

"they could not be sued, even if patients died as LONG AS THEY DID WHAT THE GOVERNMENT TOLD THEM TO DO"

So, government thinks of itself as God. Nothing new there, but nothing morally valid, either.

Expand full comment

I agree Randy Boring. This is the frightening reality we are living with in this country. It amazes me how many people still think the "vaccine" saved them from getting a bad case of COVID. There never was a need for the "vaccine." The infection fatality rate from COVID 19 is the same as the infection fatality rate from influenza. You don't need a "vaccine" that has been found to have such serious adverse effects for something on the order of a bad cold.

Expand full comment

Yep, seems nuts to me. Here is an article on Barnes opinion, haven't found his video as yet.


Expand full comment

Thank you for that background information, but the bioweapons that were developed using covid were not developed by Pfizer, they were developed by Fauci and his designees. See Dr. Martin's presentation to the EU for details on the bioweapon history: https://totalityofevidence.com/dr-david-martin/

Not sure how anyone can infer a contract that repeatedly stated that the product be safe and effective could refer to a bioweapon. Here is some information (link) on Barnes assessment of the contract. Keep in mind, it was not a Fauci created product that was being paid for in this contract, it was a new product developed by Pfizer.


Expand full comment

I have asked Sasha Latypova about Karen Kingston's work and she has said she doesn't find her work holds up under scrutiny. There are various different opinions about Karen Kingston's work. But there were some things Kingston suggested that Sasha Latypova felt were not based on the evidence.

I have seen Karen Kingston make presentations, but she and Latypova disagree on a number of things, this is one of them.

I have also seen Dr. Martin's presentations and have thought that his presentations are very informative. However, when he focuses on patents, it can be a bit misleading in that many pharmaceutical companies apply for and get patents for things that they never intend to use. So just going by which company has which patent for a biologic agent can be confusing. But overall he has brought a lot of much needed light on the subject of Moderna and Pfizer, as well as on Anthony Fauci's role in all of this.

You wrote:"Not sure how anyone can infer a contract that repeatedly stated that the product be safe and effective could refer to a bioweapon."

I guess that is the question here: what contract is Robert Barnes referring to? What contract is Karen Kingston referring to? What contract is David Martin referring to?

The contract Sasha Latypova refers to is a contract between the DoD and Pfizer for the manufacture of a medical countermeasure or "prototype." Latypova and Watt have been clear that THAT contract is for a bioweapon and it does not fall under any regulatory authority, it does not require safety or efficacy testing.

So perhaps we have a problem here because we are talking about different contracts. THAT contract was brought up in court in the case Brook Jackson brought against Pfizer. It was the reason her case was dismissed. If you go to that case you will see the judge went to the contract between the DoD and Pfizer and saw there was no requirement under OTA for any regulatory body to do safety or efficacy testing. Pfizer did some clinical tests, but their clinical tests were characterized as fraudulent by Brook Jackson. That is why she brought the fraud case against Pfizer. But the judge dismissed the fraud case precisely because THAT PARTICULAR CONTRACT was clear that the substance manufactured by Pfizer did not have to undergo safety testing or efficacy tests. The manufacturer could do tests if it wanted to but it was not required by the contract. Thus the judge found no fraud had occurred!

So maybe the confusion is we are talking about different contracts here.

Expand full comment

In the Brook Jackson case, it has been appealed. The lower court judge's decision IMO made no sense, for no contract can absolve an entity of fraud, while in the same document require that a product be safe and effective. More info in videos below.

Nope, there is only one contract, this one:


Barnes discusses the contract:




Expand full comment

Thank you very much, I will look into what you wrote and the links you provided.

Expand full comment

Yep, and "vaccine" liability exemption is not intended to shield the company from liability for willfully fraudulent misreps & lies, destruction of evidence etc, and there was clearly a lot of that. This goes beyond breach of contract. Nor need it be "criminal fraud". Lawsuits can be prosecuted for "civil fraud" without any criminal convictions or prosecution.

With the exception of Karen Kingston, our side seems to be willfully ignoring the more general issue of fraud.

Expand full comment

Yes, it's maddening, why all the ambulance chasers of the world are not on this fraud negates contracts like rats on cheese is beyond me.

Expand full comment

Yep. Maddening. I can think of some reasons why most are not on board, but "our own side" not on board is far worse, and I'm pretty sure a lot of it has to do with Big Pharma PAYOLA.

In fairness, surely some on our side didn't want to jump in a year or 2 ago because it wasn't ripe. The truth about the "vaccines" hadn't percolated enough to avoid losing the vast majority if not all the cases. In 2001, the vast majority of Americans, including lawyers, judges, juries & prosecutors trusted the "vax" & though of us as loons. If a judge spanks a type of case & the bad decision is affirmed by higher courts it could preclude other cases. If 90% of judges & juries buy into the smear that we're loons there's little chance of winning civil suits.

But now half of Americans would be willing to join a class action suit for vax injuries, and 1/4 think they know someone who died by vax - those numbers include lawyers, judges, juries, prosecutors. So it's getting ripe.

Expand full comment

I agree, and Barnes does a good job of taking their contract apart.


Expand full comment

Thanks! I'll check it out.

Expand full comment

People can learn more about this by listening to Sasha Latypova or reading her Substack.

Expand full comment

Thank you, but I have several concerns about Sasha as a source.

Her background is R&D, not law. I view her as similar to Malone, A product of the very culture that brought this tech to the fore.

I will stick with Barnes as a source on legal matters :)

Expand full comment

YEP! Really, there is nothing that I can add here -- Eve expressed the situation (to my understanding) beautifully -- and I concur, Katherine has done an amazing job of laying out the implications and options.

(Well, maybe I will just add -- (note I am not an SME on any of this), but) I fear (and I'll quote Shakespeare, as Eve expressed it more eloquently than I might) there is "something rotten in Denmark". Dr David Martin has expressed his concerns. Tom Renz, ditto. There are "powers that be" who have repeatedly been given a "smoking gun" that they chose to secure back in the holster and walk away without seeing whether anyone was harmed by a bullet). Hmmm...???

Expand full comment

You expressed it beautifully.

Thank you, Susan.

Expand full comment

Arrest Walensky, Birx, Fauci, Daszak and all DOD, CIA, CDC, NIH, WHO, FDA and big pharma and big tech. executives involved.

Fraud and homicide are ...not included in the total immunity from legal liability agreement under the PREP Act for the big Pharma criminals!

RICO laws apply now! The DOJ better wake the Fk Up and get busy!

Expand full comment

These pharmaceutical companies represent a legalized drug cartel. All we can hope is that other states will follow suit.

Expand full comment
Dec 1, 2023·edited Dec 1, 2023

Mr. Paxton is a warrior...But, in the end Pfizer is merely one of the Companies used by the CDC, HHS to market and provide the superficial appearance for the experimental Ai/Bioweapons camouflaged as medication. It can only be assumed Pfizer to be chosen the suspected 'Fall Guy to Take the Hit'. What about Moderna, J&J, GlaxoKlineSmith/Wellcome Trust...And, all the rest laundering U.S. Taxpayer $$$?

VIRTUALLY ALL ARE WALKING AWAY FREE AFTER GENOCIDE AND THIS IS NOT APPROPRIATE; Corporate, Govt., Deep State, Philanthropathic Foundations and NGO's, Individuals...Every single one knew at the beginning of death and weaponization/propagandization of EFFECTIVE TREATMENT...Exactly of what they did.

Expand full comment

Go Texas - Hope this encourages other AGs to grab a pump and blow their spine up - and, now if we can get rid of the Abbott and Costello dog and pony globalist show! Pray for his safety because TPTB will NOT go willingly!

Expand full comment


Gov Greg Abbott's part of the Abbott & Costello show:

* Passive-aggressively aided fellow corrupt BFF RINO Dade Phelan's impeachment of Paxton

* Arrested hairdressers for bucking his lockdown that bankrupted small businesses

* Kept "essential" giants open to make $Billions after destroying their competition

* Abbott-Phelan took big money from sex change mills, then blocked efforts to stop "gender affirming" drugs & surgery on children

Their betrayals are far too numerous to list here.

Greg Abbott: All Kabuki, No Cattle

ALSO please see my post below about Big Pharma corruption of "freedom" oriented legal groups.

Expand full comment

This is downright exciting!

Expand full comment

From Dr. David Martin:

Ask what @KenPaxtonTX did on September 23, 2021 after inviting me to the 7th floor office in Austin TX and what evidence he and his team refused to hear! He canceled the meeting while I was in the office reception at HIS INVITATION!


Expand full comment

Thanks, Frank -- I came to write (effectively) the same thing. This feels a bit like ... a Trojan Horse (or maybe "bait and switch"...???).

Pfizer is well-versed in the modus operandi of paying large fines, and then, without remorse, carrying-on with more of the same.

My understanding is that this case does nothing to (as DEM says) pierce the EUA. As such, there is nothing to prevent the "Controligarchs" from just doing a "rinse and repeat".

We've been warned that the next Planned-emic will be bigger (so that will, no doubt, also require an EUA).

"Fool me once, shame on you -- Fool me twice, shame on me!"

Let's be certain we aren't about to be "fooled", again!

Expand full comment

I think you are spot on. I was informed back when this AG took a pass. There were three other AG’s who had discussions with DEM and mysteriously did the same Casper act. What dirt did the Oligarchs have on them?? 😉

Expand full comment

Absolutely -- not beyond the realm of possibility! Certainly, NOTHING shocks me anymore!

Unfortunately, the real sadness is that there may not even be "dirt" -- it might truly be without nefarious shenanigans. (DOES NOT justify it -- but... ) Elections cost money. Threats to fund opponents -- or just pulling existing funding / lobbying sources might be enough to encourage a self-preservation attitude.

As a very general rule, "we" have become a nation of self-serving "go along to get along" -- spineless (and possibly compromised) "Representatives".

Expand full comment

I got David Martin’s Fauci dossier in the hand of my friend whom I knew was affiliated with & a supporter of Paxton. He promised to get it to him. I wonder what the heck happened. Unreal.

Expand full comment

Hi Frances, based on 3-4 other AG’s with appointments set for discussion back in 2021, all cancelled or were no shows.

What happened? We don’t know other than someone with influence to those AG’s gave warning to them Not to meet. That sounds like a threat they may have received. Do these AG’s have incriminating information upon themselves they do not want released? Don’t know.

Is there a smokescreen going on where the public thinks a legal action against a company or condition is an action for the people? Perhaps. But if it is a weak argument, then there is no benefit.

Expand full comment

FRAUD is their business model.

All of their vaccines and drugs are poison.

No vaccine has ever worked .

For long life, only use herbalist, nutrition, chiropractors, Ayurveda, homeopathic, and emergency rooms. Stay away from MDs, who obey only government/Pharma protocols for profit.

Expand full comment

Brilliant! These fraudulent drug companies need to be disposed of for the sake of Humanity & Health.

Expand full comment

Another aspect of the fraud is the “pharmaceutical model” whereby the public thinks the vaccines are manufactured in a gleaming facility under one roof with state of the art equipment and modern quality control.

As Sasha Latypova has covered extensively the vaccines were produced by a constellation of subcontractors working for the DOD ... manufacturing contractors passing one piece of the production to the next, each carrying out an operation with no understanding of the whole process and NO quality control. OF COURSE there are metal particulates (reported by inspectors in Japan, Aug ‘21), DNA plasmids and monkey DNA. Numerous recipients have grown tails (I made that up).

The fraud was exposed in the Brooke’s Jackson case and condoned by the judge as perfectly OK because the contracts did not promise anything except some kind of crap to inject. I could have done that for half the price. Filled the vials myself with stuff from the fridge, much less harmful. No monkey DNA.

Mandates were implemented by corporations under no legal requirement to do so, but who smashed to smithereens consumer protection laws that prohibit “Affirmative Misrepresentation,” an abhorrent version of fraud that smells so bad judges routinely mete out triple damages at the slightest whiff when bad players get caught.

Were employees whose jobs were leveraged to coerce compliance informed of manufacturing practices and contamination so horrendous that no one in their right mind would accept the shots? Of course not. Therefore those who died MUST be awarded their jobs back three times over.

Are State AGs on top of enforcing their own laws? No they won’t touch it even though they were all informed.

Expand full comment

God bless AG Ken Paxton!

There should be at least 20 other AGs standing shoulder to shoulder with this COURAGEOUS TEXAN.

Where are you?

Expand full comment

We shall see. I take nothing at face value anymore.

Expand full comment


The People That Are Wearing Masks

And Still Taking Booster Shots

Have Started To Identify

With Their Captors.


Expand full comment

Umm no he is blowing smoke up your ass. He can't sue them the Prep Act is still in place. Also, pharma companies are contractors to DODHHS.

Prep Act is a license to kill.

Ken Paxton is just as guilty he and the rest of Congress and Governors all held stock in pharma companies they made money off killing people.

Expand full comment

Yet the DoD contract, which is a legal marvel by the way, requires a safe and effective product. That clearly was not delivered. Further Pfizer knew their product was dangerous yet accepted the money and delivered a dangerous said product.

That is fraud, fraud negates all contracts. The fact is that Pfizer defrauded the DoD. So given the contract is now invalid of course Paxton can sue if he goes the deliberate fraud route.

Now the DoD can decide to give them a pass but is that really likely? With something like 3 million dead worldwide already??

Expand full comment

Yep. Fraud should also generally negate the government's liability waivers. See my reply to you above.

Expand full comment

Let us not forget the lockdowns and mandates they all allowed how stupid. Wow people

Expand full comment

I had hoped Ohio’s AG Dave Yost would have stood up to this criminality, but no. Our Governor is all in on these crimes against humanity and Yost has not challenged any of this to date!

Expand full comment

I hope that Pfizer loses these lawsuits and goes out of business. By the way, I think it would be a good idea for The Wellness Company to distance itself from Dr. Alexander. His recent substack articles relating to Israel/Palestine show that he is easily tricked by Israeli propaganda, and he seems to support Israel's killing of thousands of innocent kids in Gaza. Having him as The Wellness Company's cheerleader gives the impression that John Leak and Dr. McCullough share this neo-con war-mongering ideology.

Expand full comment

I stopped subscribing to him awhile ago. Not my cup of tea 😉

Expand full comment