Protecting Yourself from a Bully with a Badge (When You’ve Done Nothing Wrong.) Part One
First off, not every Law enforcement officer is a racist, a misogynist, a homophobe, or just a power-mad entitled dick – male OR female, and I’ll give examples later in this series. The ones who aren’t hate these other jerks as much as we do.
There’s this thing called “qualified immunity,” which the ones who are dicks, think permits them to break the law and screw civilians over — up to and including killing them — often without consequence.
If you want to see for yourself what I’m talking about, go to YouTube or TikTok and search for “bad cops.” You’ll see hundreds of items there, illustrating police/civilian encounters gone bad: from cops just being stupid to going on out-and-out vendettas. Content creators include Audit the Audit, Justice for All, DeleteLawz, KY Reacts, LackLuster/L L Media, We The People University(a former cop/sheriff deputy), The Civil Rights Lawyer, and @Detectivemattthornton (still an active duty officer) on both Tiktik and YouTube.
First of all, according to the courts Cops are ALLOWED to lie to you. They are also allowed to intimidate you through their lies and ask “fishing” questions to try to get you to incriminate yourself (Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime.) Keep your hands visible at all times!
Always be polite!
As soon as you see flashing lights, check your speedometer. If you have a dash cam, make sure it’s turned on. If you also have a smartphone, START RECORDING on it. Lock all your doors. Don’t roll your window down so far that the cop can reach through and try to open the door if he/she gets frustrated.
A.)”Do you know how fast you were going?” Do NOT say ‘No.’ If you do, he can pick a number and say that’s how fast you were going — true or not.
Note: I once shut down a cop who came up and asked me that leading question by saying, “Yes, I know EXACTLY how fast I was going — the speed limit.” Of course, you can’t use that if you are speeding.
B.)”ID/DL, registration, and Proof of Insurance.” Answer,”Am I accused of a crime, Officer?” If he’s just fishing, he/she will hem and haw and say something alongs the lines of “that’s what I’m trying to find out” or “that’s what I’m investigating.” They have nothing on you, they’re fishing. You can refuse to ID yourself under the 4th and 5th Amendments if he can’t quote a specific crime. Mere suspicion is not a crime.”Disorderly conduct,” “obstruction” and similar “crimes” are mere deflections and lies. They cannot ask for your SSN in any case, despite what they may tell you. It is only a crime to give a FALSE name to a cop. It’s NOT a crime to refuse to provide ID.
For instance, “obstruction” in every jurisdiction I have checked so far means an active, deliberate physicalact on your part.
If he/she keeps repeating this mantra, immediately ask for his/ her name and badge number and keep repeating that each time he refuses to tell you WHY he/she needs your ID, If they start getting frustrated and belligerent, change your response’ to “I want to see your Supervior/ Call your supervisor.”
C.) “Turn your phone off.” MAJOR RED FLAG!!!! They know they don’t have a good case and don’t want evidence showing their mistakes. In fact, some bad cops have been caught DELETING footage from someone else’s phone.
D.) “Do you mind if I search for your car/search you/pat you down?” before he has given a justifiable ( and actual) crime. If you answer anything other than “I do not consent/give consent/ give permision to/for any search of myself or my property.” or “I refuse to surrender my constitutional rights under the 4th and fifth amendments.” Be careful because if your reply is IN ANY WAY ambiguous, said cop will interpret it as you consenting to what would otherwise be an unlawful search. ex “Yes ( I DO mind)” = Go ahead ; “No (you don’t have my permission)” = Go ahead.
E.) “Have any drugs or weapons in the car?” Another RED FLAG that they are fishing, trying to get you to (supposedly) incriminate yourself and/or give themselves an excuse to escalate the situation.
F.) “Step out of the car” with or without threats of arrest or physical violence if you don’t obey and without giving a valid law that he has a justifiable reason to suspect you of breaking. Immediately demand a supervisor. This is also why you should keep your doors locked, to prevent the cop from opening the door and yanking you out of your vehicle. They may break out your window despite you not threatening them in any way.
If you aren’t alone and they have a phone, call the county or state police and tell them that the LEOs at your site will not identify themselves. You are unsure if they are real officers since they cannot give a valid reason for the stop, and you are fearful for your safety. (If the cops or 911 don’t seem impressed, I suggest you contact a local TV or radio station.) Stay on the line. Give a running commentary of what’s happening. KEEP AS CALM AS POSSIBLE. If you snap back at them, corrupt (or stupid) cops will claim you’re resisting and/or being aggressive and escalate things even further.
Loser. Former Capitol Police officer who lied to lawmakers about Jan. 6, 2021, defeated in primary. Let this be a lesson to others who try to capitalize off their lies about January 6.
Dunn resigned as a Capitol Police officer in December after serving for more than 15 years. He told the House Select Committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, that he was the target of racial slurs and joined support groups after the attack to deal with the trauma of what had unfolded. His claims were not verified by the government investigation.
Dunn said on X, formerly Twitter, that he ran for Congress to “protect our democracy from MAGA Republicans & greedy corporations while also fighting for abortion rights & economic opportunity for every Marylander.”
Jack Smith, special counsel: Opposed releasing files on the handling of Trump's documents case.
AP
Views: 25
Documents Reveal Biden WH Worked With Archives on Trump Case.
By Julie Kelly, RealClearInvestigations May 2, 2024
Jack Smith, special counsel: Opposed releasing files on the handling of Trump’s documents case.
AP
Top Biden administration officials worked with the National Archives to develop Special Counsel Jack Smith’s case against Donald Trump involving the former president’s alleged mishandling of classified material, according to recently unsealed court documents in the case pending in southern Florida.
More than 300 pages of newly unredacted exhibits, containing emails and other correspondence related to the early stages of the hunt for presidential papers, challenge public statements by Joe Biden about what he knew and when he knew it regarding the case against his political rival.
Jonathan Su, White House lawyer: In regular touch with National Archives.
LinkedIn
The new disclosures indicate the Department of Justice was in touch with the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) during much of 2021, undermining the DOJ’s claims that it became involved in the matter only after the Archives sent it a criminal referral on February 9, 2022, based on the findings of records with “classified markings” in 15 boxes of materials Trump gave to the Archives a month prior.
The court exhibits, which were compiled by Trump’s defense lawyers and kept under seal until last week, also show that Deputy White House Counsel Jonathan Su regularly communicated with Archive officials.
Although Biden himself is not mentioned in the exhibits, the active participation of Su and other high-ranking White House officials raises questions about whether Biden was forthright when he told “60 Minutes” he wasn’t involved in the investigation.
“I have not asked for the specifics of those documents,” Biden told Scott Pelley in the Sept. 17 broadcast, “because I don’t want to get myself in the middle of whether or not the Justice Department should move or not move on certain actions they could take. I agreed I would not tell them what to do and not, in fact, engage in telling them how to prosecute or not.”
Trump’s lawyers first filed the heavily redacted material in a January motion, under a standing protective order issued by the court to initially conceal potentially sensitive information. His team then asked U.S. District Court Judge Aileen Cannon, who is presiding over the matter in southern Florida, to remove many of those redactions based on her review.
Aileen Cannon, presiding judge: Unseal the files, she ruled..
Southern District of Florida/Wikimedia
A protracted battle ensued as Smith fought to keep large portions of the motion and accompanying exhibits from the public. Smith told Cannon that disclosing the material would jeopardize the investigation and expose potential witnesses and government employees to “significant and immediate risks of threats, intimidation, and harassment.”
But Cannon, arguing the need for public transparency, authorized the unsealing of the files, which were posted in mostly unredacted form on April 22. A comparison of the redacted and unredacted material shows the Archives acted in concert with several Biden administration agencies to build the case — coordination that included the DOJ, the Biden White House, and the intelligence community.
The Trump case prompted revelations that both Biden and former Vice President Mike Pence had also retained classified documents – in Biden’s case for decades, stretching back to his time in the Senate. But while the Archives’ outreach to Biden and Pence consisted of requests, the agency took a more assertive stance with Trump.
Gary Stern, National Archives lawyer: Some two dozen boxes of files missing.
National Archives
Within weeks of Trump’s leaving office in 2021, employees with Biden’s Office of Records Management and the Archives began coordinated demands to Trump’s transition team, including former Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.
Gary Stern, the Archives general counsel, noting “several conversations” with records office employees to discuss “concerns” about material in Trump’s possession, emailed Trump’s team in May 2021 and asked them to account for “roughly two dozen boxes of original Presidential records [that] have not been transferred to NARA.”
Stern did not specify the files the Archives wanted beyond “original correspondence between President Trump and North Korean Leader Kim Jung-un” and “the letter that President Obama left for President Trump on his first day in office.” An unsealed FBI report indicated the Archives also sought the so-called “Sharpiegate” map of Hurricane Dorian that the former president used during a 2018 televised briefing on the track of the storm.
Despite Trump’s cooperation, David Ferriero, the national archivist appointed by Barack Obama in 2009, warned the transition team a month later in June 2021 that he was running “out of patience.”
Before-and-after illustration 1: Unredactions on the National Archives’ early and aggressive focus.
Southern District of Florida
By August 2021, Ferriero and Stern were in contact with DOJ officials and at least one White House attorney to develop what initially appeared to be a records destruction case against Trump. According to White House visitor logs, Stern met with Su on August 12 at the White House.
David Ferriero, national archivist: In touch with Justice Department.
National Archives and Records Administration/Wikimedia
From that point on, the collaboration between the White House and Archives accelerated. On Aug. 30, 2021, Ferriero, making unfounded accusations that 24 boxes of materials were missing, warned Trump’s team, “At this point, I am assuming [the boxes] have been destroyed. In which case, I am obligated to report it to the Hill, the DOJ, and the White House.”
A Trump staffer whose name remains redacted responded, “To my knowledge, nothing has been destroyed.”
The archives, with apparent guidance from top White House lawyers, pressed forward. On Sept. 1, Stern sent an email to Ferriero and deputy archivist Debra Wall with the subject line, “Draft Letter to AG re Missing Trump Records.” In the Sept. 1, 2021 email, Stern disclosed that he already had “reached out to DOJ counsel about this issue,” and that “WH Counsel is now aware of the issue.”
An attachment to the email included a draft letter from Ferriero to Attorney General Merrick Garland to notify him that presidential records “may have been unlawfully removed from U.S. government custody or possibly destroyed.”
On Sept. 2, presumably with the draft letter in hand, Ferriero met with White House Counsel Dana Remus in her office, according to visitor logs. The draft letter was not sent as the Archives and White House continued to advance the case behind the scenes.
.Before-and-after illustration 2: Unredactions suggest early coordination with the White House and DOJ.
Southern District of Florida
On Sept. 9, 2021, both Ferriero and Stern met again with Remus and possibly White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain. (A Sept. 8, 2021, email from Stern referred to a meeting beforehand with “Ron and Dana,” possibly referencing Klain.) The same email indicated plans to also meet with Su.
Dana Remus, White House counsel: Met with national achivist Ferriero in her office.
White House/Wikipedia
An Oct. 2021 letter to Ferriero from Remus referred to a “notification on September 8” related to the January 6 Select Committee’s request for Trump’s records. In the letter, Remus denied Trump’s claims of privilege in preventing the committee from early access to his papers.
But the email chains do not reflect any mention of the January 6 Committee’s demands; to the contrary, emails between the White House and Archives repeatedly reference the “Trump boxes.”
In fact, a Sept. 15 email disclosed that Stern spoke to Su to “get him up to speed on the issue and the dispute whether there are 12 or 24 missing boxes.” A few weeks later, Stern told his colleagues that “WHCO [White House counsel] is ready to set up a call to discuss the Trump boxes.”
Before-and-after illustration 3: Unredactions on cooperation between the Archives and White House counsel.
Southern District of Florida
On Jan. 18, 2022, following roughly seven months of negotiations, Trump’s team delivered 15 boxes to the Archives. In a matter of hours, the Archives’ White House liaison director said he conducted what he described in an email to Ferriero, Wall, and three undisclosed recipients as a “high level overview” of the contents.
Lisa Monaco, deputy attorney general: “Instructed” National Archives lawyer Stern on how to proceed.
Department of Justice
While admitting that most of the material consisted of “newspapers, magazines, and printed news articles,” the official claimed the boxes contained “lots of classified records.”
That assessment triggered deeper involvement by the DOJ. An unsealed FBI interview with an Archives official indicated that on Jan. 22 Su directed Stern to contact the office of Lisa Monaco, the current deputy attorney general and a longtime former adviser to Obama, to lay the groundwork for a criminal referral. It would represent the first time the Archives had ever sent a referral to the DOJ asking for an investigation into the retention of classified records.
Two days later, Monaco’s office “instructed” Stern on how to proceed. For guidance as to how a criminal investigation would proceed, two Monaco associates told Stern to notify the inspectors general for both the Archives and the intelligence community as well as DOJ National Security Division Chief Jay Bratt, now the lead prosecutor for Jack Smith in the classified documents case, and the chief of the DOJ’s public integrity unit.
According to the unredacted defense motion, Stern followed the DOJ’s guidance and sent information about the 15 boxes to the Archives’ inspector general, who then notified the intelligence community’s inspector general about a “very high level potential spillage and records management issue.”
The email chain then made its way to Thomas Windom, a prosecutor now tasked to Smith’s team on the Jan. 6 case against Trump, on Feb. 1. A criminal referral was officially sent to the DOJ on Feb. 9.
Two months after the archives received Trump’s boxes, which he produced voluntarily, the FBI opened on March 30, 2022, what it named the “Plasmic Echo” investigation, according to an unsealed FBI document. The probe centered on the “mishandling of classified or national defense information.”
Before-and-after illustration 4: Unredactions on top-level DOJ involvement before receiving criminal referral.
Southern District of Florida
A grand jury and the FBI summoned Mar-a-Lago employees to testify. In May 2022, at the same time Biden officials were scouring Biden-related locations including the Penn-Biden Center in Washington for classified documents in advance of a potential GOP investigation into the same matter if Republicans won the House, the DOJ issued a subpoena for more classified records.
Not satisfied with the result – that Trump’s lawyers produced 38 more files to investigators in June 2022 – Garland authorized and the FBI executed a nine-hour raid of Mar-a-Lago in August 2022. After seizing more than 13,000 pieces of evidence, prosecutors claimed agents found another 102 records with classified markings.
In June 2023, Smith, appointed in November 2022 to take over the existing investigation, charged Trump with 32 counts of “willfully” retaining national defense information, representing a shift from the premise of the original investigation into more serious Espionage Act crimes. (Visitor logs show that Stern met with Biden’s special counsel Richard Sauber at the White House the day before Smith announced the indictment.)
Smith has also indicted Waltine Nauta, Trump’s personal aide, with obstruction, for moving boxes within Mar-a-Lago in an alleged attempt to conceal materials from investigators, and another Mar-a-Lago employee, Carlos DeOlivera, for allegedly attempting to erase security video at the property. All have pleaded not guilty.
Another Special Counsel, Robert Hur, was subsequently named to investigate Biden’s retention of classified material, dating as far back as 1977. Although Hur reported that Biden had willfully retained state secrets in unsecured locations and illegally shared them with a ghostwriter, he concluded that Biden should not be prosecuted for these violations.
Trump and his co-defendants have filed motions to dismiss based on selective and vindictive prosecution; Cannon has not yet ruled on those motions.
A May 2024 trial date in Florida has been postponed in light of Trump’s other legal entanglements, which the former president has described as a partisan witch hunt to interfere in the 2024 election.
NYPD officers enter the Columbia University building and detain pro-Palestinian demonstrators as they had barricaded themselves to iconic Hamilton Hall building in New York on April 30, 2024. (Selcuk Acar/Anadolu via Getty Images)
Views: 26
Those who support Nazi style tactics will regret this one day. Are you listening, Schumer, Raskin, and other Jewish office holders? Make no mistake, the white progressive supremacists are supporters of the pro Hamas rioters. What’s really sad is that some are Jewish and Senators and Congressmen and women.
The rioters have copied Nazi style tactics and Schumer, Raskin, and others remain silent. Why is that? Afraid to upset the base? Of course Progressive non Jews have no issues supporting the Terrorist’s.
The raid was sharply criticized by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) who stated that “if any kid” was hurt during the raid, the “responsibility will fall on the mayor” and Columbia University President Minouche Shafik. Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY), slammed the police response over students “simply exercising their first amendment rights.”
How much longer can Biden sit on the fence? Wanting it both ways when it comes to Israel, Hamas, and the college protestors. When it comes to the pro Hamas protests, Biden says how terrible the protestors Anti – Semitism is, but we don’t see any federal charges on hate crimes or speech.
Biden claims he supports Israel against Hamas, but when he posts numbers on war casualties, he uses Hamas information. He asks Israel to cease fire, but not Hamas. He threatens Israel with sanctions, but continues to feed Hamas.
Fatah, the “moderate” ruling party of the Palestinian Authority, has admitted on live television that Hamas steals humanitarian aid and kills aid workers in the Gaza Strip.
The admission, captured by Palestinian Media Watch, confirms what Israel has been saying all along — and goes further, stating that Hamas is not only responsible for endangering aid workers by hiding among them, but also asserts that Hamas has been killing aid workers directly.
Lee Fang, RealClearInvestigations & LeeFang.com January 16, 2024
Finances at the vaccine manufacturer Moderna began to fall almost as quickly as they had risen, as most Americans resisted getting yet another COVID booster shot. The pharmaceutical company, whose pioneering mRNA vaccine had turned it from small startup to biotech giant worth more than $100 billion in just a few years, reported a third-quarter loss last year of $3.6 billion.
Arpa Garay, Moderna: “It really is a vaccine that’s relevant across all age groups,” she insisted.
LinkedIn
In a September call aimed at shoring up investors, Moderna’s then–chief commercial officer, Arpa Garay, attributed some of the hesitancy pummeling Moderna’s numbers to uninformed vaccine skeptics. “Despite some misinformation,” Garay said, COVID-19 still drove significant hospitalizations. “It really is a vaccine that’s relevant across all age groups,” she insisted.
To get past the “misinformation” and convince the public to take continual booster shots, Garay briefly noted that Moderna was “delving down” on ways to partner “across the ecosystem to make sure consumers are educated on the need for the vaccine.”
What Garay hinted at during the call, but didn’t disclose, was that Moderna already had a sprawling media operation in place aimed at identifying and responding to critics of vaccine policy and the drug industry. A series of internal company reports and communications reviewed by RealClearInvestigations show that Moderna has worked with former law enforcement and public health officials and a drug industry-funded non-governmental organization called The Public Good Projects (PGP) to confront the “root cause of vaccine hesitancy” by rapidly identifying and “shutting down misinformation.”
Part of this effort includes providing talking points to some 45,000 healthcare professionals “on how to respond when vaccine misinformation goes mainstream.” PGP and Moderna have created a new partnership, called the “Infodemic Training Program,” to prepare healthcare workers to respond to alleged vaccine-related misinformation.
The company has also used artificial intelligence to monitor millions of global online conversations to shape the contours of vaccine-related discussion. The internal files — shorthanded here as the Moderna Reports — show high-profile vaccine critics were closely monitored, particularly skeptics in independent media, including Michael Shellenberger, Russell Brand, and Alex Berenson. PGP, which was funded by a $1,275,000 donation from the Biotechnology and Innovation Organization, a lobby group representing Pfizer and Moderna, has identified alleged vaccine misinformation and helped facilitate the removal of content from Twitter, among other social media platforms, throughout 2021 and 2022.
Kaitlyn Kkrizanic of PGP: Beware of “reports that Sweden is no longer recommending the vaccine for children.”
rocketreach.com
Emails from that period show that PGP routinely sent Excel lists of accounts to amplify on Twitter and others to de-platform, including populist voices such as ZeroHedge.
The messages also suggested emerging narratives to remove from the platform. “People opposed to vaccines are capitalizing on the NYT [New York Times] article about the CDC withholding vaccine information. The articles do not contain misinformation themselves but are using the news to further prove the CDC is untrustworthy,” wrote Savannah Knell, PGP’s senior director of partnerships, in an email to a Twitter lobbyist in September 2022. In another email the following month, Kaitlyn Krizanic, PGP’s senior program manager, told Twitter to be on the lookout for “reports that Sweden is no longer recommending the vaccine for children.” In some cases, conservative accounts expressing outrage at restrictive pandemic policies, such as vaccination passports, were deemed by PGP as “misinformation” that warranted removal.
The Moderna Reports consistently show the company raising red flags about those reporting documented side effects of the vaccine the biotech company was selling. Such concerns, which may be typical of corporate public relations efforts that want their product shown in the best light, take on a darker cast when it involves medicine injected into people’s bodies.
Like the Twitter Files, the Moderna Reports highlight the push by powerful entities – especially government, Big Tech, and Big Pharma – to identify and brand dissenting opinions about establishment narratives as risky forms of speech. The growing network these efforts rely on shows the growth of what has been called the censorship industrial complex. Moderna’s faltering financials also suggest, at least for now, the limits of that project.
Public Good Projects and Moderna did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
In an internal email sent last July, Moderna notified its team of its latest efforts to shape the vaccine debate. “We have partnered with PGP (The Public Good Projects) and Moderna’s Global Intelligence, Corporate Security, Medical Affairs, Corporate Communications, Clinical Safety and Pharmacovigilance teams to provide media monitoring for misinformation at scale,” Marcy Rudowitz, the company’s customer program lead, wrote. “If and when a response is needed, our team will notify the appropriate stakeholders with recommendations,” she added.
The extent to which the company may intervene to shape content decisions is not clear. PGP continues to boast close relations with establishment institutions, including major medical associations.
The rise of censorship is inextricably connected to the pandemic, which emerged in the U.S. in early 2020. As federal, state, and local governments imposed unprecedented regulations on Americans in the name of public health, efforts arose to discredit counter-narratives that could be spread easily on social media. Early in the pandemic, criticism of policies such as lockdowns and vaccine mandates came almost entirely from independent media, which faced shadowbans and outright censorship on various platforms.
Stéphane Bancel, Moderna CEO: “As you can see, we’re losing economies of scale,” he said, explaining price hikes.
Moderna 2022 ESG Report
When they introduced their vaccines in 2021, manufacturers such as Moderna, Pfizer, and Johnson & Johnson also had a powerful financial interest in bolstering such censorship.
Moderna, perhaps more than other drug firms, is overwhelmingly reliant on the continued success of its vaccine. The company announced a price hike of up to $130 a dose this month, far higher than the $15-26 for American federal contracts, according to the Wall Street Journal. “We’re expecting a 90% reduction in demand,” Modena CEO Stéphane Bancel said, when he was asked to defend the decision. “As you can see, we’re losing economies of scale.”
Far from acting as a neutral arbiter, the Moderna Reports show that the company blurred the lines between public relations and public health. In many cases, Moderna’s intelligence and communications team targeted accurate information that had “the potential to fuel vaccine hesitancy” as menacing forms of misinformation in its reports. Given the size and scope and the censorship industrial complex, it can be difficult to draw a clear straight line between Moderna’s surveillance and actions taken against specific articles, posts, and writers. Instead, as Garay suggested, the company is one stream in an evolving ecosystem aimed at undermining dissent.
Alex Berenson
Berenson: “It’s nice to know Moderna is watching me. I’m watching them too.”
FNC
Independent journalist Alex Berenson is a repeated subject of the company’s surveillance efforts. A former reporter for the New York Times, Berenson quickly emerged as one of the most outspoken critics of vaccine-related policies. He was among the earliest to cast doubt on the Biden administration’s false claim that the vaccinated people could not transmit the COVID-19 virus to others. After government pressure on Twitter, Berenson was banned from the platform in 2021, only to return after successfully litigating against the company.
He appears to still be in the crosshairs. In September 2023, Moderna flagged a tweet from Berenson that highlighted the CDC’s data showing that among 1 million mRNA-vaccinated teenagers, there were from zero to a single COVID death and up to 200,000 side effects.
The company cited Berenson’s tweet under a report headline “Attacks on pediatric COVID-19 vaccines escalate” and claimed he had “cherry-picked data.” However, the company did not directly rebut any of Berenson’s claims in its report. Rather, Moderna noted the “high-risk” danger of Berenson’s viral tweet related to the potential for low child COVID-19 vaccination rates. “Fears about side effects and long-term dangers are major reasons parents report not vaccinating their children,” the report stated. It further concluded that “resistance to COVID-19 vaccines for children can be a gateway to broader anti-vaccine beliefs.”
Other Moderna reports flag Berenson’s tweets for “misinformation about mRNA safety” and claim that he is a “conspiracy theorist” for suggesting that health authorities have not properly taken into account the documented risks of myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle) for young men receiving the vaccine. Such questions have been posed by an increasing number of health professionals, but the misinformation reports dismiss any Berenson criticism as inherently false.
“It’s nice to know Moderna is watching me,” said Berenson, when asked about his response to the revelations. “I’m watching them too. mRNA shots carry unacceptably high heart risks for teenagers and young adults. Nearly the entire rest of the world accepts this reality and now discourages or bans people under 50 from taking mRNA Covid boosters. It is unconscionable that Moderna and Pfizer continue to market them to non-elderly adults.”
“They can call me whatever they like,” he noted, “but they can’t stop my reporting.”
Russell Brand
Brand: Moderna warned of his videos “in anti-vaccine spaces where he is viewed as a truth-teller.”
Invision
Russell Brand, the British commentator and comedian, is also a repeated name in the Moderna misinformation files. The left-leaning populist routinely pillories the pharmaceutical industry for exploiting the pandemic to generate unprecedented profits.
Moderna has closely monitored Brand’s criticism of the drug industry.
In various “low-risk” reports produced in August 2023, Moderna flagged videos produced by Brand twice. In one, Moderna noted that Brand had broadcast a monologue about Jonathan Van-Tam, a former senior health official who helped formulate COVID-19 policies in Britain. Van-Tam had just taken a position with Moderna, a move that raised eyebrows with many in the press. In the video, Brand noted that the company had just “made a fortune during the pandemic selling vaccines to the government,” and that the “government worker that bought all those vaccines” was now moving through the revolving door.
In another report, Moderna alleged that Brand “claimed that COVID-19 vaccine mandates were based on a lie in a recent podcast episode.” The video was broadly accurate. The monologue highlights CDC documents that had come to light showing that officials were aware that the virus would “break through” and still infect vaccinated patients. In an ironic twist, Brand finished the segment with a discussion of efforts to censor debate around the vaccine.
Moderna noted they were not yet taking action on this broadcast, but “we are monitoring with our partner, the Public Good Projects.”
The following month, several media outlets reported that several women who insisted on anonymity were claiming that Brand had abused them nearly twenty years ago. The ensuing media firestorm, which led to YouTube demonetizing his account, became fodder for other Moderna misinformation reports. The company warned that the cancellation of Brand was sparking a backlash among social media users, who believed that he may be targeted by government and corporate censors for his outspoken opposition to pandemic narratives.
In a Moderna high-risk report, the company noted that speculation was swirling that “allegations are part of a conspiracy to silence the comedian, who has been a vocal opponent of COVID-19 vaccines.” The report linked an X video of Brand sharply criticizing Moderna and Pfizer for generating “$1,000 of profit every second” in 2021. The specific claim of profiteering was a mainstream claim, a statistic that was produced by Oxfam.
Nowhere in its reports on Brand did Moderna highlight any incorrect information. But the reports noted that they monitored Brand because he “has a large platform with over 6.6 million YouTube subscribers and over 21 million followers across multiple social media platforms.” Moreover, his “videos are widely circulated in anti-vaccine spaces where he is viewed as a truth-teller and threat to authority,” and that Brand maintained support from Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk.
Michael Shellenberger
Shellenberger: Dismissed by Moderna in internal reports as a known “misinformation author.”
AP
The Moderna misinformation reporting system reveals that the pharmaceutical firm maintained an interest in pandemic-related issues that go beyond vaccine policy, overlapping with general issues surrounding the unexplained questions that still swirl around the source of the pandemic.
The company, for instance, flagged discussions around news last year of a congressional whistleblower who came forward with allegations that the CIA suppressed an assessment from analysts that COVID-19 originated at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The story has garnered widespread coverage in NBC, Science, and ABC News, among other outlets.
But Moderna’s misinformation alerts flagged Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and journalist Michael Shellenberger for distributing information about the CIA allegation. Shellenberger – with whom this reporter has worked on the Twitter Files – had exclusively reported earlier last year that U.S. government sources believed that the “patient zeros” of COVID-19 were a group of Chinese scientists at the Wuhan lab – a major revelation later confirmed by the Wall Street Journal.
Despite his work on the issue, Moderna dismisses Shellenberger in its reports as among its known “misinformation authors.”
“Moderna has spent years spreading disinformation about their vaccines and so it makes sense that they would smear the scientists and journalists who expose them as conspiracy theorists and sources of misinformation,” Shellenberger told RCI.
“The question is why is Moderna spreading disinformation on the high probability that Covid escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology lab?” he added. “A company that makes its money selling a coronavirus vaccine shouldn’t care where Covid came from.”
Others
Moderna closely monitored other independent voices. The company flagged left-wing comedian Jimmy Dore for simply tweeting at a New York Times call for triple-vaccination with the two-word response, “Hard pass,” as an example of misinformation. The company also warned about the appearance of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on the Joe Rogan podcast as well as Lex Fridman, a popular independent podcaster.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: Moderna warned of his appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast.
AP
Other reports flag skeptics of vaccine efficiency and potential side effects. In September, Moderna’s system cited Megyn Kelly, the podcaster and former Fox News host, for a viral clip in which she said she regrets the COVID-19 booster after she developed an autoimmune condition that she believes was caused by the shot.
Moderna warned that such comments could “discourage people who are on the fence about getting vaccinated.” In its alert about Kelly, the company noted that her comments added to growing concern around autoimmune disorders and COVID-19 vaccinations. The Moderna misinformation email proceeded to offer data that appeared to reaffirm, rather than debunk, Kelly’s assertions. The alert concluded with a message about an NIH report that highlights a link between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and inflammatory and autoimmune skin diseases. Moderna did not dispute the findings of the NIH study, but noted that it “is in rotation in anti-vaccine spaces online.”
Megyn Kelly: Moderna warned that her apparently valid comments could “discourage people who are on the fence about getting vaccinated.”
Invision
The merging of public health and corporate influence peddling has concerned many academics. Jay Bhattacharya, a professor of health policy at Stanford University who says the government violated his free-speech rights by trying to silence his questioning of federal policies regarding COVID, told RCI: “We have a problem that social media companies and the government have allied with pharma to treat information flows around the COVID vaccine as a propaganda problem, rather than a medical issue that is best resolved by patients talking with their doctor about what’s best for them.”
Jay Bhattacharya: Moderna flagged a tweet of his simply linking to an unwelcome FDA finding on child vaccination.
FNC
Bhattacharya was one of the most prominent academics who was shadowbanned under the previous owners of Twitter because of his criticism of the lockdowns and masking policy. He is now one of the plaintiffs litigating against the U.S. government’s role in shaping content decisions on social media platforms in the Missouri v. Biden case, which is now before the Supreme Court.
Bhattacharya’s outspoken advocacy has attracted attention from Moderna as well. In October 2023, shortly after I spoke to him for an interview, Moderna flagged one of the Stanford professor’s tweets that shared a link to a new Food and Drug Administration preprint study that documented “elevated risk of seizures in toddlers and myocarditis in teenagers associated with covid mRNA vaccination.” Moderna did not directly dispute the study findings other than to note that its authors wrote that it “should be interpreted cautiously.”
In the attached report, Moderna added that it had highlighted the tweet and others like it because “concerns about safety and side effects are among the main reasons parents are hesitant about or oppose COVID-19 vaccines for their children.”
In other words, anything that might discourage children from vaccinations, despite any risks or lack of benefits, is dangerous information. That suggests a motive far from bringing truth to the vaccine debate, and far more about dominating it for financial gain.
Near the end of the Moderna call last September, as the biotech firm worked to highlight its stepped-up outreach to consumers, James Mock, the chief financial officer, spoke briefly to assure investors of the company’s ability to continue to make money.
“COVID is a very valuable product line of business and will continue to be,” said Mock, “and we’ll make it more profitable.”
Why are the young white folks joining folks of color in leaving the Democrat party? Racism, Bigotry, and Hate Speech.
It’s obvious that they’re tired of being taken for granted and told what they can do or say. Ever notice that at these riots the older white folks are mostly missing? Reminds me of the Union strikes. Membership is on the line but the higher ups only show up for photo ops.
James Carville. “I think this issue is deep, and I think it’s a lot deeper than just progressive advocates or young people or college campuses. I hope the president can get some kind of ceasefire and take this off the front burner because, frankly, its damage politically is pretty substantial. And if we get to Chicago at the convention and this thing is still going on, I don’t want to think about what‘s going to happen there.”
Veteran Dem strategist James Carville on the Democrat Party bleeding young voters
“We're not shedding them, they're leaving in droves"
Turns out causing an entire generation to not be able to afford home ownership is politically problematic pic.twitter.com/0NQlew0x4K
DA Alvin Bragg — dodging criticism from elsewhere.
There have been few light moments in the thunderous collision between former President Donald Trump and the legal system.
But one incident Tuesday put a brief smile on Trump’s face.
Trump faces 34 counts of first-degree falsifying business records, which Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is prosecuting as felonies. The allegations against Trump are that ahead of the 2016 election, former Trump attorney Michael Cohen paid porn star Stormy Daniels $130,000, so she would not go public with claims of an affair with Trump. Trump has denied the affair ever took place.
On the second day of jury selection, one potential juror said he had read Trump’s books “The Art of the Deal” and “How to Get Rich,” according to Newsweek.
After mentioning the second book, the juror asked if he got the title right.
Trump smiled and then nodded. The incident was not videoed because no cameras are allowed in the courtroom.
Although Monday was not very productive, with more than 50 of 96 potential jurors dismissed for saying they could not be fair and impartial, six people made the cut Tuesday, according to the New York Post. The names of jurors are being withheld.
The Post said the foreman of the jury is a married person from West Harlem who came to America from Ireland; another juror is a corporate lawyer who is an Oregon native; one is a female nurse at Memorial Sloan Kettering; and another is a female software engineer.
A juror described by the Post as a “young black woman” said during selection that she respected Trump because he “always speaks his mind.”
Also joining the jury is a 40-year-old from the Lower East Side who said Trump was “fascinating and mysterious.”
“He walks into a room, and he sets people off one way or another,” the IT consultant said. “I find that really interesting. Really, this one guy can do all of this. Wow, that’s what I think.”
On potential juror was rejected for having posted in 2017 on Facebook, “Good news!! Trump lost his court battle on his unlawful travel ban!!!”
He added, “Get him out, lock him up.”
Joshua Steinglass, a prosecutor, asked if the man still thinks Trump should be locked up.
The man drew a smirk from Trump when he replied that he no longer thinks so.
Judge Juan Merchan was irritated once with Trump and warned Trump’s attorney Todd Blanche that Trump mumbled something toward a potential juror “12 feet away from your client.”
“Your client was audibly uttering something,” the judge said. “I don’t know what he was uttering …”
“I won’t tolerate that. I won’t have any jurors intimidated in this courtroom. I will be crystal clear,” he said.
Question: If Merchan didn’t know what Trump said — per his own words — how could he decide Trump was trying to intimidate a potential juror?
Four Medications the Government Tried to Restrict During COVID and How to Legally Get Them
The following content was sponsored by The Wellness Company on the original site, BREITBART.
Just a few years ago, it would have been unthinkable that our government would ever try to restrict access to certain drugs. The COVID-19 pandemic, however, opened our eyes to just how far our government would go to line the pockets of Big Pharma.
Here are four critical medications that might have been hard to get during the pandemic due to pressure from the government and big medicine:
1. IVERMECTIN
Nobel-prize winning medicine demonized as “horse medicine” by the mainstream media and the FDA, Ivermectin is on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines.
Depositphotos
2. HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE
An antiviral that has been used for 50 years for the treatment of various diseases, Hydroxychloroquine was smeared by the left and medical establishment after President Donald Trump advocated for it.
Depositphotos
3. GENERIC Z-PAK
One of the most commonly prescribed antibiotics in history, Z-Pak is also a key component in early treatment protocols and thus came under fire by some in our crooked medical establishment.
Depositphotos
4. BUDESONIDE
Budesonide is an inhaled corticosteroid breathing treatment used to reduce inflammation in the airways and lungs.
Depositphotos
Access to all of these critical prescription medications were limited or restricted, making them difficult for suffering Americans to get.
2024 is the year to be prepared.
We know what the globalists did in 2020, and we know they will do whatever they can to maintain power, which makes 2024 a potentially very dangerous year for Americans.
Warning: The following is their advertisement if not interested, stop here.
Unlike 2020, you don’t have to be caught unprepared, and that’s where the Wellness Company comes in.
The Wellness Company and its great doctors – like Dr. Peter McCullough, Dr. Drew, Dr. Harvey Risch, and Dr. Jim Thorp – are regularly in the media fighting against the broken medical establishment.
Dr. Thorp, one of the nation’s leading critics of corrupt Big Pharma, believes that now – more than ever – people should be prepared for the next pandemic:
I’ve strongly recommended “stockpiling” critical medications including antibiotics since the turn of the century. This has been an incredible investment as many friends, family, and patients have benefited. Now, in the winter of 2024, this recommendation is even more crucial.
This kit is prescription-only – you can’t find it in any store or pharmacy. Simply fill out a short questionnaire after purchase and a trusted Wellness Company doctor will confirm your suitability and issue your prescription, Contagion Kit.
This is the perfect emergency kit at the perfect price. Every home should have this for peace of mind. – Rebecca B.
This is absolutely great! I encourage everyone to buy one of these for emergencies!! – Melody H.
Peace of mind. It is an amazing peace of mind to have this kit in case of emergencies and shortages. The Wellness Company did an excellent job of getting this to me in a timely manner and I and thankful to have it. – Phyllis T.
Don’t be caught unprepared for whatever 2024 sends your way!