TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker discusses the CDC leadership, confirming 'we let go of Susan Menarie yesterday' and that the agency is 'a very troubled for a very long time' with 'bizarre recommendations that were not science based' during the COVID pandemic. They say 'Go to the website. Look at it. Fluorination, giving kids a toxin, and vaccines.' They add, 'There's a lot of trouble at CDC, and it's going to require getting rid of some people over the long term in order for us to change the institutional culture and bring back pride and self esteem and make that agency the stellar agency that it's always been.' They conclude, 'I'm very confident in the political staff that we have down there now that they're gonna be able to accomplish that and and ensure the competent functionality of that agency.'

The speaker questions Dr. Fauci's support for institutions pressuring people to get vaccinated. They criticize the impact on individuals' lives, citing examples of job loss due to vaccine mandates. The speaker accuses Dr. Fauci of instilling fear through mandates and closures, eroding trust in public health institutions. They emphasize the importance of individual freedoms and decision-making in healthcare. The speaker challenges Dr. Fauci's approach and its long-term consequences on society.

The speaker claims that Pfizer documents reveal evidence of a crime against humanity. They state that Pfizer knew the vaccines didn't work to stop COVID just one month after rollout and that the vaccines had vaccine failure and failure of efficacy. The speaker also highlights that Pfizer was receiving numerous reports of adverse events and had to hire staff to process the paperwork. They argue that the vaccines caused heart damage and other severe side effects, and that the materials in the vaccines biodistribute throughout the body, including the brain and ovaries. The speaker suggests that this is a deliberate bioweapon attack by the Chinese Communist Party and calls for justice.

The speaker claims Pfizer committed the greatest crime against humanity in recorded history due to the scale and foreknowledge of harm. She states Pfizer knew within a month of the vaccine rollout in November 2020 that it didn't work to stop COVID, referring to internal language describing "vaccine failure" and "failure of efficacy." She claims the 3rd most common side effect in the documents is COVID. According to the speaker, mandates, job losses, family separations, deaths, injuries, and sterilizations were based on a lie. The speaker asserts that society was destroyed, children's education was ruined, depression and suicide levels increased, and businesses were destroyed, all based on a lie, resulting in a massive transfer of wealth.

The speaker expresses frustration about not being able to return to work despite the vaccine mandate being lifted. They explain that fired workers can reapply for their previous positions but must sign away their rights and may still be denied their jobs. The speaker highlights their dedication as a teacher, working through the pandemic while pregnant and prioritizing their students. They mention being fired without due process for declining the vaccine. They also raise concerns about the hidden data on vaccine side effects, such as blood clots, strokes, reproductive issues, and excessive mortality. The speaker concludes by stating that no one should have to choose between their livelihood and a potentially dangerous vaccine, and calls for an apology for all employees affected by the mandate.

The speaker expresses their belief that the federal government is controlled by corporate interests and urges people to stop taking COVID vaccines, claiming they are toxic, lethal, and ineffective. They argue that vaccines cause damage to the brain, heart, liver, and bone marrow. They blame organizations like the CDC, FDA, and medical societies for spreading misinformation that leads to death and injury, particularly among pregnant women and unborn babies. The speaker warns about the unknown long-term effects of vaccines and advises against taking any more doses or boosters. They refer to the vaccines as dangerous experimental treatments.

"we sued them twice in 2021 because first, we sued them over mandating the shot when it was EUA." "The case is no longer ripe. We're not gonna deal with it. We're dismissing the case." "Seventeen days later, LAUSD implemented a new mandate saying that employees could not test, and it fired a couple of weeks later, 500 employees." "we argued that the shots do not stop transmission or infection, and we knew this because CDC said that in 2021. CMS confirmed that in I believe it was October 2021." "All that mattered was that there was a public health emergency." "We can appeal to the Supreme Court, and so we're considering." "It's worthwhile because that's a precedent that other lawsuits are going to follow, that it doesn't matter that the vaccine doesn't stop spread."

New York City had 9,000,000 residents, most of whom were forced to vaccinate, resulting in medical consequences and job losses for many. People were unable to bury their grandparents or attend to their parents. The speaker alleges that one individual was partying while mandating these measures. The speaker demands an investigation and believes Mayor Adams had the opportunity to undo the actions of the de Blasio administration by compensating those who lost their jobs and drawing the appeal.

Good evening, mayor. Tony Ann here. You mentioned it's un-American to stop migrants from working. Many NYC employees lost jobs due to vaccines. Why fight us in court? It's not about vaccines anymore. Why keep fighting thousands of us still unemployed?

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss a set of legal actions taken by Health Freedom Defense Fund against the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) over COVID-19 vaccination mandates. - Health Freedom Defense Fund sued LAUSD in 2021 over an EUA vaccine mandate. They claim the district initially had a mandate, then appeared to repeal it, leading the court to dismiss that case as no longer ripe. Seventeen days after the dismissal, LAUSD implemented a new mandate stating employees could not test and subsequently fired a number of employees, with more than a thousand affected in total. Many faced loss of pensions, seniority, and employment. - A second lawsuit was filed in November 2021 arguing that the vaccines do not stop transmission or infection, a position the group says was supported by statements from the CDC in 2021 and by CMS in October 2021. Based on this, they argued that the vaccines are a private matter and should be treated as therapeutic rather than a public health issue. They also asserted that natural immunity is real and that Jacobson v. Massachusetts does not apply because the smallpox vaccination was assumed to be safe and effective only under historical conditions, which they argue do not hold for COVID-19. - The group reports strong initial success. Their argument won at first instance, and they achieved a favorable ruling on appeal before a three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit. This led to an en banc review (broader panel) of the Ninth Circuit. Although typically taking many months, the en banc decision came after three months, and on July 31, the Ninth Circuit ruled against them. The court stated that what mattered was the existence of a public health emergency, rather than whether the vaccine stopped transmission or infection. The group contends this is a dangerous precedent and maintains that COVID-19 is not the same as smallpox, which had a 30 percent death rate; they reasoned that by August 2021, four percent of Los Angeles County residents had already been exposed and recovered, indicating the situation did not constitute the same emergency as smallpox. - The group notes that an appeal to the Supreme Court may be possible, and they are considering pursuing it. They emphasize that the court’s decision focused on the public health emergency rather than vaccine effectiveness against transmission or infection, which they argue is a troubling position. - The speakers discuss the potential implications and the perceived terrifying precedent, with the possibility of further appeals to higher courts being contemplated.

The speaker questions Dr. Fauci's stance on making it difficult for people to live without getting vaccinated. They criticize the impact on individuals' ability to work, travel, and make medical decisions. The speaker accuses Dr. Fauci of instilling fear through mandates and school closures, eroding trust in public health institutions. This fear is seen affecting education and the economy, with long-lasting consequences.

The speaker claims the medical landscape is dominated by COVID vaccine injuries, disabilities, and deaths, and that they submit multiple entries daily to VAERS, facing scrutiny and potential penalties for falsification. They state they diagnosed an executive in her late thirties with Guillain Barre syndrome from COVID-19 vaccination. The speaker estimates that only 1% of manuscripts on COVID vaccine injuries are being published, suggesting a tremendous bias, and that there are about 4,000 papers on the vaccine debacle, which is about 1% of reality. They claim to have never seen myocarditis, heart failure, or blood clots from eating frosted flakes, but are seeing people devastated by the shots. The speaker advocates for removing COVID-19 vaccines from the market, a critical reevaluation of the vaccine schedule, dropping all vaccine mandates, and rescinding the 1986 Vaccine Injury Compensation Act.

Deborah Brooks questioned the effectiveness of COVID-19 shots, despite millions of doses administered worldwide. The speaker believes it is now a crime and a cover-up, as the data has worsened since their book in December 2022. They express frustration over the ongoing mandates for vaccinations in universities and workplaces, as well as the UK's requirement for school children to get vaccinated. The speaker concludes that this situation is a joke, a crime, a cover-up, and even murder.

The speaker states they were fired in February 2023 for refusing to wear a mask at a job site, claiming they are "done playing COVID games." After refusing to mask up when instructed by the site foreman, the speaker was sent home with pay and told it was a "nonviral offense." In a subsequent meeting, the speaker reiterated their refusal to wear a mask, and the company allegedly shifted its stance, stating the refusal was a fireable offense. The speaker was terminated, their email was shut down, and the company is retrieving company property. The speaker believes the termination was unjust, citing the President's statement that "COVID is over." They intend to pursue legal options against Amplified Lifestyles, their former employer, for violating their "basic human rights." Despite considering the company like family, the speaker is willing to lose their job over the issue.

The speaker accuses the board of inaction regarding student bathroom policies and Title 9. They claim the board can allow girls to use the staff bathroom, but hasn't. The speaker's daughter doesn't want boys watching her in the bathroom, which the speaker deems inappropriate. The speaker alleges a board member admitted their public views differ from their personal ones, calling the board unfit. They criticize board members for claiming bathroom policies aren't their job. They warn of potential dangers if boys follow girls into bathrooms. The speaker proposes creating a new bathroom or using the staff bathroom for transgender students. The speaker challenges the board to allow them to watch the board members' wives use the bathroom to expose their hypocrisy. They accuse the board of being cowards, fearing loss of federal funding. They praise one board member for standing up for the people and kids.

The speaker questions President Biden and OSHA's plan regarding non-compliance with the vaccine mandate. Speaker 0 denies any threats or demands for firing. Speaker 1 denies forcing anyone to do anything, claiming lack of jurisdiction. Speaker 0 questions the effectiveness of mask mandates for 2-year-olds. Speaker 1 denies encouraging student vaccine mandates, despite evidence suggesting otherwise. The speaker criticizes officials for distorting facts and rewriting history. The administration is accused of abusing power and the Supreme Court's rebuke is mentioned. The speaker concludes by stating that the vaccine mandate is not actually a mandate.

The speaker claims the Biden administration covered up science related to the COVID shot. Information related to vaccine complications was allegedly censored as COVID vaccine hesitant content. The speaker alleges the heart inflammation in young, healthy men and boys was not disclosed as soon as it should have been, resulting in thousands of kids developing myocarditis unnecessarily. The speaker suggests the administration knew the shot didn't stop transmission but kept it secret. The head of the FDA is cited as saying the Biden administration suppressed information about myocarditis damage to children. The speaker believes this sounds criminal, especially considering mandates for school, work, and travel.

Speaker decries the use of vaccines and mandates, questioning why it was done. They claim, "these vaccines were not vaccines" and that "the messenger RNA vaccines of Pfizer and Moderna" caused "unbelievable problems and damage to people," and were "pushed into this" by Pfizer and Moderna. They state, "These were not vaccines. These were horrible gene therapies that could actually integrate into your genome," linking to a rise in "turbo cancers." They urge others to "stand up to trial, defend themselves, and go to court" and call it "Nuremberg trial stuff," alleging "incompetence" and "negligence," that "they were never ever effective" and that there was "no evidence that they were effective whatsoever" and "they were never ever safe."

The speaker criticizes the lack of media coverage and public sympathy for those who lost their jobs due to vaccine mandates and COVID-19 restrictions, contrasting it with the concern shown in a "60 Minutes" segment about recent job losses. The speaker claims that when 8,000 service members, healthcare workers, police officers, firefighters, and teachers were terminated for not getting vaccinated, and businesses closed due to COVID-19 restrictions, there was no similar outrage or extensive news coverage. The speaker states they were personally let go from their hospital for speaking out against tyranny and inflated COVID numbers. They highlight that those affected by mandates and restrictions did not receive severance packages, unlike the individuals featured on "60 Minutes." The speaker wants the same energy and concern directed towards those previously affected, potentially in the form of an apology or back pay.

Speaker 0 introduces a disturbing video about Brandy Vaughan, an ex Merck employee and whistleblower who founded learntherestisk.org, stating she was found dead yesterday. The video documents intimidation tactics used to silence her and ends with her claim that mandatory vaccinations are for profit, not public health. The speaker notes Merck is the vaccine company that makes the MMR vaccine and explains they screened the video due to censorship and disappearing videos, urging sharing to keep the fight going for Brandy. Speaker 1 identifies herself as Brandy Vaughan and explains she has been an activist opposing SB 277 in California and questions how rights have deteriorated. She describes herself getting heat for speaking out, and she documents intimidation tactics used against her to silence her voice. She recounts her background: she worked for Merck in Santa Barbara from 2001 to 2003 selling Vioxx, which was eventually pulled from the market after it was shown to double the risk of heart attack and stroke and cause harm. After losing faith in the healthcare system, she traveled to Europe, returned with a six-month-old son, and faced bullying at a pediatrician’s office in San Francisco when requesting vaccine inserts and questions about vaccines. Four years ago, she began researching vaccines, concluded they were not very safe or effective, and chose not to vaccinate her son. When SB 277 surfaced in California, she decided to raise her voice against it, knowing she would face heat. She then details a series of intimidation incidents beginning with a break-in and home intrusion after returning from a Sacramento rally against SB 277. A key left on the doorstep was found open, despite having been hidden previously. She had recently installed a $3,000 alarm system; the alarm was triggered at 03:45, then the hallway sensor active at 03:46, and the dining room window opened and closed at 03:48. The intruders allegedly re-entered via the front door at 03:49 after disarming the alarm with the master code, which only she possessed. Security experts suggested the house was tapped, implying that everything she says and does could be listened to or watched, and they noted the back window was opened during the incident. After the break-in, the police checked for stolen items, found nothing missing, but two days later her computer, hidden above the microwave, was moved from its hiding spot to the middle of the floor. She left town for two weeks to go off the grid. Upon returning, she found a ladder left in front of the door, used to look into the bedroom window from the garage; a neighbor confirmed the ladder was new. Later, a Buddha statue in the garage was moved from its usual place, pictures were knocked over, and two days after that a duck appeared on her kitchen table, which she interpreted as a message signaling they were watching her due to conversations about staying at her house. Vaughan describes these events as intimidation and fear-inducing. She reiterates that the intimidation is designed to silence discussion of mandatory vaccination bills, which she claims have nothing to do with public health and everything to do with profit. She vows not to be silenced, emphasizes the importance of exposing what’s going on behind the bills, and frames the events as part of a larger ongoing struggle. She concludes that there is evil at play and hopes documenting the intimidation will prevent future silencing of others.

A speaker named Audra accuses the board of being domestic terrorist child traffickers who allow fraud to enter the record and work with the county and CPS to unjustly remove children from their families. She asks if they have witnessed the terror of children being taken into county custody and accuses them of isolating families to enable child trafficking for profit. Evelyn states her two daughters, Malaika and Zaya, were taken due to postpartum, not abuse or neglect. She recounts an ER visit for her daughter's UTI and claims she is now being portrayed as the perpetrator. She pleads for her children's return, stating they are loved and were taken under the guise of domestic violence, despite her requests for help. Ricky Robinson, the grandfather, accuses San Diego County of conspiracy, retaliation, and child trafficking, holding the children hostage. He demands their immediate return. He claims the county is trying to adopt the children out, fabricating records and falsely accusing the family of being predators. Speakers accuse the board of torturing children and being complicit in their abuse within county custody. They believe the board seeks confidentiality to hide this abuse and will use additional funds to traffic children.

The speaker, recently retired from a local hospital, claims widespread disbelief in flu shots among colleagues due to data issues, stating "the efficacy and I won't give you data. You created the data. Ten percent one year, eighteen percent the next, forty percent at best." They describe the flu vaccine given to children aged two to eight for nearly four years as ineffective, with a claimed three percent efficacy at times. The speaker contrasts this with their hospital experience, where doctors, nurses, medical assistants, patient care, and lab staff did not believe in the flu shot, until mandates and recommendations arrived. They express relief at retirement, saying their soul was sick about what they witnessed, and that conflicts of interest prevented them from speaking out while employed. They recount working on high-volume ER days with about 300 flu cases daily and claim they never contracted the flu, attributing this to personal practices: washing hands, taking vitamin D, and using a berry syrup. The speaker criticizes the shift from physicians and nurses to pharmacists administering the vaccine, accuses the system of bribing people with Target gift cards and marketing the vaccine as free, and denounces scare tactics. They observe an increase in vaccination across generations, noting "some of you are my age," with their generation having seven shots, their daughter ten, her son around sixty, and their new grandson expected to receive seventy-two vaccines, expressing shock at this escalation. The speaker references Robert F. Kennedy Jr., saying he fights for them and goes to court for kids who suffered, noting that Kennedy's family started Special Olympics. They claim that in Kennedy’s view, autism linked to vaccines is evident since there were no autistic kids in the past four decades, and allege that vaccines have caused autism. They describe watching a perfectly healthy two-year-old become a "severe autistic child" after vaccination, expressing certainty that autism exists because of vaccines. They forecast their 10-year-old grandson becoming an adult who, at age 40, would be walking in the mall with a diaper and a helmet. The speaker ends by thanking studies they claim are not done and reiterates their stance against vaccines, including autism implications, as presented in the narrative.

The speaker discusses internal resistance to RFK Jr.’s policies and the idea that “deep staters” have been entrenched in government. They mention being forwarded an anecdote from a “good career employee.” They point to the FDA, noting that when Marty Makary came in, he had only about 10 political appointees he could choose. Jay Bhattacharya at the NIH allegedly had one political appointee. The speaker claims that every government employee is a “deep stater” who has been there a long time and that an email from a good employee circulates a CIA manual called How to Be a Bad Bureaucrat and Subvert an Institution from Within. The email supposedly asserts that 90% of employees at HHS, which has 70,000 employees, are talking in lunchrooms about the manual and telling each other that their job is to save America and save science from the agenda of President Trump and RFK Jr. The speaker asserts this reflects how people think across major departments and asks how to get rid of them, suggesting firing them as a solution, and mentions SIOP in this context. The CDC is presented as a case study of failure, described as a public health disaster in its COVID-19 response. The speaker alleges that the CDC’s guidance on school lockdowns copied directly from a teacher union document with which they were aligned, reproducing paragraphs from the teacher’s union advocating for two years of school shutdowns. It is claimed that the CDC also said that cloth masks were fine. The speaker says the CDC led the response and that the NIH funded the entire pandemic, including gain-of-function research, asserting that this constitutes “the creation of the pandemic.” In contrast, RFK Jr. is said to have fired three employees, and this action is described as national news. The overall narrative emphasizes a view of pervasive internal opposition within federal agencies, a controversial and sweeping critique of the CDC, NIH, and HHS responses to the pandemic, and a framing of RFK Jr.’s personnel decisions as transformative and newsworthy.

The speaker believes COVID vaccine programs should be stopped. They are astounded by the number of papers critical of the vaccine or showing negative effects. The speaker claims a group of researchers funded by Pfizer and the NIH bullies editors to retract papers with negative findings about the vaccine. They assert the number of retractions is appalling. According to the speaker, in one instance where an editor resisted, Nature Springer bought the journal and retracted the paper. The speaker states that this is what they have been dealing with.