reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Twenty percent of Americans did not take the COVID vaccine because it was not safe enough. The mRNA in the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines has been chemically modified to resist breakdown by enzymes. The mRNA and spike protein are found in the heart and brain, and the spike protein circulates in the blood for six to nine months post-vaccination. The speaker claims the lethal part of the virus circulates in the blood of vaccinated individuals, especially after boosters, and that it is a killer protein. The speaker asserts safety trumps efficacy and objects to claims that vaccines, specifically the COVID-19 vaccine, saved millions of lives. They state that consent forms do not guarantee the vaccine will save lives and that there has never been a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial showing that COVID-19 vaccines reduce mortality or hospitalization.

The speakers discuss a document released by court order in 2021, which analyzes adverse event reports related to Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine. They mention the large number of diagnoses during the preliminary phase of the study, expressing concern about the speed at which these diagnoses were made. They emphasize the importance of allowing individuals to choose whether or not to receive the vaccine, especially in the military. One speaker highlights the high number of adverse events associated with the vaccine, suggesting it indicates a significant safety issue. They explain that the vaccine is a genetic product that can affect every organ in the body, making it different from traditional medications. The speakers also mention the impact of vaccine mandates on healthcare workers and describe the militarization of public health.

Dr. Menares and an interlocutor debate the science behind pediatric COVID vaccination and routine immunizations, focusing on transmission, hospitalization, and risk. - The interlocutor asks whether the COVID vaccine prevents transmission. Speaker 1 answer: the vaccine can reduce viral load in individuals who are infected, and with reduced viral load, there is reduced transmission. The interlocutor reframes, insisting that the vaccine does not prevent transmission and notes decreasing effectiveness over time, citing Omicron data showing around 16% reduction when there is a reduction. - On hospitalization for children 18 and under: Speaker 0 asserts the vaccine does not reduce hospitalization for 18-year-olds; statistics are inconclusive due to small numbers of hospitalizations in that age group (approximately 76 million people aged 18 in the country, with 183 deaths and a few thousand hospitalizations in 2020–2021; numbers have since dropped). The argument emphasizes a need to discuss the issue. - On death for children 18 and under: Speaker 0 says the vaccine does not reduce the death rate; claims there is no statistical evidence that it reduces deaths. Speaker 1 responds with a more cautious stance: “It can,” but Speaker 0 counters, calling that an insufficient answer. - The discussion references the vaccine approval process and ongoing debates in vaccine committees. The interlocutor states that when the vaccine was approved for six months and older, the discussion acknowledged no proof of reduction in hospitalization or death. The argument asserts that the justification for vaccination is based on antibody generation rather than clear hospitalization/death data. The interlocutor contends that immunology measurements (antibody production) do not necessarily justify vaccination frequency. - The core debate centers on what the science supports for vaccinating six-month-olds and the benefits versus risks. The interlocutor argues there is no hospitalization or death benefit for vaccination in this age group, and notes a known risk of myocarditis in younger populations, estimated somewhere between six and ten per ten thousand, which the interlocutor claims is greater than the risk of hospitalization or death being measurable. - The exchange then shifts to changing the childhood vaccine schedule, particularly the hepatitis B vaccine given to newborns when the mother is not hepatitis B positive. The interlocutor asks for the medical or scientific reason to give a hepatitis B vaccine to a newborn with an uninfected mother, arguing that the discussion should focus on whether to change the schedule rather than declaring all vaccines as good or bad. - Speaker 1 says they agreed with considering the science and would not pre-commit to approving all ACIP recommendations without the science. Speaker 0 disagrees, asserting their position that the debate should center on the medical rationale for these specific vaccines and schedules, not on a blanket endorsement of vaccines. - Throughout, the dialogue emphasizes examining the medical reasons and evidence for specific vaccines and schedules, rather than broad generalizations about vaccines.

In 1986, the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act removed liability from drug companies for vaccine-related injuries. Recently, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the COVID vaccine is not a true vaccine as it doesn't prevent disease or transmission. This could open up legal challenges against pharmaceutical companies, though the government may protect them. The outcome remains uncertain.

Two physicians and a child health safety group filed a lawsuit against the CDC and the vaccine schedule, claiming '72 vaccines for children ages zero to 18 years old that has never been studied.' They say 'while we have studied each individual vaccine, they have never studied giving all of these vaccines together' and that 'the effects, the long term effects, never.' The suit asks to either 'study it' or 'change the category of vaccines.' They note that most vaccines are 'category a' while 'meningitis B and the COVID nineteen vaccine' are 'category b,' and they want all vaccines to be category b so that 'parents, exemptions, and physicians can work together to decide what's best for each child.' The CDC says 'we haven't studied it,' citing lack of nonvaccinating participants and cost. They say 'you get billions in funding' and question feasibility. The speaker invites thoughts and promises updates.

Speaker 0 describes a theory they’re exploring: every vaccine examined, and the patents and testimony from the Department of Energy, point to a 500,000-strong collection of bioweapons categories, including plague, HIV, anthrax. They claim all these bacteria and yeasts have been mutated and converted into a “hybrid gamma irradiated” form, advanced and radioactive, and that these are entering humanity. They say, regarding a nuclear stockpile, humanity itself becomes the host of these radioactive materials, since they are digital and can be activated to detonate a mass casualty event. Speaker 1 clarifies by restating the concern: they can create a pandemic at any moment by activating materials that have infiltrated our bodies. Speaker 0 adds that they have become involved in helping families legally; their law firm supports families because some school districts have become worse than during COVID, even though childhood vaccines are still largely recommended federally. They claim school districts and scientists are desperate to get these materials into children, with Catholic schools allegedly no longer honoring religious or medical exemptions. They describe children with severe reactions and contraindications being denied entry to schools, faced with truancy threats or expulsion. They insist there is nothing healing about these vaccines and call it an infiltration system necessary for AI to function properly. Speaker 1 mentions the U.S. allegedly cutting ties with the WHO, but says research by John Fleetwood shows the U.S. maintains relationships relating to vaccines and influenza, with substantial taxpayer funding. They assert that with a digital ID, one’s bank account can be cut off if they don’t get certain vaccines or comply to maintain the digital ID, arguing the agenda has continued and accelerated with AI. Speaker 0 adds that the WHO remains a standing organization but has been rebranded, and emphasizes that the United States is front and center in partnerships with the WHO. Speaker 1 introduces Biomems (biomedical microelectromechanical systems) as a subset of MEMS used in biomedical research and medical devices, noting that this has existed for years. They describe sensors under the skin that transmit data to pharmaceuticals or governments, not just pacemakers. They reference Albert Bourla, who stated that a pill has been designed to track compliance. Speaker 0 confirms: “They tell us what they're doing.”

They watched every meeting of the advisory committees in 2021–2023 when COVID shots were authorized. "the CDC's own research showed that the protection from the vaccine, if any, was between months two and six. And by six months, it showed negative efficacy." They assert, "The COVID shots have negative efficacy after six months" and question, "how a shot with negative efficacy is saving lives, and it has the worst side effect profile of any vaccine in human history." "So how exactly is a vaccine with the worst side effects and negative efficacy saving lives?" They claim, "What ended the COVID pandemic was the Omicron variant that was more transmissible but less lethal." They question, "the vaccine, how many people it helped? It could be a net negative." They cite trial data: "'twenty one people died in the in the vaccinated group and seventeen died in in the, placebo group.'"

"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."

Speaker 0 acknowledges reports of myocarditis and pericarditis associated with the Pfizer vaccine but seems unsure about the mechanism behind it. Speaker 1 asks if the vaccine was tested for its ability to stop virus transmission before being released. Speaker 2 questions if people were forced to get vaccinated to keep their jobs and asks Speaker 0 to retract their statement. Speaker 0 clarifies that everyone had the choice to get vaccinated or not, and they don't believe anyone was forced.

Over 100 million Americans were required to get vaccinated due to job mandates. The government claimed vaccines were safe and effective, but data showed vaccinated people could still carry the virus. Despite promises of freedom, there have been 1 million adverse events reported from COVID-19 vaccines, with only 11 compensated cases. Big Pharma has immunity from liability for vaccine injuries.

The transcript presents a critical examination of Bill Gates, portraying him as transforming from a software magnate into a global health power broker whose wealth and influence have reshaped public health, vaccine development, and population policy. It argues that Gates’ philanthropic activities are not purely charitable but are deployed to extend control over health systems, global research agendas, and even the reproductive choices of people worldwide. Key claims and points are detailed across several strands: - Public image and power shift: Bill Gates is described as no longer a “public health expert” yet becoming a central figure in billions of lives, guiding medical actions and vaccine strategies. The program asserts that Gates’ reinvention through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has been aided by a sophisticated public relations apparatus and by directing media coverage of global health issues. - Foundation scale and reach: The Gates Foundation is depicted as the world’s largest private foundation, with assets reported as tens of billions of dollars and a broad remit in global health, development, growth, and policy advocacy. Its influence extends to funding media outlets, think tanks, and reporting units across multiple outlets (BBC, NPR, Our World in Data, ABC, among others), creating what the program calls “tentacles” across global health. - Partnerships and funding of global health initiatives: Gates is credited with initiating and funding major global health vehicles, including: - Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, with seed funding and ongoing commitments that have shaped vaccination markets. - The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, and other public-private partnerships that coordinate vaccine development and immunization programs. - Support for CEPI (Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations), the World Health Organization’s vaccine initiatives, and other pandemic preparedness efforts. - The World Health Organization’s funding profile, described as heavily dependent on Gates Foundation support, with Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus noted as a non-medical doctor connected to Gates-backed initiatives. - The “Decade of Vaccines” and vaccine policy: Gates is credited with launching a decade-long vaccine initiative, including a pledge of billions of dollars to vaccine development and distribution. This is linked to the creation of a global vaccine action plan and to Gavi’s role in establishing vaccine markets. The narrative asserts that vaccines have been used to steer global health policy and to secure roles for private firms in public health decision-making. - Vaccine development concerns: The program raises concerns about the safety and speed of vaccine development, criticizing the eighteen-month timeline Gates advocates for a universal vaccine, and questioning the use of new technologies (DNA and mRNA platforms) and rapid deployment with limited testing. It highlights potential safety risks, including historical vaccine-associated disease enhancement and concerns about broad immunization in a short period. - Vaccine safety and regulation: It is claimed that vaccine safety at scale is hard to guarantee and that liability protections for vaccine makers and public health officials have been enacted (e.g., a U.S. declaration granting liability immunity for COVID-19 countermeasures), a point framed as enabling risk-bearing without accountability. - Population control framing: A central thread is the assertion that Gates seeks to reduce population growth through health improvements, vaccines, and reproductive health services. The transcript traces Gates’ interest in contraception and population issues to his family background and to Rockefeller-era eugenics historical contexts, arguing that discussions about fertility, contraceptive technologies, and demographic trends have long-term population implications. It cites specific Gates Foundation activities in reproductive health, including funding for innovative birth-control delivery methods, depot injections, implanted devices, and efforts to develop digital identity tied to health services as tools within a broader population-control framework. - Digital identity and biometric ID: The narrative emphasizes Gates’ involvement with biometric identification through Gavi and ID2020, noting partnerships with Microsoft and the Rockefeller Foundation, the Aadhaar system in India, and the World Bank’s ID4D initiative. It argues that vaccination programs, biometric identity, and cashless payments are being integrated into a comprehensive “population control grid,” enabling state and private actors to track, truncate, or deny access to services based on identity and health status. - Data, surveillance, and privacy concerns: The piece contends that the push for digital IDs, digital health records, and biometrics will erode privacy and enable broad government and corporate surveillance, linking health data to financial services, voting, housing, and welfare. It highlights projects involving digital certificates, immunity passports, and real-time health data collection via microneedle patches and barcode-like skin markers, suggesting these innovations could be used to control access to services. - Epstein connections and broader conspiracy context: The program references alleged connections between Gates and Jeffrey Epstein, including flight logs and involvement in philanthropic funding discussions, framing these ties as part of a broader pattern of influence. It also points to prior associations with notable figures (Buffett, Rockefeller, Soros) and critiques of Gates as aligning with a “population control” ideology. - The underlying motive and conclusion: Throughout, the narrative asserts that Gates’ wealth is being used not for charity alone but to build an overarching system of control—over health institutions, research funding, public policy, identification, and financial systems. It contrasts his public image as a generous philanthropist with alleged hidden agendas, suggesting that the real aim is to shape global governance and human behavior through vaccination, identification, and digital infrastructure. - Final framing and call to action: The closing sections urge viewers to recognize Gates’ influence as part of an ideology rather than a single person’s plan. It frames the situation as a broader movement that could continue beyond Gates personally, urging awareness and action to resist what the program deems a population-control regime embedded in global health and digital identity initiatives. In sum, the transcript portrays Bill Gates as a central figure driving a multifaceted, globally interconnected program—through the Gates Foundation, Gavi, CEPI, and related partnerships—that allegedly reconfigures vaccine policy, global health governance, reproductive health, biometric identification, and digital payments into a cohesive system of population control and surveillance, using philanthropy as a veneer for power and control.

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.

Laura Logan hosts a discussion with Dr. Sherri Tenpenny on vaccines, public health policy, and what they see as failures and harms within the system. The conversation weaves together personal history, policy details, scientific debates, and broader social concerns, intercut with promotional content for GiveSendGo. Key points and claims raised by Dr. Tenpenny - Vaccine ingredients and aluminum exposure: Tenpenny asserts that if someone receives every vaccine on the schedule, they would be injected with a total of about twelve thousand micrograms of aluminum, which she says is inflammatory to every organ system and can be stored in bones (60% of aluminum exposure). She notes aluminum is present in vaccines in order to replace mercury, which she describes as also a poison. - Early vaccine industry liability and the 1986 Act: The discussion explains that prior to 1986 there were liability concerns for vaccine makers due to injury lawsuits. Tenpenny recounts that in 1986 Congress passed a law giving the pharmaceutical industry liability immunity for vaccines, creating what she describes as a ramp in the vaccine schedule. She cites that by 1991 additional vaccines were introduced (Hep B at birth, Hib, chickenpox, Prevnar, Gardasil, Hep A, and more) and alleges this resulted in a rising autism incidence aligned with new vaccines. - The vaccine injury system: Tenpenny explains the Injury Compensation Act and the existence of VAERS as a tracking system, along with a separate pathway created under the PREP Act (the Preparedness and Readiness Act). She states that during the COVID era a separate program, the Covered Countermeasure Program (CICP), existed under the PREP Act, but it had no funding and a one-year statute of limitations, leading to under-compensation and very few adjudicated cases; she contrasts this with the earlier 1986 act, which funded vaccine injury compensation through the Federal Court of Claims and VAERS. - Perceived safety and effectiveness concerns: The speakers discuss studies suggesting that the flu shot might not prevent flu and that some studies indicate vaccines including pneumonia vaccines may be associated with higher risk of the conditions they aim to prevent. Tenpenny frames this as evidence of cracks in the vaccine program and argues that vaccines are linked to a broad spectrum of health issues, including autoimmune diseases, infertility, and cancers, which she says have been increasing. - Pediatric vaccination schedule and “pediatric poisoning program”: Tenpenny asserts that infants receive multiple injections early in life, with claims that by age two they will have thousands of micrograms of aluminum and other compounds that remain in the body, including in the brain. She characterizes the pediatric schedule as a systematic poisoning program for children and a parallel “adult assault program” for adults receiving vaccines. - COVID-19 vaccine controversy and health impacts: The conversation covers the COVID vaccines, including assertions about adverse effects such as myocarditis, strokes, kidney injury, autoimmune diseases, neurological issues, and cancers. Tenpenny describes long-term concerns (long COVID, autoimmune diseases) and claims of widespread injury and death, contending that the pandemic revealed how the health-care and pharmaceutical systems operate, including alleged corruption and profit motives. She discusses the difficult experiences of families during the pandemic, including restrictions on care and the use of alternate treatments like ivermectin in some cases. - The claim that COVID vaccines were not properly evaluated and that mandated vaccination reflected coercion: The speakers discuss mandates and the experiences of individuals in workplaces and educational institutions who faced pressure to receive vaccines, including religious exemptions and disputes about mandates. Tenpenny suggests a broader pattern of overreach in public health policy and questions about the balance between individual rights and mandates. - History and philosophy of public health programs: They discuss the Healthy People initiatives, arguing that the program’s goals have expanded in scope (from 15 goals to 1,200 for Healthy People 2030) and that the expansion is associated with greater surveillance and control over personal lives. Tenpenny claims that this is part of a broader trend toward data collection and governance of individual health and behavior. - The economics and incentives around vaccines: The conversation notes how physicians are compensated in part through vaccine administration, implying financial incentives influence clinical decisions. Tenpenny emphasizes the profit motive behind vaccines and the pharmaceutical industry’s financial interests, citing extreme examples like the one boy in a photo who allegedly became heavily medicated due to vaccines. - The role of media and information control: They discuss the influence of advertising in media since the 1990s and the difficulty of reporting critically on vaccines when major advertisers are pharmaceutical companies. They also mention AI and misinformation concerns, including examples of AI fabricating sources and the need to verify information. - Personal stakes, accountability, and political possibilities: Tenpenny discusses personal cost for challenging the vaccine paradigm, including an earlier period of potential licensing scrutiny and professional pushback. She names figures such as Fauci and Birx, argues that accountability has not yet occurred, and expresses hope that public interest in accountability could shift through advocacy and political leadership, citing RFK Jr. as a potential ally though acknowledging political and institutional obstacles. - Treatment and detoxification approaches: For those who have already received vaccines, Tenpenny outlines two separate tracks: detoxification for childhood vaccines and detox for COVID vaccines. For detox, she mentions products such as PureBody Extra (PBX), a zeolite-based supplement she says helps remove metals like aluminum and mercury from the body. She notes it is usable across age groups and even for pets, and she personally uses it. She also discusses non-specific detox approaches such as vitamin D optimization, lymphatic stimulation, exercise, and a diet focusing on avoiding white foods and reducing inflammation. She cautions that there is no proven blood or urine test to quantify spike protein after a COVID vaccine, and that detox strategies aim to support overall health rather than remove embedded spike protein from tissues. - The role of faith and resilience: The interview includes discussions of faith as a guiding force for Tenpenny, including her personal journey toward Christian faith in 2020. They reflect on fear, hope, forgiveness, and the idea that one can act with integrity and do the right thing even when faced with controversy or personal cost. They discuss existential questions about meaning, purpose, and moral responsibility, including the belief that life has a spiritual dimension that informs how to respond to public-health challenges. - Community and parenting: The conversation emphasizes the importance of community networks for new parents, including seeking mentorship from experienced parents and trusted health advocates, and maintaining parental agency in decisions about vaccines, medical interventions, and child-rearing. They discuss the value of critical thinking, asking questions, and avoiding blind trust in professionals or institutions. - Closing notes and resources: Tenpenny provides her websites and a Substack for ongoing information, including dr10penny.com, dr10penny.substack.com, and 10pennywalkwithgod.substack.com, as well as her X profile busy doctor t. The episode closes with a call to viewers to stay informed and to seek second opinions, while thanking the audience for supporting independent journalism. Overall, the dialogue centers on a critical, conspiratorial framing of vaccines, public-health policy, and the medical establishment; it weaves together testimonies about personal experience, policy history (notably the 1986 Act and the PREP Act), alleged systemic failures in compensation for vaccine injuries, criticisms of COVID-19 responses and vaccine mandates, and practical detoxification and faith-based guidance. The promotional content for GiveSendGo lightly interrupts the core discussion, but the majority of the exchange remains an extended argument about vaccine safety, accountability, and the perceived influence of big pharma on health care and public policy.

The Queensland Supreme Court ruled COVID-19 vaccine mandates for emergency services were unlawful. Dr. Nick Coatsworth, a medical expert, acknowledged his role in promoting mandates but believes they were wrong. He stated mandates have a time limit in a pandemic, and we should reconsider their use in the future. Hindsight should guide our decisions for future pandemics.

The speaker questions whether OSHA has the authority to mandate vaccinations for 84 million Americans. Speaker 1 mentions that the Supreme Court has ruled on the matter. Speaker 0 criticizes Speaker 1 as an unelected bureaucrat, stating they cannot force people to take an experimental vaccine or show their papers. Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of attempting to fire 84 million workers and asks if they believe the court was wrong. Speaker 1 acknowledges that the court's decision is final. Speaker 0 quotes Speaker 1's statement to Reuters, where they express disappointment with the ruling but state that they will continue to encourage employers to implement safety measures.

The speaker states vaccinations are free, safe, and convenient, and over 200,000,000 Americans have at least one shot. They express impatience with those refusing vaccination. One speaker equates being anti-mandate with being anti-vaxx, regardless of personal vaccination status. They reject the idea of unvaccinated teachers in classrooms with children who cannot be vaccinated. An Austrian newspaper allegedly published rules stating unvaccinated individuals could be fined up to €2,000 multiple times a day, with refusal leading to imprisonment for up to a year in separate prisons. Another speaker claims the unvaccinated are heroes who served as a control group, highlighting vaccine shortcomings. They assert that health experts and political leaders aimed to make life unlivable for the unvaccinated, and society scapegoated them. They blame leaders and health experts, but also individuals who participated in the persecution. They state that vilifying the unvaccinated was wrong and driven by a desire to blame someone for ineffective lockdowns. They express gratitude for the unvaccinated, whose courage exposed rising authoritarianism.

"Let me just say that the reason that I started Health Freedom Defense Fund was because, you know, going way back, I'd been in the Health Freedom space for twenty five years now or twenty years at that point." "And so I founded Health Freedom Defense Fund because I wanted to be able to fight back." "the biggest case, the first huge case that we won well, first, we stopped the Los Angeles Unified School District from mandating the EUA shot for their employees in March 2021." "The day after we filed it, they rescinded their mandate and said, oh, it wasn't really a mandate. It was just a suggestion."

There was a lack of transparency about vaccine side effects, leading to underreporting. Mandating vaccines was a mistake; personal choice should have been allowed since they don't prevent infection and have side effects. Translation: Lack of transparency and underreporting of side effects, along with mandating vaccines, were mistakes. Personal choice should have been allowed due to the vaccines not preventing infection and having side effects.

Speaker 1 states that no vaccines, including the COVID vaccine, have been properly tested. They claim that no childhood vaccine has undergone a placebo-controlled clinical trial of sufficient duration and power to assess its safety before being injected into millions of children in America. Speaker 1 asserts this is not an opinion, but can be verified by anyone reviewing package inserts and clinical trial documents on the FDA website.

Pfizer's claim of 96% efficacy for their vaccine was questioned. The study and data were not independently verified, and Pfizer wanted to keep the data hidden for 75 years. The true effectiveness of the vaccine, based on absolute risk reduction, is less than 1%. More people died and were harmed in their trials compared to the placebo group. The vaccine's safety was questionable from the start, and it is not effective. Additionally, appropriate studies were not conducted for new variants.

A New York state judge ruled that 10 employees fired by the New York City Department of Education for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine must be reinstated with back pay. The judge found that the city's denial of religious exemptions to certain teachers was unconstitutional and arbitrary. The judge stated that there was no rational basis for not allowing unvaccinated teachers among primarily unvaccinated students. The judge also referenced Mayor Eric Adams' lifting of the vaccine mandate for some private employees, suggesting that the mandate for public workers was arbitrary. Many workers lost their jobs for not adhering to the mandate. The ruling provides hope for those seeking justice through the courts.

Pfizer knew a month into the rollout, November 2020, that this vaccine did not work to stop COVID. Everything that followed—the mandates, the lost jobs, the closures, children not allowed back to school if they didn’t take the shot, the armed forces compelled to take it, pilots compelled—was built on a lie of vaccine efficacy. The most common side effect of getting vaccinated is COVID, and Pfizer understood that the vaccine’s efficacy and vaccine failure showed it did not stop COVID. They also knew the injection did not stay in the deltoid. Europeans through the EMA and public health entities described side effects as chills, fever, fatigue, needing to lie down, but Pfizer knew that was a lie. In Pfizer documents, charts show that the materials—the spike protein, the mRNA, the lipid nanoparticles, and polyethylene glycol—biodistribute within forty-eight hours and leave the injection site to biodistribute to major organs throughout the body, crossing the blood-brain barrier. This may have contributed to personality changes in some loved ones who took the injection. They also accumulate in the liver, the adrenals, the spleen, the lymphatic system, and in women, the ovaries. The first injection accumulates in ovaries; the second injection more so. Experts could not find any mechanism whereby this material left the body in either gender. By the first booster, surgeries on vaccinated women reported fully blocked ovaries, among other damage. Pfizer knew that. They also hired 2,400 full-time staff to process reports of serious adverse events, starting to receive them during the 2020-2021 period. In Pfizer documents, over forty-two thousand serious adverse events were tallied from November 2020 to February 2021, with many individuals experiencing multiple events. The top documented side effects included myalgia (muscle pain), followed by joint pain, then COVID itself, and then a catastrophic tally of serious side effects including heart damage (myocarditis, pericarditis), problems with the aorta, thrombotic events (blood clots in various locations), neurological events (tremors, Guillain-Barré, dementia, epilepsy-like seizures), autoimmune disorders, and eye damage including blindness. Reproductive damage was noted: miscarriages and other issues. Twelve hundred deaths in three months were recorded as not statistically random; they were old with prior conditions, yet doctors noted causality concerns and recorded them. Pfizer knew by April 2021 that minors were injured by the vaccine, specifically myocarditis and pericarditis. Minors sustained heart damage, with thirty-five minors affected. The Israeli Ministry of Health warned the CDC and the Biden administration about minor heart damage, but FOIA requests later showed active conversations up to the White House regarding myocarditis in minors. Instead of withdrawing or advising parents, a 17-page document was produced as a script to persuade parents to vaccinate their minors, supplemented by a TikTok influencer campaign encouraging young people to get injected. These communications indicated that kids would sustain deadly heart damage, and still proceeded. Senator Ron Johnson is using the work to unredact those documents and hold hearings about the cover-up. Pfizer knew all of these things.

None of the vaccines, including the COVID vaccine, have undergone proper testing. No childhood vaccine has completed a placebo-controlled clinical trial with sufficient duration and power to confirm its safety before being administered to millions of children in America. This is not an opinion; it can be verified by anyone visiting the FDA website, where the package inserts and clinical trial documents are available for review.

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.