Overview of False Claims Case against Pfizer

Overview of False Claims Case against Pfizer - full video pic.twitter.com/BrsuBgoQwg

— Brook Jackson 💜 (@IamBrookJackson) November 23, 2022

So what happens when you file a False Claims Act is you're a whistleblower who has seen the American people scammed and you file a claim in court under the False Claims Act, the federal law, and on behalf of the people that they've been scammed. Now, what the law allows is for the U.S. government to take over the case if they want, and in that aim if the government takes over the case and they say, "Oh this is a credible case, there's a legal grounds here,  we need time to investigate in secret, and so we don't want the defendant to know that we're investigating.  So Judge, seal everything." Now critics have pointed out that one of the great dangers of this is that the government, particularly in cases where they may be culpable and complicit themselves, government bureaucrats, officials, and agents themselves in the corruption that's being exposed, to use the seal process to hide from the public the information the whistleblower has.  What happened here is that Brook Jackson filed her claim, fall of 2020, before all the vaccines start rolling out and hitting everybody around the globe.  The government comes in, Justice Department says, "Oh, this is a serious case.  Judge, you need to seal all this.  We need time to investigate in secret." They do this for more than a year.  Supposedly they're investigating during this time frame.  Then the government decides we're not going to intervene in the case.  We'll let Brooke Jackson's lawyers take lead.  So Pfizer comes in and says, "Judge please, please, please, don't allow any discovery." And after the judge says, "Oh, I'm not going along with that.  I'm going to allow discovery," Pfizer then comes back and begs again, complains about Barnes making statements in the court of public opinion about what's going on and about Brooke Jackson making public statements, and all of a sudden the judge says, "Oh, we got to shut this down, this discovery, for the time being." But despite that, okay, it is what it is, the judge says he's only going to rule on the merits.  I take him at his word.  Pfizer files a motion to dismiss.  We file our response.  Their whole argument was that the government would have given us the $2 billion bucks anyway.  It doesn't matter if we broke every clinical trial rule in the book even though these rules and regulations are about making sure that this drug is safe, effective, and an actual vaccine that inoculates against the transmission of a disease.  2:26. What Brook Jackson witnessed was that the clinical trials were a joke, one big fat fraud. Pfizer didn't abide any of the core principles for safety, efficacy, or the drug being a vaccine. So she had information that was explosive, that the world was involved in this mass medical experiment according to former President, Barack Obama's own words, were entitled to know.  But she wasn't allowed to discuss the case because the U.S. government had sealed it under the pretext that they were investigating because they thought it was a legitimate case.  So we file our opposition to their motion to dismiss and say "Look, the whole purpose why the government wrote a $2 billion dollar check to Pfizer was because they believed Pfizer had complied with all the rules and regulations that are the metric to measure whether the drug is safe, whether it's effective, and whether it's actually a vaccine that inoculates against disease. So, saying that they would have written the check for an unsafe, dangerous, ineffective drug that doesn't actually work as a vaccine is ludicrous, but that's Pfizer's defense.  Apparently, somebody in the government got nervous, that we were going to win our off-miss and finally get discovery that Pfizer has been busy hiding from the world.  What happens?  At the last minute, the government files something that I've never seen in a Qui Tam case, meaning False Claims Case, in history.  The government comes in and says "Oh, we agree with Pfizer.  There's no legal grounds for this case."  So either the government was lying to the court, making the court complicit in cover-up and fraud, on a massive global scale, or there's been a sudden shift in the Biden Administration from where the case started out.  Now apparently, the local District Attorney that's on this case has a personal relationship with or knows the judge. So that has a whole set of other issues being implicated.  But clearly, Pfizer pulled out all the stops.  Biden Administration pulled out all the stops.  They are begging the court to not allow this case to proceed to discovery, not allow this case to proceed to trial, which they would never had done if they thought that Pfizer was actually legally right.  And they're implicitly, and it suggests, the U.S. government, the Justice Department, or the Biden Administration was misleading the court, misleading Brook Jackson, in saying they were investigating this case, because if they really believe it never had legal merits, they should never have requested that the case be sealed.  And it appears what they were really trying to do is that the Biden Administration at the top levels wanted to hide this information, misuse and abuse its power to request sealing.  5:10.  Make the court complicit in that by granting the sealing order.  The court's relying on the government's honesty and sincerity, which is now in serious doubt, so the world didn't know what Brook Jackson knew.  So it raises major questions about what the government and Biden Administration have been up to. Did the Biden Administration know about how dangerous this drug was?  How unsafe and ineffective it was?  About how it wasn't even a vaccine at all because it doesn't inoculate against anything really as the evidence continues to mount while they're trying to force this on young children as we speak?  Was the Biden Administration complicit in this massive fraud on the world?  But clearly, there's a lot of nervous Nellies in the Biden Administration.  They're terrified that if this case gets to discovery it will likely implicate high-ranking members of the Biden Administration in covering up one of the worst public health disasters in American, in world, history. 

6:11. Government says seal it, we're going to investigate.  The idea there being if Pfizer did, in fact, lie, or if the government said, "We're going to throw Pfizer under the bus now, they lied to us.  Give us back the $2 billion and we're going to go after you," that would be the smart way of covering their tracks unless the investigation would necessarily implicate government and government officials, in which case they would say "We've investigated ourselves.  We would have given the $2 billion to Pfizer regardless."

6:39. They're not even saying that.  They're saying "Judge, this is not a legal grounds to complain." They're saying "It doesn't matter whether Pfizer complied with rules or regulations but as a matter of law, this is not a False Claims Act," which makes no sense.  Why did you seal the proceedings then?  Why did you say that you were investigating it then?  If this on its face was legally, could not suffice to ever be a plausible claim, then you were lying to Brooke Jackson, you were lying to the court, and lying to the world to cover up Pfizer's corruption.  You just didn't want people to know at the time it mattered most how dangerous this drug was.  

7:17. What happens now?  Let's say hypothetically, well we know now, the government says 

"Please dismiss, please dismiss, please dismiss.  Don't allow any investigation to happen."

7:32. If they dismiss . . . if they dismiss, I mean Brooke Jackson has already gone public with her findings.  What has she not been allowed to publicly disclose iver the last tear? 

7:38. It was the time. She wasn't allowed to talk about the case at the time they were rolling out this vaccine.  It looks like the government deliberately misused and abused its power to seal to cover up a major scandal involving the government and involving Pfizer, involving this so-called vaccine that is not, in fact, a vaccine.  It doesn't inoculate. I mean the data keeps accumulating.  The vaccine is more dangerous to most people than COVID-19 is.  Period.  And now that they know that . . . but thet didn't want people to know that then.  How many people would be alive today?  How many people would not be disabled today had they known the information that Brook Jackson had and that she'd brought the case?