While Everyone Obsesses Over The #LockdownFiles...

Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson gets her day in court

Every newspaper in Britain is currently gushing over what is being called the #lockdownfiles.

In short, The Telegraph has obtained 100,000 WhatsApp messages between former Health Secretary Matt Hancock and various other ministers, including then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson, that provide some behind-the-scenes insight into the pandemic response.

The thing is, they simply confirm what many of us have already come to suspect. Namely, ministers were keen to impose a heavy-handed approach using police to physically enforce lockdown, Hancock employed daft and negligent protection policies for care home residents, and despite Johnson knowing the low fatality rate, he went with a disastrous one-fits-all response anyway.

Other items of note include Hancock pushing the Evening Standard news editor, former Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, to spread panic so he could artificially inflate and thus “achieve” his Covid testing numbers promise. While a top Whitehall mandarin mocked holidaymakers for choosing to go on holiday and then complaining about being confined in Covid quarantine hotel rooms.

What they don’t contain is more telling - no mention of possible improper Midazolam administration, no reference to faulty PCR testing, no revelations on the pervasiveness of nudge units/spying, shutting down dissenters. Nor is there any insight into the jab authorisation process. The fact that the Telegraph is selectively releasing chosen snippets of the messages also reeks of damage control…

So government officials not only failed to act on sound science but delighted in the ill-found powers their approach gave them. Newsflash, we knew that.

Meanwhile, across the pond, Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson finally got her day in court.

The hearing was held before Trump-appointed U.S. District Judge Michael Truncale, in which he considered whether Brooke’s case against Pfizer should move into the discovery phase. Perhaps deliberately, Truncale allowed Pfizer’s attorneys to present oral arguments on motions to dismiss. This is not something he said he usually allows.

To stop Brooke’s lawyers from deposing their clients, attorneys for Pfizer, Ventavia Research Group, and ICON (Pfizer subcontractors used to conduct the original trials), audaciously argued that whether protocol violations occurred is beside the point. Since the government was made aware and granted EUA to their products anyway, it is not their fault.

Here is where the most interesting event occurred. Brooke’s lawyers contended the FDA authorised their jab before reviewing the information Brooke provided. You know, the information that alleges improper reportage of adverse events and a failure to keep trial participants blinded - the basic necessities needed to establish an accurate safety review.

From the court transcripts, what became clear is the defence attorneys did not want the focus to shift to Brooke’s specific allegations, but to the government’s inaction in dealing with them. When Judge Truncale asked them, hypothetically, “so if the FDA gets it wrong, they just get it wrong and we live with it?” to which they responded “Exactly”.

In other words, “the government sat on their arses that’s not our fault!”

They also relied on the technicalities outlined in Pfizer’s unique contract with the government. Per Pfizer’s written motion to dismiss, “the agreement was not a standard federal procurement contract, but rather a ‘prototype’ agreement executed pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2371b[.]…”. It further stipulated that “[contract’s Statement of Work] describes a ‘large scale vaccine manufacturing demonstration’ that imposes no requirements relating to Good Clinical Practices (‘GCP’) or related FDA regulations”.

In short, special rules apply to us because the government allowed them…

The U.S. government’s statement of support (for the case to be dismissed) issued back on October 4th 2022 mirrored similar sentiments. According to them, because Brook’s complaint “does not plead factual content to support a conclusion that compliance with the clinical trial protocol or regulations was necessary under the contract between Pfizer and the Army” it is of no consequence.

Now I’m no lawyer but to argue that a special little contract supersedes universal clinical trial laws and regulations seems laughable. It is a wonder why Truncale didn’t laugh them out of the room, particularly when Pfizer and co’s defence attorneys blamed the government for failing to react to their own apparent ineptitude.

Jackson, meanwhile, hopes the case will move forward so her lawyers can depose investigators at each clinical trial site and maybe even Dr Anthony Fauci himself.

Judge Truncale will reportedly rule on the motion to dismiss in the coming weeks.

In the interim, it looks like a blame game could be brewing…