Has the Covid-19 pandemic crossed to the wrong side of the law?

Under House Arrest as a Result of a Crime Committed by the CDC


UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT:

I think it’s

00:50

appropriate that we have a certain

00:51

decorum about how we engage when we are

00:54

actually making very serious and very

00:57

contemplated allegations. in this case

01:01

I’m reporting on some criminal activity

01:03

and as a result, this video is

01:06

also going to be submitted to a number

01:08

of US Attorney’s, to the Attorney General,

01:11

to other law enforcement agencies, and as

01:13

a result and in honor and respect for

01:16

their roles in their posts, I think it’s

01:18

appropriate that we bring a appropriate

01:21

level of decorum to the process.
the

01:23

second thing is I have some notes here

01:25

and the reason I have notes is because

01:27

I’m going to make very precise

01:28

statements and these statements are not

01:31

things to take lightly. they are actually

01:34

extremely serious. they are allegations

01:36

based

01:39

on the facts that I’m going to be

01:40

Presenting. as a result of that you’re

01:42

gonna see me look at my notes because I

01:44

take this matter very, very seriously. I

01:47

need to set the stage for where we’re

01:49

Going. at the end of this I’m going to

01:51

make a series of allegations of

01:52

violations of both the United States

01:54

Constitution a series of civil and

01:57

criminal acts that have been engaged

01:59

around the entire COVID19 pandemic,

02:02

fear-mongering and scare tactics, and I’m

02:05

going to be specific in naming

02:07

individuals and organizations that are

02:09

at least implicated if not directly

02:12

involved in the conspiracy that I’m

02:14

laying out. so let’s set the stage

with some laws that are not

02:18

necessarily

02:18

commonly known.
article 1 section 8

02:21

Clause 8 of the United States

02:22

Constitution and as it is manifest in

02:26

the 35 u.s. code is the law that gives

02:29

rise to intellectual property the right

02:31

for somebody an inventor and author to

02:33

have access to their inventions for a

02:36

period of time for commercial

02:38

exploitation that is a constitutional

02:40

right granted under article 1 section 8

02:43

Clause 8 of the United States

02:45

Constitution article 1 section 9 Clause

02:48

2 is the interesting Clause that you

02:52

don’t hear about very much but it’s

02:53

actually something that is a presumption

02:55

not only in the United States

02:56

Constitution but in most of the

02:58

civilized world and that is the writ of

03:00

habeas corpus now what does habeas

03:02

corpus mean that means that there is a

03:04

recourse in the law when someone has

03:07

been placed in confinement and when that

03:11

confinement is either unjustified or

03:14

inappropriate habeas corpus under the

03:18

Constitution under article 1 section 9

03:20

Clause 2 cannot be suspended and it

03:24

cannot be suspended in the absolute

03:26

sense of this this by the way is

03:28

something that is alluded to in attorney

03:31

general william bars memo dated today

03:33

released just a few hours ago now those

03:36

are constitutional provisions what I’m

03:39

also going to lay out our two very

03:41

important other provisions that come out

03:43

of the turn of the last century most of

03:45

them in the late 1800s and early 1900s

03:47

and those two provisions are called the

03:50

Sherman Act which is 15 US Code section

03:52

1 and following and the Sherman Act

03:56

which was amended with the thing called

03:58

the Clayton Act in 1914 and I just want

04:01

to make reference to three provisions

04:03

inside of the Sherman and Clayton Act

04:05

combined these represent what’s called

04:07

the antitrust acts of the United States

04:11

15 US Code section 1 actually makes it

04:15

illegal for anything that is a

04:18

conspiracy and restraint of trade or

04:20

commerce among the states with or with

04:23

foreign engine nations

04:25

and any of those actions are declared

04:27

illegal every person who shall make a

04:29

contract or engage in a combination

04:32

or conspiracy is declared to be illegal

04:34

and shall be deemed guilty of a felony

04:37

and I made reference to the fact that

04:39

this is criminal and civil allegations

04:41

the criminal allegations are given rise

04:43

from the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act

04:47

15 US Code section code 2 section 2

04:51

talks about a violation of monopolizing

04:55

trade and this says every person who

04:58

shall monopolize or attempt to Milaap

05:00

monopolize or combine or conspire with

05:03

any other person or persons to

05:05

monopolize any part of trade or commerce

05:06

among the several states or with foreign

05:09

nations shall be deemed guilty of a

05:11

felony and once again this is a criminal

05:14

violation and the penalty shall be not

05:18

exceeding a hundred million dollars if a

05:21

corporation or four person a million

05:23

dollars the third provision that I want

05:26

to give rise to with respect to the

05:28

antitrust acts is a thing in section 19

05:32

called interlocking directorates and

05:34

officers and specifically I just want to

05:37

make reference to this no person shall

05:39

at any time serve as a director or

05:41

officer in any two corporations engaged

05:44

in whole or in part in commerce and by

05:48

virtue of their business or location of

05:49

operation competitors so that the

05:52

elimination of competition by agreement

05:55

would constitute a violation of any trip

05:58

any entry antitrust law now those five

06:01

provisions 2x of the Constitution which

06:03

give rise to all kinds of cures in both

06:06

civil matters and otherwise and the

06:08

Sherman Act which are actually criminal

06:10

acts are very important to set the stage

06:12

for what happened on April 25th 2003 the

06:18

United States Center for Disease Control

06:19

broke the law they broke 35 US Code

06:23

section 101 in the filing of a patent

06:27

entitled coronavirus isolated from

06:32

humans under Section 101 of u.s. 35 u.s.

06:38

code the patenting of a substance of

06:41

nature is illegal this was confirmed by

06:44

the way

06:45

Supreme Court case with which we were

06:47

affiliated in 2013 against myriad

06:50

genetics and the Supreme Court ruled in

06:53

their affirmation of this that it is

06:56

illegal to have a patent on a human gene

07:00

the Center for Disease Control

07:04

April 25th 2003 filed a patent for and

07:10

ultimately received United States patent

07:12

seven seven seven six five to one and I

07:18

need to make a very specific reference

07:20

to the fact that in claims three and

07:22

four the method of detecting SARS virus

07:26

and a kit for the detection of SARS

07:31

virus was granted with no limitation

07:35

particularly claim for which reads a kit

07:38

for detecting a severe acute respiratory

07:40

syndrome associated corona virus in a

07:43

sample that’s as broad as you get they

07:46

received a patent that restricted anyone

07:48

anywhere in the United States from

07:51

engaging in any activity using this now

07:55

from April 2003 and following the CDC

08:00

owned not only SARS but they owned the

08:05

kit to detect SARS its ability to be

08:09

tected its ability to manufacture kits

08:11

and during that 15 year period the

08:13

effect of this grant which was ruled

08:15

unconstitutional by the Supreme Court

08:17

meant that commercial exploitation or

08:21

any research involving the commercial

08:23

exploitation of the virus or any kit to

08:26

detect the virus would have been an

08:29

infringement of the CDC patent and

08:32

therefore an infringement giving rise to

08:35

CDC’s actions were it not for the fact

08:38

that CDC’s patent and their maintenance

08:41

thereof is actually illegal CDC and the

08:47

National Institute of Allergy and

08:49

Infectious Disease led by Anthony foutch

08:51

II that’s the right that’s right the

08:53

doctor foul that you hear entered into

08:56

trade among states including

08:59

not limited to a corporation called eco

09:02

health alliance incorporated and with

09:05

foreign governments and foreign entities

09:08

in direct violation of the Sherman Act

09:10

provisions specifically the Wuhan

09:13

Institute of virology and the Chinese

09:15

Academy of Sciences through a 2004

09:18

National Institutes of Health grant ro1

09:22

AI one one zero nine six four that

09:27

constitutes commercial activity

09:30

involving an illegal asset entered into

09:34

interstate and international commerce in

09:37

violation of the Sherman Act the CDC and

09:40

n IA ID also entered into a commercial

09:47

engagement with the University of North

09:49

Carolina at Chapel Hill which is

09:52

obviously interstate and with foreign

09:56

nations specifically the Wuan Institute

09:58

of virology and the Chinese Academy of

10:00

Sciences with dr. Ralph s barrack of the

10:04

University of North Carolina Chapel Hill

10:06

and doctor Zheng Li XI the head of the

10:11

research component of the project that

10:13

included not only the Wuhan Institute of

10:15

virology but the National Natural

10:18

Science Foundation of China CDC and the

10:23

NIAID entered into trade among states in

10:26

addition which gave rise not only to a

10:30

constructive infringement unless there

10:33

was another undisclosed agreement on the

10:36

patent that was held by CDC with the

10:39

University of North Carolina Chapel Hill

10:40

and with foreign nations to conduct

10:43

chimeric construction of novel

10:46

coronavirus material with specific

10:47

virulence properties prior to during and

10:51

following the determination made by the

10:54

National Institute of Health on October

10:55

the 17th 2014 that this work was not

10:59

sufficiently vetted for biosecurity and

11:02

safety standards further it is presumed

11:05

and this is a presumption please make

11:08

the clear distinction this is a

11:10

presumption that the CDC and its

11:12

associates were

11:13

a fully aware of the work being

11:15

performed using their patented

11:17

technology be entered into explicit or

11:20

implicit agreements including licensing

11:22

or other consideration and we know

11:24

there’s other consideration because we

11:26

know the amounts of the grants that were

11:27

exchanged and see willfully engaged one

11:30

or more foreign interests to carry

11:32

forward the exploitation of their

11:34

proprietary technology after the United

11:37

States Supreme Court rendered that

11:39

technology and the proprietary rights to

11:42

that technology illegal under their 2013

11:46

determination now it’s interesting to

11:49

note that in January 2018 the u.s.

11:53

embassy reportedly sent two individuals

11:55

to the Wuhan Institute of virology and

11:57

in their examination found that a number

11:59

of individuals and and parts of the

12:02

laboratory procedure were not in

12:04

compliance with safe operating

12:06

procedures for the level of severity of

12:08

the bio hazards within that laboratory

12:10

the Washington Post reported that a

12:13

cable dated the 19th of January 2018

12:17

confirmed that there was and I quote

12:20

during interactions with scientists at

12:22

the wiv laboratory they noted that the

12:24

new lab has serious shortage of

12:27

appropriately trained technicians and

12:28

investigators needed to safely operate

12:30

this high containment laboratory a year

12:33

later in June 2019 the CDC conducted an

12:37

inspection of Fort Detrick s’ US Army

12:40

Medical Research Institute of expect

12:42

infectious diseases or us a Murud and

12:45

ordered it closed after what appears to

12:48

be the same violations and this is

12:50

actually quite critical because the

12:52

Center for Disease Control shut down a

12:55

laboratory for the very same argument

12:58

that was made when the State Department

13:01

and embassy staff reportedly found the

13:04

same or similar violations at the Wuhan

13:07

Institute of virology as those

13:09

information with respect to the Fort

13:11

Detrick investigation are not clearly

13:13

available all we can assume is that CDC

13:16

selectively and capriciously closed one

13:19

lab and let another with similar similar

13:22

violations that also had a financial

13:25

interest in their activity

13:27

to continue now here’s where it gets a

13:30

little messy folks because CDC reported

13:33

the first SARS Cove CoV case in January

13:37

2020 and according to the CDC’s own

13:40

epidemiology epidemic intelligence

13:43

service by the end of January to the 1st

13:46

or 2nd of February there were 650

13:49

clinical cases and what they report to

13:52

be 210 tests performed now just stop for

13:56

a minute and ask yourself the question

13:58

if the tests which reportedly was not

14:01

approved by the FDA for emergency use

14:05

remember for emergency use was not

14:07

approved until the 4th of February how

14:09

is it that in late January allegedly the

14:12

CDC had already allegedly conducted 210

14:15

tests on alleged cases of corona virus

14:20

infection in the United States

14:22

given that the suspected pathogen was

14:24

first implicated in official risk

14:26

reports on December 31st 2019 and only

14:30

isolated within that very short period

14:32

of time between December 31st and the

14:35

early part of January one can only

14:37

conclude that the CDC had the mechanism

14:39

and the wherewithal to conduct tests to

14:41

confirm the existence of a novel

14:43

coronavirus did not have the mechanism

14:47

but falsely reported the information and

14:50

it certainly tests credulity of both the

14:52

World Health Organization and the CDC

14:54

that they could manufacture before

14:56

anyone even knew this virus existed and

14:59

had not clarified it in any form of

15:02

genomic testing that they had tests for

15:04

210 tests before any emergency youth

15:08

authorization was granted did the CDC

15:13

had the test did they not have the test

15:14

why doesn’t the world have the test the

15:18

world doesn’t have the test because from

15:21

2003 until today the CDC illegally held

15:28

maintained and controlled an illegal

15:31

patent on both the virus and on the test

15:35

that would be required to detect its

15:37

presence the reason why you can be told

15:41

is a novel coronavirus and the reason

15:43

why there is no way to empirically

15:46

validate whether there actually is SARS

15:49

CoV – or not is because the CDC

15:52

maintained an illegal monopoly restrain

15:55

trade and violated both the Sherman the

15:59

Clayton Act in their business practices

16:01

with both domestic and foreign operators

16:04

around March 12th and this date becomes

16:07

exceptionally important – the last

16:10

comment I’m going to make around March

16:12

12th 2020 in an effort to enrich their

16:15

own economic interests by way of

16:17

securing additional funding from both

16:19

federal and foundation actors the CDC

16:22

and NIH dr. foul Chi elected to suspend

16:26

testing as a requirement to classify a

16:29

patient with kovat 19 now March 12th is

16:34

really important not surprisingly as

16:38

there was a drop in reported cases the

16:41

liberalization of what constituted a

16:45

suspected or presumptive positive case

16:47

needed to be created to incite fear and

16:51

to prop up the fear of a pandemic which

16:55

was never capable of being independently

16:58

verified because of an illegal action

17:01

taken by the Center for Disease Control

17:03

the CDC and the who elected to commit to

17:08

a narrative of a novel coronavirus and

17:10

remember they had the only ability to do

17:14

so they patented the compound of nature

17:16

illegally and then they held the patent

17:18

on the tests for that compound there was

17:21

no way to independently verify this

17:23

further they participated in exhibiting

17:26

properties of virulence that include the

17:28

ACE 2 receptor and other spike protein

17:32

properties which are the subject of US

17:34

patent seven six one eight eight zero

17:37

two issued to the University of North

17:40

Carolina’s own Ralph barek and in the

17:42

absence of testing protocols all of them

17:46

elected to insist that SARS CoV 2 was a

17:50

novel pathogen responsible for

17:53

conditions

17:54

that and I’m quoting were consistent

17:57

with moderate to severe acute

18:00

respiratory syndrome and pneumonia you

18:04

heard me correctly and the reason why

18:06

that last statement is so important is

18:08

because as of today there are still with

18:12

all of the liberal definitions of what

18:14

counts as a CO vid patient there are

18:17

still more cases since March the 12th of

18:21

pneumonia of an idiopathic origin

18:23

meaning a pneumonia that comes from a

18:25

pathogen we don’t know there are still

18:28

more cases of pneumonia with an

18:31

idiopathic origin then there are Co vid

18:34

cases by over 5,000 and for those of you

18:37

who like to go into the CDC web page and

18:39

do the gotcha moment on well but there’s

18:42

a reporting glitch the problem is the

18:44

reporting glitch lives in both sets of

18:46

data in both sets of data and the

18:50

pneumonia numbers still outstrip the

18:52

kovin numbers by over 5,000 as of today

18:56

there is no question that on February

19:02

17th 2014 when the Center for Disease

19:07

Control paid your tax dollars to renew a

19:12

patent that was declared illegal by the

19:15

United States Supreme Court in June 2013

19:19

almost a year apart when they renewed

19:23

their illegal patent on February 17 2014

19:27

the Center for Disease Control violated

19:29

article 1 section 8 Clause 8 of the

19:32

United States Constitution by renewing

19:36

their illegal patent on February 17th

19:39

2014 the CDC willfully violated the law

19:42

using public funds in light of a Supreme

19:46

Court ruling that actually had declared

19:48

their actions illegal on June 13 2013

19:53

with respect to article 1 section 9

19:57

Clause to the protection of habeas

19:59

corpus governor Gavin Newsom in

20:03

California under executive order n 33 20

20:08

based the declaration of a state of

20:11

emergency and the ultimate reach the

20:14

ultimate restriction of civil liberties

20:16

on and I quote the threat of Co vid 19

20:21

there is no constitutional protection

20:24

and by the way if you go and look at the

20:28

Juho case in in the case in san

20:33

francisco during the the previous

20:36

pandemic litigation in the supreme court

20:38

you’ll realize that there is no

20:41

protection that has ever afforded a

20:44

governor in any state the right to

20:46

suspend civil liberties on the threat of

20:50

a thing particularly when that threat

20:54

has not given been given the opportunity

20:57

to be examined no background of the

21:00

underlying supporting science has been

21:01

verifiable and in this particular case

21:03

could not be verified without infringing

21:07

the CDC’s patent or without their

21:11

collusion fox guarding the henhouse

21:14

absolutely and governor newsome’s order

21:17

by stating that it is under the threat

21:20

without any confirmed serology or

21:24

confirmed immunologic evidence violated

21:28

not only his rights under government

21:32

code sections eight five six seven eight

21:34

six two seven and eight six five five

21:37

which by the way never give anybody the

21:40

right to declare an emergency based on

21:43

merely an unsubstantiated threat at the

21:47

time of that declaration neither the CDC

21:50

nor the w-h-o had sufficient testing in

21:53

place to confirm or isolate the novel

21:56

coronavirus California did not have

21:59

pathology data to suggest that the

22:01

epidemic was even eminent and the rest

22:03

of the United States was incapable of

22:05

making any such assessment because of

22:07

the aforementioned actions of the

22:09

conspiring parties let me make this

22:12

point abundantly clear to date there is

22:15

no clinical data showing that the

22:17

restraint of healthy individuals also

22:20

known as social distancing

22:22

has any empirical data supporting its

22:25

use if you look at the University of

22:28

Washington Johns Hopkins and Imperial

22:31

College models not a single one of them

22:34

mandates entire lockdown of a healthy

22:38

population the most aggressive

22:40

assumptions under social distancing are

22:42

set forth to be a workplace reduction of

22:45

about a reduction of 50% but in no model

22:48

in no scientific document in no place at

22:51

all has there ever been validation that

22:55

quarantine in a healthy population has

22:57

any merit in science governor Newsom

23:00

followed by another 44 governors

___

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.