Anti-Trump Memo Update



[INSIDE JW]

A Dangerous Obstruction of Justice

[[link removed]]

The leak of the Supreme Court draft opinion in the _Dobbs v Jackson_
case is a dangerous obstruction of justice. And, it could very well
lead to intimidation and violence directed at Supreme Court justices.
Indeed, leftwing protestors reportedly
[[link removed]]
plan to appear at the homes of conservative justices.

This unprecedented leak fits with the Left’s continued assault
against the Supreme Court. As soon as the news of the leaked opinion
broke, leftwing protesters were at the Supreme Court.

There must be a full investigation, but I’m not holding my breath
when it comes to the Biden administration upholding the rule of law
– especially when administration allies, including Sen. Chuck
Schumer, have threatened the justices in the past.

In the meantime, let's hope the rule of law prevails and the precious
lives of unborn human beings can once again be protected under law.

We are directly involved in this case. In December 2021 we announced
[[link removed]]
our amicus
curiae
[[link removed]]
brief with the Supreme Court in favor of overturning _Roe v. Wade_.
Our brief, filed in support of the constitutionality of
Mississippi’s Gestational Age Act, argues that states have the right
under the Constitution to regulate abortion and protect unborn life
(_Dobbs v. Jackson_
[[link removed]]
(No. 19-1392)).

Our brief argues that the Supreme Court should overturn Roe and
restore the regulation of abortion to the state:

Despite creative judicial legislating, it is crystal clear that
abortion does not involve war, peace, negotiation, foreign commerce,
or taxation. Abortion fits squarely into the states’ sphere of
objects that concern the “lives, liberties, and properties of the
people.” Not being an enumerated power, the _Roe_ Court did not have
the authority to overturn the abortion laws of the states.

Additionally, our brief notes
[[link removed]]
that _Roe v. Wade_ didn’t provide clarity, but instead muddied the
waters:

Far from creating a national consensus, _Roe _threw the states into a
48-year contentious legal battle. Even some abortion advocates eschew
the injudicious method of federalizing abortion as short-circuiting a
naturally evolving jurisprudence under state laws. As federal and
state judges attempt to apply this Court’s precedents, a national
landscape of inconsistent, inconclusive, and untenable rules have
emerged. As a national policy, abortion jurisprudence is, in a word, a
mess. Stubbornly holding on to unconstitutional precedent will never
have a positive outcome. It is time to return abortion policy to the
states where it belongs and where the democratic process can
effectively work.

I pray that the justices will remain steadfast in the fallout from
this egregious crime.

COURT ORDERS FBI TO DETAIL OFFICIALS LISTED IN ANTI-TRUMP MEMO

A federal court has ordered the FBI to disclose additional details
about FBI and other officials copied on the memo used to justify
launching the “Crossfire Hurricane” spy operation against
President Trump and his 2016 presidential campaign.

Judge Carl J. Nichols has given the FBI until June 16, 2022 to
respond. The order comes in our September 2019 FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
filed after the FBI failed to respond to a request for the memo, known
as an “Electronic Communication” or “EC.” (_Judicial Watch
v. U.S. Department of Justice_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:19-cv-02743)).

In May 2020, we obtained
[[link removed]]
a
redacted version of the previously secret memo, authored by former FBI
agent Peter Strzok. The Biden Justice Department argued
[[link removed]]
that
there is no significant public interest in disclosing the names of
officials copied on the memo.

We filed a motion
[[link removed]]
countering that claim and arguing that the public had a significant
interest in knowing who at the FBI had knowledge of the memo and
presumably approved the investigation.

The court held a hearing
[[link removed]]
on the
dispute in September 2021, and on May 2, 2022 issued a minute order
requiring the FBI to file a supplemental memorandum of up to 5 pages,
supported by an affidavit or declaration, explaining the positions and
seniority held by any persons whose names are redacted from the
“CC:” section of the document.

In support of our position, we provided the Court with two
declarations by Kevin Brock, former assistant director of the
Directorate of Intelligence and former FBI principal deputy director
of the National Counterterrorism Center. Brock testified that it is
not standard procedure to have an EC drafted, approved, and sent to
and from a single agent and that doing so violates FBI oversight
protocols:

In the EC document here, the “From” line indicates the EC – and
authorization to begin an investigation as required under FBI policy
– is from a part of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division. The
contact listed is Peter Strzok. The EC was drafted by Peter Strzok.
The EC was approved by Peter Strzok. On the face of the document
produced, it appears the EC that initiated a criminal FARA
investigation of unidentified members of the Trump presidential
campaign was created by Peter Strzok, approved by Peter Strzok, and
sent from Peter Strzok to Peter Strzok. This is not the usual
procedure.

FBI policy prohibits an agent from initiating and approving his or her
own case. Such action violates FBI oversight protocols put in place
to protect the American people from an FBI agent acting unilaterally.

***

In fact, the EC does not identify any individual by name as a target
of the investigation. It does not articulate any factors that
address the elements of FARA as required by routine FBI policy and
procedure and the Attorney General Guidelines and, therefore, does not
contain sufficient justification for initiating an investigation into
USPERs [U.S. persons].

Based upon my experience, no reasonable and experienced FBI
counterintelligence squad supervisor in the field would have approved
the EC at issue here – as released – which opened the Crossfire
Hurricane investigation.

The unredacted information released in the EC document here offers no
legitimate predication justifying the investigation of USPERs involved
in a presidential campaign or subsequent FISA intercept of a U.S.
citizen.

The Biden administration is still covering up who was involved in the
Obama administration’s unprecedented and illicit spying on Donald J.
Trump. This court decision is another step forward in accountability
for the worst government corruption scandal in American history.

QUESTIONS ABOUT PFIZER/BIONTECH VACCINE’S EFFECTS

While drug giant Pfizer is reporting
[[link removed]]
a 61 percent leap in profits for the first quarter, due to COVID,
we’re learning more about the vaccines that were rushed to market
during the pandemic.

We received 466 pages
[[link removed]]
of records from the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that
show a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech,
lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site,
mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals,
eight to 48 hours after injection.

Pfizer/BioNTech’s mRNA-based COVID vaccine relies on LNPs as a
delivery system. Pfizer said in a January 10, 2022 press release
[[link removed]]
that Acuitas Therapeutics LNP technology is used in COMIRNATY, the
Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine.

We also received 663 pages
[[link removed]]
of records from HHS revealing that Johnson & Johnson relied on studies
showing that vaccine DNA particles and injected virus particles were
still present in test animals months after injection.

The records also show that Johnson & Johnson, as part of its
submission to the FDA for approval of its COVID vaccine, did not
include studies of the spike protein encoded in the J&J vaccine.

We obtained the records in response to a FOIA lawsuit (_Judicial Watch
v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:21-cv-02418)) filed after the Food and Drug Administration, the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute
for Allergy and Infectious Disease failed to respond to a June 8,
2021, FOIA request for:

[A]ccess to biodistribution studies and related data for the Pfizer,
Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson vaccines used to treat and/or prevent
SARS-CoV-2 and/or COVID-19.

Biodistribution
[[link removed]]
is a
method of tracking where compounds of interest travel in an
experimental animal or human subject.

The Pfizer records include a report
[[link removed]],
which was approved in February 2021, on the animal trials on the
distribution of the Pfizer COVID vaccine in rat subjects. In a section
titled “Safety Pharmacology” the report notes, “No safety
pharmacology studies were conducted with BNT162b2 [the BioNTech
vaccine] as they are not considered necessary for the development of
vaccines according to the WHO guideline (WHO, 2005).” Similarly,
under “Pharmacodynamic Drug Interactions,” is “Nonclinical
studies evaluating pharmacodynamic drug interactions with BNT162b2
were not conducted as they are generally not considered necessary to
support development and licensure of vaccine products for infectious
diseases (WHO, 2005).”

This Pfizer report notes that when lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) “with
a comparable composition” to that used in the Pfizer COVID vaccine
were injected into rats, “Total recovery (% of injected dose) of LNP
outside the injection site was greatest in the liver and was much less
in the spleen, adrenal glands, and ovaries.” … “in summary”
… “the LNP distributes to the liver.” In the detailed analysis,
the report states, “Over 48 hours, the LNP distributed mainly to
liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries, with maximum concentrations
observed at 8-48 hours post-dose. Total recovery (% of injected dose)
of LNP, for combined male and female animals, outside of the injection
site was greatest in the liver (up to 18%) …”

This same Pfizer/BioNTech study notes “No genotoxicity studies are
planned for BNT162b2 [the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID vaccine] as the
components of the vaccine constructs are lipids and RNA and are not
expected to have genotoxic potential (WHO, 2005).” Similarly,
“Carcinogenicity studies with BNT162b2 have not been conducted as
the components of the vaccine construct are lipids and RNA and are not
expected to have carcinogenic or tumorigenic potential.”

The conclusion of the study begins: “The nonclinical program
demonstrates that BNT162b2 is immunogenic in mice, rats, and nonhuman
primates, and the toxicity studies support the licensure of this
vaccine.” The report notes that “boost immunizations” were also
being tested on the animals in the trial. Also, “Vaccine-related
microscopic findings at the end of dosing for BNT162b2 were evident in
injection sites and surrounding tissues, in the draining iliac lymph
nodes, bone marrow, spleen, and liver.”

Also included in the Pfizer records is a report
[[link removed]],
approved in January 2021, titled “Pharmacokinetics Tabulated
Summary.” A table in the report shows the biodistribution of lipid
nanoparticles containing mRNA used in the vaccine using rats as the
clinical trial subjects reports LNPs accumulating after 48 hours,
especially in the lymph nodes, ovaries, small intestine and spleen.

A summary of a study
[[link removed]],
approved in November 2020, of LNP mRNA distribution in rats, sponsored
by Acuitas Therapeutics, notes that the concentrations of the LNP mRNA
saw “levels peaking in the plasma by 1-4 hours post-dose and
distribution mainly into liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries
over 48 hours. Total recovery of radioactivity outside of the
injection site was greatest in the liver, with much lower total
recovery in spleen, and very little recovery in adrenals glands and
ovaries. The mean plasma, blood and tissue concentrations and tissue
distribution patterns were broadly similar between the sexes and …
did not associate with red blood cells.”

A September 2020 “Confidential” appendix to the clinical trial
studies
[[link removed]]
submitted for the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID vaccine (BNT162b2), titled
“Justification for the absence of studies in CTD Module 4 (part of
2.4)” notes under “Safety Pharmacology” that “No safety
pharmacology studies were conducted as they are not considered
necessary according to the WHO guideline (WHO, 2005).”

And under “Pharmacodynamic Drug Interactions,” is written:
“Nonclinical studies evaluating pharmacodynamic drug interactions
were not conducted as they are not generally considered necessary to
support development and licensure of vaccine products for infectious
diseases (WHO, 2005).”

Under the heading “Genotoxicity,” is: “No genotoxicity studies
are planned for BNT162b2 as the components of the vaccine constructs
are lipids and RNA that are not expected to have genotoxic potential
(WHO, 2005).”

Regarding “Carcinogenicity (including supportive toxicokinetics
evaluations)” is written:

Carcinogenicity studies with BNT162b2 have not been conducted as the
components of the vaccine constructs are lipids and RNA that are not
expected to have carcinogenic or tumorigenic potential.
Carcinogenicity testing is generally not considered necessary to
support the development and licensure of vaccine products for
infectious diseases (WHO, 2005).

In a “Confidential” Pfizer study
[[link removed]],
approved in April 2020, looking at four COVID vaccine variants, the
company tested a vaccine with an RNA strand “that self-amplifies
upon entering the cell.” It “encodes the Venezuelan equine
encephalitis (VEE) virus RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RDRP or
replicas).”

In the same Pfizer study, the authors note that, “Although liver
function tests will be carefully monitored during the clinical
development of these vaccines, BioNTech’s prior clinical experience
indicates that the distribution to the liver does not pose a safety
concern.

Also, the Pfizer study authors note, “Based on previous nonclinical
and clinical experience with the three RNA platforms, a beneficial
safety profile is anticipated, and may include transient local
reactions (such as swelling/edema or redness) and body temperature
increases.”

The Johnson & Johnson
[[link removed]]
records include a 2007 study
[[link removed]]
of the biodistribution of an intramuscular-administered
adenovector-based viral vaccine
[[link removed]]
using New Zealand
white rabbits, which showed that the vaccine accumulated in “the
spleen, iliac lymph node, and the muscle at the site of injection.”

A biodistribution table included as an appendix to the 2007 rabbit
study showed that the vaccine DNA particles were still present in the
iliac lymph nodes 91 days after injection.

A chart of pharmacokinetics data from a November 2020 report
[[link removed]]
of a study on “VAC31518 JNJ-78436735,” the Johnson & Johnson
vaccine, on rabbits shows the collection of the injected virus
particles in the spleen and iliac lymph nodes up to three months
later, as well as particles found in the skin and muscle at the
injection site.

In a November 4, 2020 report
[[link removed]]
submitted to the FDA regarding the Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccine,
the authors discuss the 2007 New Zealand rabbit study in which
adenovirus-vectored vaccine is trialed, but note that “No
pharmacokinetic or biodistribution studies have been conducted with
AD26.COV2.S specifically.”

The report notes that metabolism, excretion, and pharmacokinetic
interactions with other drugs were not studied in this trial because
they are “Not applicable to vaccines.” It is also noted that
“biodistribution studies have not been conducted with
Ad26.COV2.S.”

A table in the report shows that the vaccine virus continued to appear
in the rabbits’ iliac lymph nodes 180 days after injection.

A June 2020 “Pharmacokinetics Written Summary
[[link removed]]
for the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccines notes that:

Ad26COVS1 (also known as VAC31518 or JNJ-78436735) is a monovalent,
recombinant replication-incompetent adenovirus type 26 (Ad26) vectored
vaccine encoding a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2
(SARS-CoV-2) Spike protein…. No specific pharmacokinetic studies
have been performed with Ad26COVS1. However, to assess distribution,
persistence, and clearance of the Ad26 vector (platform),
biodistribution studies were conducted in rabbits using two other
Ad26-based vaccines encoding [redacted] and [redacted] antigens….
[T]he available biodistribution results are considered sufficient to
inform on the biodistribution profile of Ad26COVS1, for which the same
Ad26 vector backbone is used.

These documents show why many Americans have concerns about whether
the novel COVID vaccines that were developed at such an accelerated
pace were tested properly and thoroughly.

HIRE A BIDEN OFFICIAL, GET A NO-BID CONTRACT, WASTE $17 MILLION

It helps to know somebody. And it’s easy for bureaucrats to spend
your tax dollars. Our_ Corruption Chronicle_s blog details
[[link removed]]
a sweetheart deal between a private agency and your government.

A nonprofit that hired a Biden administration official received a huge
no-bid government contract that wasted $17 million on unused hotel
rooms for illegal immigrants, a federal audit
[[link removed]]
reveals. The politically connected group, which had no experience
providing the services covered by the sole source federal contract,
also failed to meet COVID-19 health protocols required by the
government when the deal was signed. The highly questionable
arrangement was executed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE),
the Homeland Security agency responsible for housing migrant families
in detention. The agency typically uses Family Residential Centers
(FRC) to house family units, but in early 2021 ICE anticipated
increased apprehensions of illegal immigrant families along the
southern border and awarded a contract to harbor them in hotels while
completing intake processing, auditors from the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) Inspector General explain in a recent report.

The group that received the lucrative no-bid award, Endeavors, had
never provided beds or all-inclusive emergency family residential
services when ICE hired it to do so, auditors found. Formerly known as
Family Endeavors, the Texas-based nonprofit claims
[[link removed]]
to passionately serve vulnerable
people in crisis through its innovative, personalized approach. Last
year a national news outlet reported
[[link removed]]
that Endeavors won a colossal $530 million government contract just
months after it hired Biden administration official Andrew
Lorenzen-Straight as its senior director for migrant services and
federal affairs. The contract is by far the largest ever awarded to
the nonprofit, according to the article, and is potentially worth more
than 12 times the group’s most recently reported annual budget.
Lorenzen-Strait, a former ICE official who also advised the
Biden-Harris transition team on Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
policy and staffing matters, must have pulled some strings.

The recently published audit focuses on an $87 million chunk of the
Endeavors deal to increase housing capacity for detained migrant
families early last year. The sole source contract was for
approximately six months, from March to September 2021, to provide
1,239 beds and other necessary services in hotels. Because ICE did not
seek multiple bids for the work as it is obligated to do, the agency
blindly agreed to pay for a block of more than 1,200 hotel rooms,
regardless of how many got used. It resulted in $17 million worth of
hotel rooms that remained mostly empty, the DHS IG found. “ICE did
not adequately justify the need for the sole source contract to house
migrant families and spent approximately $17 million for hotel space
and services at six hotels that went largely unused between April and
June 2021,” the reports state. “ICE’s sole source contract with
Endeavors resulted in millions of dollars being spent on unused hotel
space.”

The DHS watchdog reveals that the deal was penned after Endeavors
provided an unsolicited proposal for housing migrant families in
hotels. Government agencies typically receive proposals from
contractors after putting out requests for proposals. “However,
Endeavors provided a proposal without such a request from ICE,”
investigators found. ICE then cited “unusual and compelling
urgency” as the basis for an exception to the competitive
contracting process. The agency’s justification noted that Endeavors
was the only known source capable of meeting the requirements to
provide 1,239 hotel beds and all-inclusive emergency family
residential services to support the surge of asylum seekers. “Based
on our analysis of ICE’s justification for sole sourcing the
contract to Endeavors, we determined ICE did not have supporting
documentation to establish that Endeavors was the only contractor that
could provide the services needed,” the DHS IG writes.

Additionally, Endeavors did not meet the government’s healthcare
protocols or ensure proper COVID-19 testing for families. “For
example, families were not tested by ICE for COVID-19 prior to being
transported to hotels and were not always tested by Endeavors staff
upon arrival at or departure from hotels, putting migrant families and
the outside population at risk of contracting COVID-19,” the report
states. “Further, Endeavors did not follow required ICE standards to
ensure the proper care for housing migrant families while such
families were residing in its facilities.”

Until next week,





[Contribute]
[[link removed]]


<a
href="[link removed]"
target="_blank"><img alt="WU02"
src="[link removed]"
style="width:100%; height:auto;" /></a>

[32x32x1]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x2]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

[32x32x3]
[[link removed]]

Judicial Watch, Inc.
425 3rd St Sw Ste 800
Washington, DC 20024

202.646.5172



© 2017 - 2022, All Rights Reserved
Manage Email Subscriptions
[[link removed]]
|
Unsubscribe
[[link removed]]

View in browser
[[link removed]]