Covid Vaccine Secrets!



[INSIDE JW]

Judicial Watch Sues Secret Service for Records about Raid on Trump’s
Home

[[link removed]]

Given that the Secret Service is charged with protecting former
President Trump and his home, it’s critical that we know what it
knew when Biden’s FBI stormed into Trump’s Florida estate.

We filed a FOIA lawsuit against the Department of Homeland Security
for all communications of the U.S. Secret Service internally and with
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) regarding the raid on
President Trump’s home and for any video or audio recordings made
during the raid on August 8, 2022 (_Judicial Watch Inc. v. U.S
Department of Homeland Security_
[[link removed]
_(No. 1:22-cv-03147)).

We sued in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia after
the Secret Service ignored an August 11, 2022, FOIA request asking
for:

* All emails and text messages between officials in the Office of
the USSS Director and officials of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
regarding the search warrant and/or execution of the search warrant on
former President Trump’s home on or about August 8, 2022.
* All emails and text messages sent to and from officials on
President Trump’s USSS protective detail regarding the search
warrant and/or execution of the search warrant on President Trump’s
residence on or about August 8, 2022.
* All video and audio recordings capturing the execution of the
search warrant on President Trump’s home on August 8, 2022.

The FBI reportedly
[[link removed]]
notified the Secret Service a few hours before the raid that it would
happen and that Secret Service agents facilitated access to Trump’s
home.

What is the Secret Service trying to hide about its involvement in the
Biden FBI’s unprecedented and abusive raid of Trump’s home. This
FOIA lawsuit, the fourth we’ve filed on the Trump raid, further
highlights the Biden administration’s comprehensive cover-up about
its latest abuses of the former president.

We are in the forefront on the court battle for transparency regarding
the raid.

Last week, we announced
[[link removed]]
that the
National Archives is withholding 99% of the requested records about
the raid in response to Judicial Watch’s FOIA lawsuit.

In August, we forced the release
[[link removed]]
of the
raid affidavit through a court request
[[link removed]]
to unseal the warrant materials used in the raid.

We also filed two lawsuits
[[link removed]]
against the Justice Department for records of the raid search warrant
application and approval, as well as communications about the warrant
between the FBI, the Executive Office of the President, and the Secret
Service.

More is coming…

FDA RECORDS DETAIL PRESSURE ON COVID BOOSTER USE AND APPROVAL

We received 43 pages
[[link removed]]
of heavily redacted records from the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) regarding the COVID-19 booster vaccine.

We obtained the records in response to a February 2022 FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against the
Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) we filed after HHS failed
to respond to a September 3, 2021, FOIA request for records of
communication from the former director and deputy director of the
FDA’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review, Dr. Marion Gruber and
Dr. Philip Krause, (_Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services_
[[link removed]
_(No. 1:22-cv-00293)).

On September 13, 2021, Gruber and Krause
[[link removed]]
were among a group of resigning
[[link removed]]
doctors who agreed that, “Available evidence doesn’t yet indicate
a need for COVID-19 vaccine booster shots among the general population
…”

In a July 13, 2021, email
[[link removed]]
to an individual whose name is redacted, Beatrice Kalungall, a Branch
Chief in the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research
(CBER)/ Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies, provided a list of
responses to questions posed about “Use of Covid-19 Vaccines in
Research.”

One of the questions asked was, “Are the EUA vaccines [Emergency Use
Authorization Covid-19 vaccines] considered ‘lawfully marketed’
(21 CFR 312.2(b)) for the purposes of an IND [Investigational New
Drug] exemption (though we anticipate it is likely that we would still
file an IND based on other criteria)?”

Kalungall replied:

> “Vaccines which are available under EUA may be considered
> ‘lawfully marketed’ if used under the scope of authorization as
> described in the Letter of Authorization (LOA) for each product.
> Note that an important consideration is the possible risk to
> subjects so please clearly identify the intended study population
> and include a discussion of the issue from your perspective.”
In a separate email
[[link removed]]
thread and discussion generated from the same initiating July 13,
2021, email regarding “Use of Covid-19 Vaccines in Research”, Dr.
Doran Fink, a top official in the Office of Vaccines Research and
Review, writes:

> “Providers are losing confidence in FDA/CDC to do the right thing
> for their patients, including that we can’t give inquiring
> patients a straight answer about what they are allowed to do outside
> of an IND [Investigational New Drug].”
Dr. Krause, Deputy Director of the FDA’s Office of Vaccines
Research and Review, responds to Fink:

> “From my brief discussion with Peter [presumably, CBER Director
> Peter Marks] this morning, after some calls with CDC and HHS last
> night, the problem is that the [redacted]. Take a deep breath before
> reading this next paragraph. On that call, the CDC evidently stated
> that they will assemble all the data they are aware of on third
> dosing in this setting, and send it to us in the hope that we will
> (very soon) authorize the third dose for immunocompromised as part
> of the EUA. Peter told me that CBER IOD [presumably CBER Immediate
> Office of the Director] will triage this—I told him I need to be
> cc:ed on any of these communications so we don’t get blindsided,
> but that we also need to protect the review team.”
These FDA records further document top officials’ concerns about
the controversial COVID-19 booster shots. That it has taken months and
a federal lawsuit to uncover this critical material is a scandal.

In a previous production from the February 2022 FOIA lawsuit, Judicial
Watch received 112 pages
[[link removed]]
from the FDA that show top officials being pressured by companies and
the Biden administration to impose timelines on approval for the
booster shots “that make no sense.”

Through FOIA, we have uncovered a substantial amount of information
about COVID-19 issues:

* Recently, we revealed HHS records that detail
[[link removed]]
the
extensive plans for a propaganda campaign to push the COVID-19
vaccine.
* We uncovered NIH records
[[link removed]]
revealing an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat
coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records
also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
(NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research
in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was
also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s
[[link removed]]
lack of compliance with reporting
rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research
involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
* Department of Veterans Affairs records
[[link removed]]
detailed the
adverse reactions of veterans to the COVID-19 vaccines. As of April
2021, Veteran’s Health Services reported 895 serious reactions which
included: 20 cardiac arrests, 36 strokes, 15 cases of deep vein
thrombosis, 10 heart attacks, and 19 pulmonary embolisms. They also
reported over 26,000 less serious reactions. The agency withheld
[[link removed]]
individual report details asserting privacy exemptions under FOIA.
* Centers for Disease Control and Prevention records
[[link removed]]
show Director
Rochelle Walensky’s communications, include a request for details
about the death of a teenager who died days after receiving a
coronavirus vaccination.

The records also include a study paid for and conducted by Pfizer and
BioNTech that found
[[link removed]


> Adverse event analyses during the blinded period are provided for
> 43,847 ≥16-year-olds (Table S3). Reactogenicity events among
> participants not in the reactogenicity subset are reported as
> adverse events, resulting in imbalances in adverse events (30% vs
> 14%), related adverse events (24% vs 6%), and severe adverse events
> (1.2% vs 0.7%) between BNT162b2 and placebo groups. Decreased
> appetite, lethargy, asthenia, malaise, night sweats, and
> hyperhidrosis were new adverse events attributable to BNT162b2 not
> previously identified in earlier reports.
HHS records reveal that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277
[[link removed]]
was given to the
Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
NIAID records show that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth
Alliance
[[link removed]]
to
research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer
of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also include an email
from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for
help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and
indoor surfaces.

HHS records include an “urgent for Dr. Fauci
[[link removed]]
” email chain,
citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth
Alliance
[[link removed]].
The government emails
also reported that U.S. billionaire Bill Gates’s foundation worked
closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for
Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help
“raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from
China on important international counsels as high level commitment
from China.”

HHS records include a grant application for research involving the
coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function
[[link removed]
research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses,
attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically
manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.

HHS records show the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in
January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data
[[link removed]],
which was
hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.

University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records
[[link removed]]
show the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the
University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), Dr. James W. Le Duc,
[[link removed]]
warned Chinese
researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential
investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.

HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the
COVID-19 vaccines show a key component of the vaccines developed by
Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the
injection site
[[link removed]],
mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals,
eight to 48 hours after injection.

Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) reveal safety
lapses
[[link removed]]
and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on
dangerous agents and toxins.

HHS records include emails
[[link removed]]
between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis
Collins
[[link removed]]
and Anthony
Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19.

HHS records show that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms
[[link removed]]
to China’s terms
and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased,
“strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in
January 2020.

Fauci emails
[[link removed]]
include his
approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the
2019 novel coronavirus.

DELAWARE SUPREME COURT KILLS VOTE-BY-MAIL, SAME-DAY VOTER REGISTRATION

We can claim a victory for cleaner elections in Delaware.

The Delaware Supreme Court struck down
[[link removed]]
the state’s vote-by-mail and same-day voter registration statutes
for violating the Delaware Constitution. The court effectively concurs
with the _amicus curiae_
[[link removed]]
brief we submitted in the case, which argues the Delaware statute
impermissibly expands those practices far beyond the limits set in the
Delaware Constitution.

The DATE decision
[[link removed]]
comes in the case _Albence v Higgin et al._ (DE Vote by Mail
342,2022), in which the court considered the constitutionality of two
state laws passed by the Delaware General Assembly that attempted to
grant every voter the opportunity to vote by mail and register to vote
up to the day of the general election. The court ruled
[[link removed]


> The Vote-by-Mail Statute impermissibly expands the categories of
> absentee voters identified in Article V, Section 4A of the Delaware
> Constitution…The Same-Day Registration Statute conflicts with the
> provisions of Article V, Section 4 of the Delaware
> Constitution…The Court enters this abbreviated order in
> recognition of the impending election scheduled for November 8,
> 2022, and the Department of Election’s desire to mail ballots to
> voters by or around October 10, 2022. A more formal opinion, fully
> explaining the Court’s views and the reasons supporting our
> unanimous decision, will issue in due course. The mandate shall
> issue immediately.
In our _amicus curiae brief_
[[link removed]],
we emphasized that mail-in voting is “highly susceptible to fraud
and abuse” and told the court the statute in question is
unconstitutional and should be struck down:

> State and federal officials have universally acknowledged
>
[[link removed]]
> the existence of the threat of fraud due to mail-in voting…Voting
> by mail is … problematic enough that election experts say there
> have been multiple elections in which no one can say with confidence
> which candidate was the deserved winner.”


***

> The Delaware Constitution and precedent allow
>
[[link removed]]
> absentee and mail-in voting in only the following instances: when in
> public service to the United States or the State of Delaware, due to
> illness or disability, by reason of absence while on vacation, due
> to religious tenets or teachings, and due to emergency declaration
> by the General Assembly in response to an ongoing pandemic…Without
> amending the Delaware Constitution, any legislative act by the
> General Assembly to expand absentee voting beyond these requirements
> is per se invalid.
The court’s ruling makes it harder to unlawfully tamper with an
election. We are gratified that the court agreed with our _amicus_
brief and acted swiftly to strike down these unconstitutional election
laws that created increased opportunities for fraud in the November 8
elections.

RECORDS SHOW CDC OFFICIALS DISCUSSING POST-VACCINE MYOCARDITIS IN
ADOLESCENTS

Given reports
[[link removed]]
of myocarditis in adolescents after Covid vaccination, it is
disconcerting that our Centers for Disease Control has been less than
forthcoming about what it knew and when.

We uncovered 1,081 pages
[[link removed]]
of records from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
detailing internal discussions about myocarditis and the COVID
vaccine. Other documents detail adverse “events for which a
contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded.”

We obtained the records through a FOIA lawsuit
[[link removed]]
against HHS
(_Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services_
[[link removed]]
(No. 1:22-cv-00660)) after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA),
which is an agency of HHS, failed to respond to an August 30, 2021,
FOIA request for:

> All emails sent to and from members of the Vaccines and Related
> Biological Products Advisory Committee regarding adverse events,
> deaths and/or injuries caused by investigatory vaccines for the
> prevention or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 and/or COVID-19 currently
> produced by Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna and/or Johnson & Johnson.
The Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee
(VRBPAC
[[link removed]])
is the U.S. Government’s central advisory body, along with Advisory
Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP
[[link removed]]),
advising whether to
approve COVID vaccines.

On May 13, 2021, senior CDC Director, Division of Birth Defects and
Infant Disorders Dr. Amanda Cohn
[[link removed]],
wrote to
[[link removed]]
FDA Director of the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research
(CBER) Dr. Peter Marks
[[link removed]]
and other
officials about COVID-19 vaccines: “I have another issue to discuss
as well, reports of myocarditis in adolescents. I am putting together
an email, but this may come to the surface this weekend.”

In a section of an FDA briefing document
[[link removed]]
submitted by Johnson & Johnson/Janssen to the FDA regarding trials of
its COVID vaccine, J&J notes that five people experienced serious
adverse events: “selected events among vaccine recipients for which
a contributory effect of the vaccine could not be excluded based on
FDA assessment of the clinical information provided.”

These adverse events included deep vein thromboses, pulmonary
embolism, transverse sinus thrombosis, seizure and hemiparesis
(inability to move
[[link removed]]
one side of the body) occurring anywhere from three to 28 days
following vaccination.

In a section of the same briefing document as above, titled
“Pregnancies,” the briefing document notes that of four women who
became pregnant following the Janssen shot, two of the babies were
lost – one due to an ectopic pregnancy and the other due to
“spontaneous abortion.”

In a section of the document titled “Safety Summary,” the study
states: “Numerical imbalances were reported between vaccine and
placebo recipients for thromboembolic events (15 versus 10) and
tinnitus (6 versus 0).”

It beggars belief that the Biden administration tried to hide these
key documents that would serve to inform the public about the safety
of the COVID vaccines.

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]]