COVID-19
New film ‘Epidemic of Fraud’ exposes massive COVID corruption
From LifeSiteNews
By Frank Wright
‘Epidemic of Fraud’ exposes the suppression of hydroxychloroquine, a potential solution to the COVID crisis, orchestrated by government entities including the FDA.
This month sees the release of a new film documenting the COVID regime. What is different about “Epidemic of Fraud” is the scope of corruption it exposes, reaching beyond the prohibition of genuinely safe and effective medicine, to massive financial and political motives to promote lockdowns and the dangerous “vaccines” instead.
John Davidson’s film begins with the scandalous campaign against hydroxychloroquine, a derivative of quinine, the naturally occurring wonder drug whose control has always been a matter of U.S. national security.
“This was the answer. This would have halted the pandemic.” So said Steven Hatfill – COVID adviser to President Donald Trump – in a segment in the film. He noted that “within a week or so, we had 62 million doses” of hydroxychloroquine.
He continued: “52 other countries have used it successfully to keep their pandemic – their hospital admissions under control”
So who decided to halt the Trump administration’s early treatment plan to administer a proven cure? As Davidson shows, “The idea to halt hydroxychloroquine came from the FDA.”
Davidson is far from alone in showing precisely who was responsible.
Dr. Robert Malone – ‘cause unknown’
Davidson, a committed Christian, began as a radio journalist, eventually moving to television and film production. He admits early in the film that he, too, promoted COVID measures, thinking he was providing a public service. It was the restrictions on hydroxychloroquine, he told LifeSiteNews, that “red-pilled” him.
Beginning in 2020, he spent the intervening years in piecing together a story which amounted to a massive fraud conducted on, and at the expense of, the American people.
His film makes extensive use of interview footage from the lockdown period, showing Dr. Robert Malone in 2021 explaining to Joe Rogan exactly who was behind the suppression of a cheap drug that could have stopped the pandemic in its tracks. It was, according to Malone, a “conspiracy between [the FDA’s] Janet Woodcock and Rick Bright to make it so that physicians could not administer hydroxychloroquine outside of the hospital.”
Rick Bright was demoted from his position as director of BARDA, the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, for smearing Trump’s recommendation of hydroxychloroquine as “dangerous.”
As to why the hydroxychloroquine restriction mattered, the truth of the claim against Bright, Malone went on:
Rick Bright in videotaped testimony has explicitly spoken about how they conspired to cook up a strategy to make it so that hydroxychloroquine could only be administered in the hospital – which by the way is too late for when [it] should be used.
Rogan asked Malone the obvious question – why did they do that?
“That is what is the unknown” replied Malone. “There are so many whys and hows – I like to say – there’s a stack of stuff that doesn’t make sense.”
Yet Davidson’s film makes a lot of sense of this seemingly senseless decision. Bright was championed as a heroic “whistleblower” for his leading role in the plan to deprive Americans of a safe and affordable remedy for COVID-19.
Bright’s ambitions are now global. He moved on to work as CEO of the Pandemic Prevention Institute at the Rockefeller Foundation in 2021, celebrating a new World Health Organization “Pandemic Intelligence Centre.” He also spoke at the 2024 World Economic Forum on a panel discussing the role of artificial intelligence in “future cures” and “rebuilding trust in a better tomorrow.”
Bright’s LinkedIn profile reads: “Exponential Transformation of Global Health & Healthcare (Changing the World).” His record leaves no doubt as to the nature of this better world he envisions for us all.
Bureaucrats v. The People
The film shows how Davidson contacted the FDA to submit a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request, to see communications between the two major decision makers – Rick Bright and Janet Woodcock.
In a phone call with the Food and Drug Administration, Davidson was told he would have to wait two years to see the data, due to a backlog of 1100 similar requests.
Davidson used his time to investigate the two decision makers whose actions led to a campaign of suppression of hydroxychloroquine that was so successful, that doctors could be ruined if they continued to prescribe it.
“If you use these drugs [in the U.S.] you probably will be fired” said one doctor, as the film documented how doctors in Australia’s Queensland faced imprisonment for prescribing “HCQ,” as hydroxychloroquine is known. As Congressman Jim Jordan points out later in the film, “Something has happened to prevent early treatment.”
The film shows Rep. Jordan speaking at a November 2020 hearing, saying these “logjams” have been created by officials to deny Americans and their elected officials access to the truth.
We should have the right to access this without the interference of bureaucrats at the FDA and CDC.
I can’t get it. Millions of Americans can’t get it because of the logjam created by bureaucrats.
Sen. Ron Johnson was accused the next month of “elevating fringe theories” to “question virus science” by the New York Times, who nonetheless quoted him as saying, “There’s a blackout on good information in social media and media. So people are being denied information to make intelligent choices themselves.”
This blackout was spearheaded by Dr. Antony Fauci, who said at the time that there was a “distinct anti-science flavor” to those questioning his promotion of “vaccines,” lockdowns, masks, and social distancing. Fauci said he effectively was “the science,” and the media played along.
“[T]hey get up and criticize science… but if they criticize me they are criticizing science – cause I represent science,” Fauci had stated.
It became “anti-science” to question anything about this epidemic of fraud. It also became nigh impossible to get any answers. Asking why led Davidson to a darker dimension which had a bearing on another widely censored subject – the 2020 presidential election.
Political pressure
Davidson points out that if the COVID pandemic continued, then the use of mail-in ballots in the presidential election would be permitted under lockdown conditions.
Secondly, he says there was considerable pressure to deprive Donald Trump of a “win,” with a coordinated media campaign caricaturizing the president as insane for recommending hydroxychloroquine. He was linked to the death of a man who drank fish tank cleaner, as the promotion of the “100% safe and effective” mRNA injections began to intensify.
With people locked indoors before their screens, this was the message many received about Trump, and the centuries-old remedy he had endorsed – months before they would vote for their new president.
Canada’s CBC published a news alert on their X (formerly Twitter) account in March 2020, reading, “Arizona man dead, woman in critical condition after ingesting chemical touted by U.S. President Donald Trump as potential COVID-19 treatment. ‘Don’t believe anything that the president says,’ woman tells NBC. ‘Call your doctor.’”
As Davidson shows, the information war against Trump and the proven safety of hydroxychloroquine was undertaken amid enormous pressures, both political and financial. If Trump won again, would he return to promoting a $20 per dose drug, against the novel “vaccines” and the deadly Remdesivir, which was $3000 per treatment? Davidson asks his audience:
With 11 trillion dollars on the line, and the risk of Trump being right – could you have said hydroxychloroquine works?
If Davidson’s cost estimate sounds fantastical, consider that in 2020 Harvard University estimated that the cost to the U.S. from COVID-19 might run to $16 trillion.
This appraisal was revisited in a study in May 2023. Undertaken by the University of Southern California, it showed that by the end of 2023, the total cost of the pandemic to the U.S. would already amount to $14 trillion.
Consider now that these costs, most of which arose from lockdown restrictions, could have been avoided. Now factor in the many vaccine injured and those who have “died suddenly,” along with care home deaths, ventilator deaths, and other iatrogenic fatalities arising from the use of drugs such as midazolam. This is where following the science has led us.
An out-of-patent medicine, cheaply available and known to be safe for centuries could have stopped it all.
John Wilkes Booth and quinine
The film covers the remarkable history of the naturally occurring antimalarial compound quinine, including the fascinating detail that John Wilkes Booth, Lincoln’s would-be assassin, had been “smuggling quinine to desperate families” across the rebel South. Lincoln had aimed to “create as many sick and dead Southern soldiers as possible” by blockading the distribution of quinine.
Davidson shows Lincoln’s northern blockade was just one example of the military dimension to the deliberate restriction of access to quinine, of which hydroxychloroquine is a modern derivative.
It is this which gives tonic water its distinctive tang, and for this reason the gin and tonic was widely consumed by the British in the tropics. Quinine has long been safe and effective in treating a variety of sicknesses, and is so vital that its stockpiling was ordered again by the U.S. government in 1946 – as Davidson shows. The military significance of the drug which could have saved America has a long heritage. Its restriction was described by Davidson as an arguable case of “biological warfare.” This is one further disturbing dimension to the true pandemic which blighted nations under Fauci’s lockdowns.
Epidemic fraud
The message of Davidson’s film is that something is seriously wrong with our world. This wrong is not restricted to the media, whose smear campaigns “gaslit” the public into compliance, leading them to take novel treatments whose manufacturers were indemnified from liability.
It extends beyond the intimidation of doctors and the reputational ruin those brave enough to speak out have suffered. Davidson’s film, a remarkable cinematic achievement for a man who made it largely alone in his garage, is a document which will embolden anyone who sees it against the corruption that has replaced public service at the highest levels.
The film can be understood as an insight into one of the most dedicated and successful acts of self-harm that a nation has ever undertaken. The United States government, its health officials, its captive media, and its trusted public health officials have destroyed public trust along with risking the health, lives, and livelihoods of millions of its citizens.
Davidson’s film deserves the widest possible audience, as it speaks beyond partisan antagonisms to reveal a systematic betrayal of the American public, coordinated through the channels of guidance and information that Americans expected to serve them – and not the powerful political and financial interests he exposes here.
The sickness he documents is not a lab-created virus. It is the capture of the free world by dark forces whose hunger for power and for profit will see them poison their own well.
Speaking to Davidson in an interview, LifeSiteNews asked what he thought the future might hold, as public awareness of the magnitude of the epidemic of fraud around COVID grows. His answer was inspirational.
People are coming together over this. I have met lawyers fighting for the vaccine-injured, brave doctors speaking out, and there is a real movement growing.
He finished with a striking image.
I think about David and Goliath a lot.
My film is like the stone that David fired from his sling. I have released the stone. It is up to God now where it finds its mark.
You can watch “Epidemic of Fraud” by completing an email registration on Davidson’s site “Broken Truth.”
COVID-19
Former Trudeau minister faces censure for ‘deliberately lying’ about Emergencies Act invocation
From LifeSiteNews
By Christina Maas of Reclaim The Net
Trudeau’s former public safety minister, Marco Mendicino, finds himself at the center of controversy as the Canadian Parliament debates whether to formally censure him for ‘deliberately lying’ about the justification for invoking the Emergencies Act.
Trudeau’s former public safety minister, Marco Mendicino, finds himself at the center of controversy as the Canadian Parliament debates whether to formally censure him for “deliberately lying” about the justification for invoking the Emergencies Act and freezing the bank accounts of civil liberties supporters during the 2022 Freedom Convoy protests.
Conservative MP Glen Motz, a vocal critic, emphasized the importance of accountability, stating, “Parliament deserves to receive clear and definitive answers to questions. We must be entitled to the truth.”
The Emergencies Act, invoked on February 14, 2022, granted sweeping powers to law enforcement, enabling them to arrest demonstrators, conduct searches, and freeze the financial assets of those involved in or supported, the trucker-led protests. However, questions surrounding the legality of its invocation have lingered, with opposition parties and legal experts criticizing the move as excessive and unwarranted.
On Thursday, Mendicino faced calls for censure after Blacklock’s Reporter revealed formal accusations of contempt of Parliament against him. The former minister, who was removed from cabinet in 2023, stands accused of misleading both MPs and the public by falsely claiming that the decision to invoke the Emergencies Act was based on law enforcement advice. A final report on the matter contradicts his testimony, stating, “The Special Joint Committee was intentionally misled.”
Mendicino’s repeated assertions at the time, including statements like, “We invoked the Emergencies Act after we received advice from law enforcement,” have been flatly contradicted by all other evidence. Despite this, he has yet to publicly challenge the allegations.
The controversy deepened as documents and testimony revealed discrepancies in the government’s handling of the crisis. While Attorney General Arif Virani acknowledged the existence of a written legal opinion regarding the Act’s invocation, he cited solicitor-client privilege to justify its confidentiality. Opposition MPs, including New Democrat Matthew Green, questioned the lack of transparency. “So you are both the client and the solicitor?” Green asked, to which Virani responded, “I wear different hats.”
The invocation of the Act has since been ruled unconstitutional by a federal court, a decision the Trudeau government is appealing. Critics argue that the lack of transparency and apparent misuse of power set a dangerous precedent. The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms echoed these concerns, emphasizing that emergency powers must be exercised only under exceptional circumstances and with a clear legal basis.
Reprinted with permission from Reclaim The Net.
COVID-19
Australian doctor who criticized COVID jabs has his suspension reversed
From LifeSiteNews
By David James
‘I am free, I am no longer suspended. I can prescribe Ivermectin, and most importantly – and this is what AHPRA is most afraid of – I can criticize the vaccines freely … as a medical practitioner of this country,’ said COVID critic Dr. William Bay.
A long-awaited decision regarding the suspension of the medical registration of Dr William Bay by the Medical Board of Australia has been handed down by the Queensland Supreme Court. Justice Thomas Bradley overturned the suspension, finding that Bay had been subject to “bias and failure to afford fair process” over complaints unrelated to his clinical practice.
The case was important because it reversed the brutal censorship of medical practitioners, which had forced many doctors into silence during the COVID crisis to avoid losing their livelihoods.
Bay and his supporters were jubilant after the decision. “The judgement in the matter of Bay versus AHPRA (Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency) and the state of Queensland has just been handed down, and we have … absolute and complete victory,” he proclaimed outside the court. “I am free, I am no longer suspended. I can prescribe Ivermectin, and most importantly – and this is what AHPRA is most afraid of – I can criticize the vaccines freely … as a medical practitioner of this country.”
Bay went on: “The vaccines are bad, the vaccines are no good, and people should be afforded the right to informed consent to choose these so-called vaccines. Doctors like me will be speaking out because we have nothing to fear.”
Bay added that the judge ruled not only to reinstate his registration, but also set aside the investigation into him, deeming it invalid. He also forced AHPRA to pay the legal costs. “Everything is victorious for myself, and I praise God,” he said.
The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency (AHPRA), which partners the Medical Board of Australia, is a body kept at arm’s length from the government to prevent legal and political accountability. It was able to decide which doctors could be deregistered for allegedly not following the government line. If asked questions about its decisions AHPRA would reply that it was not a Commonwealth agency so there was no obligation to respond.
The national board of AHPRA is composed of two social workers, one accountant, one physiotherapist, one mathematician and three lawyers. Even the Australian Medical Association, which also aggressively threatened dissenting doctors during COVID, has objected to its role. Vice-president Dr Chris Moy described the powers given to AHPRA as being “in the realms of incoherent zealotry”.
This was the apparatus that Bay took on, and his victory is a significant step towards allowing medical practitioners to voice their concerns about Covid and the vaccines. Until now, most doctors, at least those still in a job, have had to keep any differing views to themselves. As Bay suggests, that meant they abrogated their duty to ensure patients gave informed consent.
Justice Bradley said the AHPRA board’s regulatory role did not “include protection of government and regulatory agencies from political criticism.” To that extent the decision seems to allow freedom of speech for medical practitioners. But AHPRA still has the power to deregister doctors without any accountability. And if there is one lesson from Covid it is that bureaucrats in the Executive branch have little respect for legal or ethical principles.
READ: More scientists are supporting a swift recall of the dangerous COVID jabs
It is to be hoped that Australian medicos who felt forced into silence now begin to speak out about the vaccines, the mandating of which has coincided with a dramatic rise in all-cause mortality in heavily vaccinated countries around the world, including Australia. This may prove psychologically difficult, though, because those doctors would then have to explain why they have changed their position, a discussion they will no doubt prefer to avoid.
The Bay decision has implications for the way the three arms of government: the legislature, the executive and the judiciary, function in Australia. There are supposed to be checks and balances, but the COVID crisis revealed that, when put under stress, the separation of powers does not work well, or at all.
During the crisis the legislature routinely passed off its responsibilities to the executive branch, which removed any voter influence because bureaucrats are not elected. The former premier of Victoria, Daniel Andrews, went a step further by illegitimately giving himself and the Health Minister positions in the executive branch, when all they were entitled to was roles in the legislature as members of the party in power. This appalling move resulted in the biggest political protests ever seen in Melbourne, yet the legislation passed anyway.
The legislature’s abrogation of responsibility left the judiciary as the only branch of government able to address the abuse of Australia’s foundational political institutions. To date, the judges have disappointed. But the Bay decision may be a sign of better things to come.
READ: Just 24% of Americans plan to receive the newest COVID shot: poll
-
Alberta17 hours ago
Proposed $70 billion AI data centre in MD of Greenview could launch an incredible new chapter for western Canadian energy
-
COVID-192 days ago
Australian doctor who criticized COVID jabs has his suspension reversed
-
Business2 days ago
Massive growth in federal workforce contributes to Ottawa’s red ink
-
Alberta13 hours ago
Your towing rights! AMA unveils measures to help fight predatory towing
-
Frontier Centre for Public Policy2 days ago
False Claims, Real Consequences: The ICC Referrals That Damaged Canada’s Reputation
-
COVID-192 days ago
Former Trudeau minister faces censure for ‘deliberately lying’ about Emergencies Act invocation
-
National1 day ago
When’s the election? Singh finally commits. Poilievre asks Governor General to step in
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
Party Leaders Exposed For ‘Lying’ About Biden Health