International
The highly politicized FBI has lost the trust and cooperation of local law enforcement
From LifeSiteNews
If these allegations are true and accurate, the Justice Department and FBI are – and have been –institutionally corrupted to their very core to the point in which the United States Congress and the American people will have no confidence in the equal application of the law.
Miranda Devine has an interesting July 24 op-ed in the New York Post, sharing information gleaned from a group of law enforcement who are no longer cooperating with what they see as a highly politicized FBI.
The underlying issue is not a surprise to many of us, and the specific reasons for the distrust and lack of cooperation are, not surprisingly, exactly what we predicted long before their assembly came together.
From the Post:
… ‘They are not only reluctant to work with the FBI but reportedly have decided to no longer share actionable, substantive information on criminal and other intelligence-related activity with the FBI.’
Most concerning is what the alliance of whistleblowers calls a ‘crisis of confidence’ in FBI-led task forces where relationships with local cops have deteriorated to the point of ‘imploding’ in some cases because of ‘poor management and ineffective leadership by the FBI.’
Local cops said their precipitous loss of trust in the FBI was triggered by its excessive response to the Capitol riot of January 6, 2021, followed by the raid on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence in Florida.
One source, a 25-year veteran sergeant in the Major Crimes Division of a large police force in a Western state, said they ‘cannot understand why the FBI is not going after [far-left militant group] Antifa, BLM and pro-Palestinian rioters with the same vigor the FBI brought to bear against’ J6 participants.
READ: Google under fire for reportedly manipulating searches about Trump assassination attempt
What the group describes about the FBI relationship with Antifa is exactly what we have previously discussed on these pages. There is no way for Antifa to operate as a domestic extremist group, without the expressed support and willful blindness of the FBI. Quite simply, if the FBI wanted to stop the violent and extremist activity of Antifa, they could do that easily.
Remember, the objective of the FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago was to resecure what they perceived as physical evidence President Donald Trump controlled showing how the DOJ and FBI action in 2016 was targeting him using the power of their law enforcement and intelligence agencies. In the background, the origination of all the DOJ/FBI/Intelligence Community targeting goes back to the 2015/16 FBI exploitation of the NSA database; this is not a contested discussion issue – it’s just continually forgotten.
The FBI was using their access to the NSA metadata of all Americans to conduct surveillance on political candidates that might be a threat to the power structures that exploited the secrets within the electronic records of all Americans. The FBI was, and almost certainly still is, conducting domestic surveillance and tracking Americans just like the German Stasi or Soviet KGB. It’s still happening, but we are not supposed to talk about it, or something.
The raid on Mar-a-Lago, just like the Robert Mueller investigation, was part of a long-standing coverup operation. The FBI was looking for what Trump took with him as evidence of the weaponized system that targeted him. The FBI wanted that back. The FBI was willing to use deadly force to get it back if that’s what it took.
The modern FBI is the police agency of a weaponized U.S. government, with a direct and purposeful mandate to keep the American people under control through strict surveillance and a violent police state.
Understand and accept this with great seriousness, there are no honorable “rank and file” inside this organization.
Every member of the FBI is a participant in the weaponization of power and government. The members are jackboots recruited from ideological college campuses for exactly the purpose of supporting a Stasi-like police state.
Through the past several years, we have discovered how the FBI worked inside Twitter, Facebook, and social media to control information, remove content, and manipulate opinion on behalf of the U.S. government – all activity political.
We have also learned the FBI took active measures to suppress information about the Hunter Biden laptop and control any negative consequences for the Biden regime – again, political. These are not disputed realities.
The U.S. Department of Justice and FBI are now political institutions that have abandoned their originating mission in order to become the domestic equivalent of the Soviet-era FSB. Their joint targeting mechanisms have been redesigned to support the interests of corrupt D.C. politicians, specifically the interests of Democrats.
It was in June 2022, when Senator Chuck Grassley sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray, notifying them of whistleblower allegations from within the FBI that senior leadership in both Main Justice and FBI are involved in a coordinated effort to cover up criminal activity related to Hunter Biden.
The whistleblower allegations, in combination with the documented history of DOJ and FBI misconduct, culminate in Sen. Grassley stating:
If these allegations are true and accurate, the Justice Department and FBI are – and have been – institutionally corrupted to their very core to the point in which the United States Congress and the American people will have no confidence in the equal application of the law. Attorney General Garland and Director Wray, simply put, based on the allegations that I’ve received from numerous whistleblowers, you have systemic and existential problems within your agencies. [Emphases added]
Grassley was admitting what has been visible for years.
Grassley is telling the corrupt DOJ-FBI leadership that people in the organizations are outlining the detailed behavior of their corrupt leadership. However, with zero oversight involved, and with Democrats in charge of all committees that would be responsible for such oversight, and with institutional media in alignment and agreement with the corrupt institutional intents of the DOJ/FBI, the frustrating question becomes… “and?”
I mean, who are we kidding? If Republicans were in charge of the Senate Judiciary, Reform/Oversight, or Intelligence committees, do we really believe that anything would be different? Before responding to that cynicism, remind yourself, they were for four years; January 2015 through January 2019, Republicans in charge of oversight.
It was exactly when Republicans were in charge of Main Justice and FBI oversight that Main Justice and FBI were targeting political candidate Donald Trump.
In July 2021, the DOJ Office of the Inspector General produced an absolutely damning Inspector General investigation of FBI conduct in the rape and sexual assault of U.S. gymnasts, revealing how FBI agents facilitated Nassar’s sex crimes by taking no action despite numerous witness statements to them.
Worse yet, the FBI never reported the sexual assaults to local law enforcement… and to top it off, the rank and vile FBI agents lied during the investigation of their conduct, and the DOJ under AG Bill Barr, and now under AG Merrick Garland, refused to prosecute the FBI liars.
The entire IG report reveals layer-upon-layer of FBI wrongdoing, misconduct, and false statements in an effort to cover up their activity when the internal investigation of their conduct began. This report is a total condemnation of the FBI rank and file. It really is quite stunning.
Background on FBI
As we discovered in January 2023, the FBI was fully aware of the terrorist who was planning to shoot the synagogue in Colleyville, Texas, and yet they did nothing.
The FBI knowledge of the shooter, Malik Faisal Akram, who was known as Faisal Akram, was confirmed by the Daily Mail. Akram ranted, prior to his travel to the U.S., that he wished he had died in the 9/11 terror attacks. He was a regular visitor to Pakistan, and reportedly a member of the Tablighi Jamaat group set up to “purify” Islam. To say the U.S. intelligence system knew Faisal Akram would be an understatement.
The FBI was also fully aware of the Boston Marathon bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers, before they executed their plot. The FBI took no action. The Russian police twice warned the FBI that the Tsarnaev brothers were going to carry out a domestic terrorist attack on the U.S., but the FBI did nothing.
The FBI knew about the San Bernardino terrorists, specifically Tashfeen Malik, and were monitoring her phone calls and communications before her and Syed Farook executed their attack killing 14 people and leaving 22 others seriously injured. The FBI took no action.
The FBI knew Colorado grocery store shooter Ahmad Alissa before he executed his attack. The FBI took no action.
The FBI knew in advance of the Pulse Nightclub shooter (Omar Mateen) and were tipped off by the local sheriff. The FBI knew in advance of the Parkland High School shooter (Nikolas Cruz). The FBI knew in advance of the Fort Hood shooter (Nidal Hasan), and the FBI knew in advance of Colorado grocery store shooter Ahmad al-Aliwi Alissa. The FBI took no action.
The case of the first recorded ISIS attack on U.S. soil was in Garland, Texas in 2015.
The FBI not only knew the shooters (Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi) in advance, but the FBI also took the shooters to the venue and were standing only a few yards away when Simpson and Soofi opened fire. Yes, you read that correctly – the FBI took the terrorists to the event and then watched it unfold. “An FBI trainer suggested in an interview with 60 Minutes that, had the attack been bigger, the agency’s numerous ties to the shooter would have led to a congressional investigation.”
Remember, shortly before the 2018 mid-term election, when Ceasar Syoc – a man living in his van – was caught sending “energetic material that can become combustible when subjected to heat or friction,” or what FBI Director Christopher Wray called “not hoax devices”?
Remember how sketchy everything about that was, including the child-like perpetrator telling a judge later that he was trying to walk back his guilty plea, because he was tricked into signing a confession for a crime he did not create.
Or more recently, the goofball plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer that involved 18 suspects, 12 of them actually working for the FBI as the plot was hatched? And we cannot forget the January 6 D.C. protest-turned-insurrection effort, which is clearly looking like an FBI inspired and coordinated effort; and unlike Syoc, despite the numerous CCTV cameras and resources in the area, they cannot find who placed the pipe-bombs.
Have we forgotten the Atlanta “Olympic Park Bombing,” and the FBI intentionally setting up transparently innocent Richard Jewel?
What about the FBI failing to investigate the assassination of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens in Benghazi. Did we forget when Robert Mueller’s FBI waited 19 days after the Benghazi attack before showing up at the compound? Journalists from the U.S. were walking around the compound after 48 hours, but it took the FBI another two weeks before the first investigator arrived. All evidence long destroyed.
Then, there’s the entirety of the FBI conduct in “Spygate,” the demonstrably evident FBI operation to conduct political surveillance against Donald Trump using their investigative authorities; and the downstream consequences of a massive institutional effort to cover up one of the biggest justice department scandals in the history of our nation. The original effort against Trump used massive resources from the DOJ and FBI. Heck, the coverup operation using the Mueller/Weissmann special counsel used more than 50 investigative FBI agents alone.
And of course, the FBI still had 13 extra agents available to rush to a NASCAR racetrack to investigate a garage door pull-down rope that might have been perceived as a noose; but the serial rape of hundreds of teenage girls, eh, not-so-much effort – even when they are standing in front of the FBI begging for help.
[At this point, I am increasingly convinced by evidence there are elements within the FBI that are enablers involved in sex trafficking, human smuggling, abduction, counterfeiting, and money laundering as part of their operational mission.]
The FBI didn’t make a mistake or drop the proverbial ball in the Olympic gymnast case, they intentionally and specifically maintained the sexual exploitation of teenage girls by doing absolutely nothing with the complaints they received. This is not misconduct, this is purposeful.
Then, as if to apply salt to the open wound of severe FBI politicization, what did the FBI do with the Hunter Biden laptop?
[Notice I’ve set the issue of the disappearing Huma Abedin/Anthony Weiner laptop – in the known custody of the FBI – over there in the corner, next to missing investigation of the Awan brothers.]
More recently, the FBI executed a search warrant on the home and office of Project Veritas and the founder, James O’Keefe. While the raid was taking place, a New York Times reporter called O’Keefe to ask him about his thoughts on getting raided. The same New York Times journalist, a few days later, then begins writing about the confidential attorney-client privileged information illegally retrieved then leaked by the FBI during their raid.
My point is this…
What the Federal Security Service (FSB) is to the internal security of the Russian state, so too is the FBI in performing the same function for the U.S. federal government.
The FBI is a U.S. version of the Russian “State Police”; and the FBI is deployed – almost exclusively – to attack domestic enemies of those who control government, while they protect the interests of the U.S. Fourth Branch of Government. That is the clear and accurate domestic prism to contextualize their perceived mission: “domestic violent extremists pose the greatest threat” to their objective.
Put another way, “We The People,” who fight against government abuse and usurpation, are the FBI’s actual and literal enemy.
Let me be very clear with another brutally obvious example. Antifa could not exist as an organization, capable to organize and carry out violent attacks against their targets, without the full support of the FBI. If the FBI wanted to arrest members of Antifa, who are actually conducting violence, they could do it easily – with little effort.
It is the absence of any action, by the FBI toward Antifa, that tells us the FBI is enabling that violent extremist behavior to continue. Once you accept that transparent point of truth, then you realize the FBI definition of domestic violent extremism is something else entirely.
The FBI is not a law enforcement or investigative division of the U.S. Department of Justice. The FBI is a political weapon of a larger institution that is now focused almost entirely toward supporting a radical communist agenda to destroy civil society in the United States.
The FBI set up the operation in Michigan to give the illusion that domestic threats were attempting to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer, everything about the events were an FBI construct. The same thing with the January 6 events in Washington, D.C., and the pipe bombs. These are domestic FBI operations. Think about the precarious nature of what this type of activity indicates.
The current mission of the FBI appears to be preserving and protecting institutional power by protecting the administration of President Joe Biden.
Anyone who continues to push this insufferable and fraudulent “honorable FBI rank and file talking point” is, at this point in history, willfully and purposefully operating to deceive the American people on behalf of government interests who are intent on destroying us.
It is not a difference of opinion any longer. Personally, I have lost the ability to sit comfortably or intellectually with anyone who pushes or accepts the “mistakes are made” nonsense. The FBI is not making mistakes, it is doing well what it considers important.
To me, it comes down to a simple matter of accepting what is continually staring us in the face.
Additionally, as we watched the outcome of the Michael Sussmann trial, we should never lose sight of the fact that 40 FBI agents were involved in the Mueller-Weissmann probe to investigate the fraudulent construct created by Hillary Clinton and crew. 40 agents? And, according to the outcome of the Sussmann trial, the FBI knew it was all a ruse.
This is why and how the Fourth Branch of Government is now the superseding apparatus above all other branches. This is why and how Barack Obama, John Brennan, and Eric Holder created it, cemented it, and made it impervious to any effort to remove it.
Remember when Henry Cuellar was critical of the Biden administration open border policies that were hurting his Texas district? Less than a month after going public with his criticisms, the FBI raids on his home and office began, the same FBI that raided the home of James O’Keefe while coordinating its search with the New York Times.
The Fourth Branch of Government is corrupt; heck, the J6 committee was defending the corrupt FBI, participating with the corrupt FBI, selling a joint J6 operation that involved the FBI. The corrupt media have aligned with the corrupt FBI, and the justice institutions in/around this legal framework are self-aware and fully autonomous.
As the Twitter Files show, the DOJ and FBI, through the authority of DHS, now have the ability to monitor every single aspect of every life that might seek to challenge or destroy the corrupt system.
In essence, Skynet – the ultimate end game of political surveillance and targeting outlined by Edward Snowden – has been activated. We the People are the enemy of the state.
Jackboots are very real, and they are wearing FBI logos on their shirts.
Daily Caller
Spreading Sedition? Media Defends Democrats Calling On Soldiers And Officers To Defy Chain Of Command
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt was confronted on Thursday about President Donald Trump stating that the Democrats who called on the military to defy his orders committed crimes “punishable by death.”
In two Truth Social posts on Thursday, Trump accused the six Democratic lawmakers who called on military members to “ignore illegal orders” of committing “seditious behavior” that potentially could be “punishable by death.” In response, Leavitt immediately started criticizing the lawmakers who “conspired” to encourage military members to defy the president and potentially put themselves in harm’s way.
“You have sitting members of the United States Congress, who conspired together to orchestrate a video message to members of the United States military, to active duty service members, to members of the national security apparatus, encouraging them to defy the president’s lawful orders. The sanctity of our military rests on the chain of command, and if that chain of command is broken, it can lead to people getting killed, it that’s what these members of Congress, who swore an oath to abide by the Constitution, are essentially encouraging,” Leavitt said.
“We have 1.3 active duty service members in this country, and if they hear this radical message from sitting members of Congress, that could inspire chaos, and it could incite violence, and it certainly could disrupt the chain of command,” Leavitt continued.
WATCH:
Democratic Michigan Sen. Elissa Slotkin released the viral video on Tuesday, which included Democratic Arizona Sen. Mark Kelly and Democratic Pennsylvania Rep. Chris Deluzio, in which they accused Trump of of “pitting” service members and intelligence community officials “against American citizens” and of violating the U.S. Constitution. The six lawmakers all previously served in the military or intelligence community.
The press secretary added that their actions may be “punishable by law” given that Trump has never given any unlawful orders.
“That is a very, very dangerous message, and it perhaps is punishable by law. I’m not a lawyer … They are literally saying to 1.3 million active duty service members not to defy the chain of command, not to follow lawful orders. But they’re suggesting, they’re suggesting, Nancy, that the president has given illegal orders, which he has not. Every single order that is given to this United States military by this commander in chief and through this chain of command, through the Secretary of War, is lawful,” Leavitt said.
The lawmakers issued a joint statement stating that Trump believes they should be put to death for swearing to “protect and defend the Constitution.”
“What’s most telling is that the President considers it punishable by death for us to restate the law,” the statement read. “Our servicemembers should know that we have their backs as they fulfill their oath to the Constitution and obligation to follow only lawful orders. It is not only the right thing to do, but also our duty. “But this isn’t about any one of us. This isn’t about politics. This is about who we are as Americans. Every American must unite and condemn the President’s calls for our murder and political violence. This is a time for moral clarity.”
“In these moments, fear is contagious, but so is courage. We will continue to lead and will not be intimidated. “Don’t Give Up the Ship!” the statement concluded.
Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution states that the president is the commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The president is also in charge of intelligence agencies such as the FBI and CIA since he is the head of the executive branch.
In response to the video, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth stated that they have “Stage 4 [Trump Derangement Syndrome].”
The UK’s Health Security Agency (UKHSA) has recently been exposed for its blatant refusal to release critical data that could reveal a potential link between Covid-19 shots and the nation’s alarming surge in excess deaths.
As The Telegraph reveals in a damning exposé, UKHSA officials invoked the “distress or anger” of bereaved families as their shield, arguing that any hint of correlation in the data might shatter the emotional well-being of those left behind.
Sonia Elijah investigates is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Subscribe to Sonia Elijah Investigates
According to The Telegraph:
The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) argued that releasing the data would lead to the “distress or anger” of bereaved relatives if a link were to be discovered.
Public health officials also argued that publishing the data risked damaging the well-being and mental health of the families and friends of people who died.
Last year, a cross-party group expressed alarm about “growing public and professional concerns” over the UK’s rates of excess deaths since 2020.
In a letter to UKHSA and Department for Health, the MPs and peers said that potentially critical data – which map the date of people’s Covid vaccine doses to the date of their deaths – had been released to pharmaceutical companies but not put into the public domain.
They argued that the data should be released “on the same anonymised basis that it was shared with the pharmaceutical groups, and there seems to be no credible reason why that should not be done immediately”.
UsForThem, a campaign group, requested that UKHSA release the data under freedom of information laws. But the agency refused, making a number of different arguments including that publishing the data “could lead to misinformation” that would “have an adverse impact on vaccine uptake” in the public.
UKHSA also claimed there would be a risk of individuals being identified, despite the request being made for an anonymised dataset. After a two-year battle, the Information Commissioner ruled in the UKHSA’s favour, backing its refusal to publish the data.
Gareth Eve whose wife, Lisa Shaw died from the Astra-Zeneca Covid jab, took to social media to express his opinion on the UKHSA’s refusal to disclose the data—under the guise that it will risk “damaging the well-being and mental health of families and friends of people who died.”
He wrote: “As someone who lost his amazing wife to a Covid jab. As a Dad of a little boy who lost his Mammy at the age of 6 I can assure you, my heart and my mental health is already very much broken.”
Dr Craig v the Information Commissioner & the UKHSA
UsForThem was not the only party seeking this crucial data through Freedom of Information requests. As early as 2022, diagnostic pathologist and statistician Dr Clare Craig submitted a series of FOI requests to UKHSA and ONS seeking detailed data on deaths following COVID-19 vaccination. On 4 August 2023 she made a specific request for anonymised individual-level NIMS records of adults over 20 who died after December 2020 (age at first dose, vaccination dates, and barnardised date of death). UKHSA refused disclosure. After the Information Commissioner upheld the refusal in June 2024, Dr Craig appealed to the First-tier Tribunal against both the Information Commissioner and UKHSA. The tribunal dismissed her appeal on 14 October 2025.
Dr Craig kindly gave me persmission to include the First-tier Tribunal’s 27-page decision.
Sonia Elijah investigates is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Several anomalies stand out to me:
- UKHSA repeatedly changed its legal grounds.
When Dr Clare Craig made her request in August 2023, the UKHSA originally said “no” under section 40(2) FOIA (personal data exemption). Even with barnardised death dates, the UKHSA argued that the combination of age at first dose, exact vaccination dates, and approximate death date could still allow some individuals to be re-identified. So, the UKHSA treated the requested data as third-party personal data and refused it outright.
Later, probably in preparation for the tribunal they downplayed section 40(2) and relied mainly on section 38 FOIA (Health and Safety). Section 38(1) says information is exempt if its disclosure would, or would likely to:
a] endanger the physical or mental health of any individual.
b] endanger the safety of any individual.
This exemption is not absolute but is subject to the public-interest balance test.
The UKHSA also shifted to other arguments: sections: 12 (Cost), 4 (Vexatious or repeated requests), 36 (Prejudice to effective conduct of public affairs), 41 (Actionable breach of confidence). They ultimately succeeded with the broad “health and safety” exemption (s.38) based on speculative risks of harassment or violence.
- Releasing these records (even barnardised) could lead to bereaved families being identified and harassed.
- It could fuel anti-vaccine campaigns that incite threats or violence against doctors, scientists, or public-health staff.
- It could cause serious distress to relatives who discover their loved one’s details are being discussed online.
- Misinformation/misinterpretation of the data could itself damage public confidence and therefore harm mental health on a wider scale.
In short, the UKHSA started with “this is personal data, full stop,” which later became “well, maybe it can be anonymised, but releasing it anyway would endanger people’s health or safety.” Then they threw in every possible additional exemption (cost, vexatious, political damage, and legal confidentiality) to make absolutely sure at least one would stick.
- The closed hearing and confidential bundle
Other anomalies that stood out were the following: a closed hearing on 24 June 2025 that Dr Craig was not allowed to attend. And a closed/confidential bundle of documents that she was not allowed to see. Later, the tribunal gave her a written gist (a few paragraphs) that said, in very general terms, what topics have been covered in the closed sessions and what the secret evidence was broadly about—without revealing anything that the UKHSA deemed too sensitive!
When asked for comment, Dr Craig wrote: “There is more than enough evidence that the vaccine products caused death. The majority were covid deaths in the first two weeks after injection and in the period after the third mRNA dose. Non-covid deaths also rose and these did not come in waves. However, the ONS stopped published their data when the problem became undeniable. I hope this story about hiding the data wakes people up to the failure of our institutions to respect the truth over their own agendas.”
Silencing the Signal: From Excess Deaths to Black-Ops Disinformation
This active form of suppression has gone far beyond merely downplaying any possible link between COVID shots and excess mortality. What has been actively concealed includes:
- The very fact of sustained excess deaths appearing across many countries from 2021 onward.
- The extensive evidence of harm caused by the experimental mRNA and viral-vector injections themselves, as documented in the manufacturers’ own pharmacovigilance reports submitted to regulators (reports that were meant to remain confidential). Read my analysis of these reports here, here, here, here and here.
- A systematic campaign of scientific censorship: dozens of peer-reviewed studies and preprints that identified serious adverse events, novel mechanisms of injury, or elevated mortality signals were retracted, withdrawn, or smeared—often without legitimate scientific justification.
- An overt psychological and information-warfare operation orchestrated by state actors—including the UK’s 77th Brigade and Counter Disinformation Unit, U.S. agencies, NATO’s strategic communications centres, and independent NGOs, such as the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH)—all coordinated to intimidate, defame, deplatform, and silence doctors, scientists, and citizens who publicly questioned the “safe and effective” narrative.
- Collusion with Big Tech platforms to throttle, shadow-ban, or deplatform dissenting voices under the pretext of “countering disinformation.”
In 2023, I wrote about how governments and mainstream media worldwide have imposed a “veil of silence” on the issue of excess deaths, particularly after the rollout of COVID shots in mid-2021—in stark contrast with their earlier obsession with daily COVID death tallies. My piece centred on a pivotal UK parliamentary 30-minute adjourned debate on October 20, 2023, secured by then-independent MP Andrew Bridgen.
Piercing the Veil of Silence over Excess Deaths
It is important to remember how the BBC inserted live captions during Bridgen’s debate to fact-check and undermine him in real-time, labelling his claims as “misinformation.”
Molly Kingsley, co-founder of UsForThem, a campaign group (also targeted by the Counter Disinformation Unit) that requested the UKHSA to release the data under freedom of information laws, took to social media to post a further detail in their legal case.
“The UKHSA also alleged that if they released the data, someone might use it to promote a misleading impression (misinformation) about a possible relationship between dates of dosage and dates of death. They argued that this had the potential to damage confidence in vaccine programmes and so could endanger the health of the public.”
Sonia Elijah investigates is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
A closer look at suppressing the link between excess deaths and Covid shots
In June last year, a bombshell study examining excess deaths on a global level, was published in BMJ Public Health by a group of researchers (Mostert et al.) from Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam.
BOMBSHELL STUDY: 3 MILLION EXCESS DEATHS IN 47 COUNTRIES
Their results showed:
The total number of excess deaths in 47 countries of the Western World was 3,098,456 from 1 January 2020 until 31 December 2022. Excess mortality was documented in 41 countries (87%) in 2020, 42 countries (89%) in 2021 and 43 countries (91%) in 2022. In 2020, the year of the COVID-19 pandemic onset and implementation of containment measures, records present 1 033 122 excess deaths (P-score 11.4%). In 2021, the year in which both containment measures and COVID-19 vaccines were used to address virus spread and infection, the highest number of excess deaths was reported: 1 256 942 excess deaths (P-score 13.8%). In 2022, when most containment measures were lifted and COVID-19 vaccines were continued, preliminary data present 808 392 excess deaths.
The group’s findings were amplified by an article in The Telegraph: “Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths.”
Notably, shortly afterwards, the Princess Máxima Center (the Paediatric Oncology centre affiliated with the authors) issued a statement, “distancing itself” from the publication. It went on to assert: “The study in no way demonstrates a link between vaccinations and excess mortality; that is explicitly not the researchers’ finding. We therefore regret that this impression has been created.”
This triggered BMJ Public Health to respond with an “expression of concern” a few days later, stating: “The integrity team and editors are investigating issues raised regarding the quality and messaging of this work.”
CENSORING THE SCIENCE: Bombshell Study on Excess Deaths Faces Retraction
The last update, in January 2025, stated: “BMJ are awaiting the result of an institutional investigation into the conduct of the work, which was due to be finalized by the end of 2024. At present, the institution can offer no update on when the information will be sent to BMJ.”
Also noteworthy is that on 25 August 2023, the UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) announced that it would no longer update its “Deaths by vaccination status, England” series, marking the end of its regular publications. The ONS stated: “We will no longer be updating the Deaths by vaccination status analysis, England series.” No specific reasons were detailed in the notice. This begs the questions: what caused ONS to make such a decision? Is it because an inconvenient pattern of truth was emerging that went against the “safe and effective” narrative?
On 18 April 2024, Andrew Bridgen managed to secure a landmark two-hour House of Commons debate on excess deaths since 2021 and their link to mRNA COVID vaccines.
Debate in Parliament Ignites over Excess Deaths and Vaccine Safety Concerns
Describing it as “the greatest medical scandal in living memory,” Bridgen — himself double-vaccinated and vaccine-injured — accused authorities of deliberately hiding and manipulating data, abandoning proven protocols, and using midazolam/morphine under NICE NG163 to hasten deaths. He highlighted UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) baseline changes that erased ~20,000 excess deaths in 2023 and their refusal to release anonymised record-level data.
The “inconvenient” data secured by Wouter Aukema
My series of interviews with senior data patterns & forensics analyst, Wouter Aukema, have been extremely revealing. Aukema and his team’s software was able to download 15 million case safety reports (within and outside of Europe) for 6000 drugs and vaccines from European Medicines Agency’s EudraVigilance system for the past 20 years. This information was presented on dashboards, built to make public pharmacovigilance data accessible and navigable. They shockingly revealed a three-fold increase in case safety reports for the Covid vaccines (at the start of the rollout) compared to all the other drug products and substances- over the past 20 years.
True Horrors of Covid Vaccine Harm Data NOW Exposed!
In my second interview with Aukema, he dropped the biggest bombshell. According to his systematic downloading of the data from EudraVigilance (which includes case safety reports from around the world not just the EU)- 40% of worldwide serious case safety reports (including hospitalization and death) in relation to Covid vaccines (only) have been removed from the European Medicines Agency’s database from October 2021-November 2022. In addition, case safety reports have also been retroactively modified, after their data lockpoint (DLP).
Data Crimes: Deleting Covid Vaccine Deaths
Only last month, I broke the story how the European Medicines Agency (EMA) had sent a letter to Aukema demanding he immediately delete the pharmacovigilance data dowloaded from EudraVigilance. It has also come to light that similar EMA letters were sent to French researchers Emma Darles and Pavan Vincent.
BREAKING: Data Analyst Faces EMA’s Demand to Delete Pharmacovigilance Data!
Just a day before Aukema was going to present his findings at the Back to the Future conference, he discovered an email from the EMA in his spam folder, with a subject line that sent chills: “Request to immediately delete non-public information originating from the EudraVigilance system and made available on the dashboards you have on Tableau Public.”
Sonia Elijah investigates is a reader-supported publication.
To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
One of the key claims alleged by the EMA was that Aukema’s dashboards, which include worldwide unique case identifiers and country-of-origin data, pose an “indirect” risk of identifying patients. “I have no access to patients’ birth dates or names,” he insisted. “Even if that data was available, I would never have downloaded it. My objective is to gather insights on patterns, not to find people.”
After further discussions with Wouter Aukema, he revealed a disturbing practice affecting approximately 40% of serious (including fatal) COVID-19 vaccine adverse-event reports.
Whenever a case narrative is updated – even for the most trivial edit, such as inserting a comma – the system generates an entirely new case ID number and a new receipt date. The previous version of the report, with its original identifier and timestamp, is permanently overwritten and becomes untraceable. There is no audit trail, no version history, and no way to retrieve the original entry. Aukema describes this as “a floating duck.”
On the surface everything appears normal, but the critical reference points are in constant motion, making it impossible to track changes or hold anyone accountable for what has been altered or suppressed. He suspects that this systematic erasure of original reports is not accidental. In his view, the manipulation originates from the pharmaceutical companies themselves and from national pharmacovigilance authorities – including Lareb in the Netherlands and, by extension, equivalent bodies such as the MHRA (Yellow Card scheme) in the United Kingdom – whose databases feed into the European system.
In short, not only are serious and fatal cases being under-reported or retrospectively downgraded; in a large proportion of instances, the original evidence that they were ever reported in the first place is being deliberately and irreversibly destroyed.
Now, turning back to the UKHSA’s blank refusal to release critical data which could expose the link between excess deaths and the Covid shots—perhaps this link could be found in Aukema’s damning data sets, which include case safety reports from the UK for the Covid shots.
Each individual case safety report (ICSR) in EudraVigilance includes (when reported): date of vaccination, date of onset of the adverse reaction, and the date of death (if fatal). If a large, tightly clustered peak of fatal reports were visible in the first 0–14 days—and especially if that peak exceeded the reporting bias and background mortality expected in the vaccinated population—it would represent a very strong safety signal requiring urgent investigation.
Is this the reason why the EMA are so fixated on the deletion of the country-of-origin data? Could it be a case of an orchestrated cover up shared by regulators amid liability fears?
Sonia Elijah investigates is a reader-supported publication.
If you appreciate the hard work I do as an independent investigative journalist,
please consider supporting me with a paid subscription or buy me a coffee!
ATA Collect $72 Million in Dues But Couldn’t Pay Striking Teachers a Dime
Historic Return: NHL Confirms Player Participation in 2026 Winter Olympics
Alberta Offers Enormous Advantages for AI Data Centres
National Crisis Approaching Due To The Carney Government’s Centrally Planned Green Economy
-
Energy2 days agoCarney bets on LNG, Alberta doubles down on oil
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta on right path to better health care
-
Indigenous2 days agoTop constitutional lawyer slams Indigenous land ruling as threat to Canadian property rights
-
Alberta2 days agoCarney government’s anti-oil sentiment no longer in doubt
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta Emergency Alert test – Wednesday at 1:55 PM
-
Alberta1 day ago‘Weird and wonderful’ wells are boosting oil production in Alberta and Saskatchewan
-
Health2 days agoSPARC Kindness Tree: A Growing Tradition in Capstone
-
Business1 day agoCanada is failing dismally at our climate goals. We’re also ruining our economy.