Stefanik: Rooting Out Deep State Corruption Is A Top Priority For House Republicans

Stefanik: Rooting Out Deep State Corruption Is A Top Priority For House Republicans

House GOP Conference Chair Elise Stefanik of New York pledged that aggressive oversight of executive agencies to rid the federal government of overt corruption will be a top priority for Republicans in the new Congress.

On Tuesday, Stefanik became one of a dozen Republican lawmakers appointed by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy to serve on the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.

In an exclusive interview with The Federalist on Wednesday morning, Stefanik characterized the select panel, which was established under the Judiciary Committee led by Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, as House Republicans’ primary vehicle for pursuing accountability for the Biden administration’s abuses.

“A top priority for House Republicans is rooting out the weaponization of the federal government against everyday Americans,” said Stefanik. The No. 3 lawmaker in GOP leadership highlighted the nation’s top intelligence agencies as the committee’s primary focus.

[POLL: 4 In 5 Americans See Two-Tiered Justice System]

“The FBI and DOJ are ripe for oversight, and they deserve oversight,” she said, while also pledging that investigations would come for the Internal Revenue Service and National Institutes of Health. Both agencies “have run rampant in targeting Americans,” Stefanik said, adding that Congress has a “constitutional duty” to conduct meaningful oversight.

“Democrats failed to do that when we were in one-party rule,” she added.

Whom the committee plans to subpoena remains an open question. “We’re going to make that decision as a select committee,” Stefanik said.

Other prominent members of the Republican conference named to the panel include Kentucky Congressman Thomas Massie and Wyoming Rep. Harriet Hageman. In August, Hageman successfully toppled three-term incumbent Liz Cheney in the Wyoming Republican primary by 37 points. Cheney, who ran House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Select Committee on Jan. 6 as vice chair, relied on Democrats switching parties to blunt a loss that might have otherwise been near unanimous among the state’s Republicans.

McCarthy endorsed Hageman in the race two years after Cheney endorsed a primary challenge to Massie from her perch in leadership. In the spring of 2021, House Republicans replaced Cheney with Stefanik as GOP conference chair.

Stefanik plans to take a lead role on the new panel probing the weaponization of the federal government as she did during the first impeachment saga of former President Donald Trump in 2019.

“The government has the responsibility to serve the American people, not go after them,” she said.

While Pelosi barred McCarthy’s appointments to the Select Committee on Jan. 6, Stefanik said the new House speaker was likely to seat Democrats on the probe. No minority appointments, however, have been made so far.

On Tuesday night, McCarthy kept his word to bar California Democrat Reps. Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell from the House Intelligence Committee. McCarthy has also pledged to kick Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar off the Foreign Affairs Committee. Stefanik told The Federalist that while it was ultimately the speaker’s choice to approve Democrat appointments to the Select Committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government, neither Schiff, Swalwell, nor Omar would likely be admitted to the panel.

McCarthy explained to reporters on Capitol Hill Tuesday night that the trio of lawmakers would still serve on committees but none related to the nation’s top secrets.

“They’ll serve on committees,” McCarthy said, “but they will not serve on a place that has national security relevance because integrity matters to me.”


Tristan Justice is the western correspondent for The Federalist. He has also written for The Washington Examiner and The Daily Signal. His work has also been featured in Real Clear Politics and Fox News. Tristan graduated from George Washington University where he majored in political science and minored in journalism. Follow him on Twitter at @JusticeTristan or contact him at Tristan@thefederalist.com.

Source

Cautiously Optimistic – The House Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government

Communication, discussion and step-by-step outlining is a very time-consuming enterprise.  If you are wondering about the light CTH posting recently, refer to the prior sentence.  I cannot say much; except to say no one is more cynical than I, and yet there is reason to be cautiously optimistic.

As previously noted, the 118th Congress is expected to authorize a “Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.”   The subcommittee will fall under the jurisdiction of the House Judiciary Committee led by Chairman Jim Jordan.   Additionally, Thomas Massie (R-KY) is being reported as a representative under consideration for the chairmanship the House subcommittee.

House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan and potential House subcommittee Chair Thomas Massie should have a grasp of the scale and scope of the opposition they are about to face.  Assuming they have a fully prepared staff to support them – willing to take on a very consequential investigation; then we begin by first anticipating who will oppose their effort to investigate the “weaponization of government“.   Which is to say everyone!

The defensive apparatus of the DC political system will likely do everything in their power, individually and with collective assistance, to ensure this committee fails.  The stakes are quite high.  As readers here can well attest, DC politics is an institutional system of purposefully created compartmentalized silos.

The compartmented information silos permit plausible deniability, and this collection of weaponized institutions contains career bureaucrats who view their opposition as the American people.

Example – The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (SSCI), and every Republican member therein, including SSCI Vice-Chairman Marco Rubio, will make it their willfully blind priority to obstruct any investigation that touches on how the intelligence apparatus of the United States government is weaponized against the people.

The SSCI is the institution that facilitated the creation of the National Security State.  Any effort to investigate the outcome of that system will make the House investigators adversarial to their colleagues in the Senate.

Additionally, every executive branch intelligence institution including the DOJ-NSD, FBI, DHS, ODNI, CIA, DoD, DIA, NSC and every sub-agency within their authorities will do anything and everything to block a subcommittee looking into their domestic activity.

A lot of bad decisions have led to really bad things.  DC does not want those bad things discussed.

Every national security justification that exists, and some that have yet to be created by the DOJ National Security Division solely for the expressed interest of blocking this subcommittee, will be deployed.

Every member of the subcommittee and their staff will be under constant surveillance.  Phones will be tapped and tracked, electronic devices monitored, cars and offices bugged, physical surveillance deployed, and top tier officials at every subsidiary agency of the U.S. government will assign investigative groups and contract agents to monitor the activity of the subcommittee and provide weekly updates on their findings.

The White House together with the National Security Council will also backchannel to and from these agencies doing the surveillance.

The intelligence apparatus media will be deployed, and daily leaks from the various agencies to their contact lists in the New York Times, Politico, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and MSNBC will be in constant two-way communication for narrative assembly and counterpropaganda efforts.

This is the context of opposition to begin thinking about before anything moves forward.

Additionally, the national security state will demand the House investigation take place on their terms.  They will demand secrecy, national security classification and require House subcommittee members to adhere to the Intelligence Community terms for review and discussion of anything.

Each agency will not voluntarily assist or participate in the investigation of any of their conduct.  Every official within every agency will do the same; and they will require legal representation that will be provided to them by Lawfare political operatives skilled in the use of “National Security” and “classified information” as a justification for non-compliance and non-assistance.  A protracted legal battle should be predicted.

Lastly, anticipate Special Counsel Jack Smith using his position to block the House subcommittee from receiving evidence.  The House should anticipate that congressional representatives are already under investigation as a result of the authorities granted to Jack Smith by Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco {Go Deep}.  The White House and all of the executive branch agencies will use the existing Special Counsel to block House investigation. Heck, that looks to be the primary purpose of the appointment.

As a result, expect the House subcommittee members to be under constant threat from the DOJ, via the Special Counsel, specifically from DAG Lisa Monaco, with statements that House subcommittee investigative efforts are “obstructing” a special counsel investigation.  The aforementioned agencies and the Senate intel committee will work with the DOJ to use the Jack Smith special counsel as a shield to block participation with the House subcommittee.

With all of that in mind, what is the successful path forward?

♦ First, everything has to be done in sunlight and maximum transparency, even the planning and organization of the committee construct, purpose and goals.

The committee can have no shadow operations, unknown guiding hands or secrets that can be discovered and then weaponized against the intent.  Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

I know DC has little concept of working like this, but you can train yourself to do it.  You have nothing to hide; however, those who are being investigated have everything to hide.  Do not provide them ammunition by retaining secrets that can be weaponized against you.

As Andrew Breitbart said, be open with your secrets.

Your second cousin Alice will be a source for the New York Times to write about the Thanksgiving dinner three years ago when she heard the “N” word or a tasteless joke about something outrageous.  Every member of the committee and staff need to prepare for a dossier completed by the FBI about them and distributed to the government allies in mainstream media.

Security clearances will be leveraged and threatened as a tool of the national security state to stop the secrecy envelope from being opened publicly.  This will happen; so just anticipate it.  When the security clearance of [insert_name_here] is threatened, go to the microphones and tell the public who is doing the threatening, and why.

♦GOALS – The goal needs to be crystal clear to anyone and everyone who would contemplate assisting.  Yes, there needs to be a legislative intent in order to legally formulate the committee; that’s a no-brainer.  However, the ultimate goal should NOT BE accountability on those who may have perpetrated or supported weaponized activity against American Citizens.  The ultimate goal SHOULD BE for maximum public information, transparency and sunlight about the weaponization as it is discovered.

Let us assume the goal is accepted, before moving forward, the subcommittee needs a professional communication strategy in place before the rules, terms and member outlines are structured or made public.

A thoughtful communication strategy so that information can come from the committee to the public without the filtration of a corrupt system that will bend and skew the findings as a weapon against the committee itself.

♦COMMUNICATION PORTAL – Hire a communication staff and set up a website for the sharing of information directly from the committee to the public.  The daily activity of the committee should be shared publicly in granular detail.  The witness names as scheduled, documents requested, everything that involves the committee activity should be known to the general public. This system should be updated at least DAILY, or as information is compiled.

This communication network should also contain a separate staff assigned to solicit, accept and distribute information provided by the public to the subcommittee.  Yes, you read that correctly, the subcommittee website should be able to accept information provided by the public as it relates to the ongoing committee work.

Crowdsource We The People as research leverage against the much more effective Lawfare operations you will face in opposition.  This means a portal where the ‘open source’ information can be delivered by researchers, many of those on the spectrum, who hold deep knowledge of the information and system processes in the silos.

In the past several years, thousands of documents have been retrieved by FOIA and public records investigations.  Hundreds of experts in the granular details of the DHS, FBI, DoD and DOJ-NSD systems have knowledge that can benefit the committee; you just need a way for them to transmit the evidence/information to you.

That ‘open source’ evidence should flow into the committee portal with address sourcing that allows the committee staff to review and locate it independently.  This avoids the predictable counterargument, from the national security state, that Russia (or foreign actors) is feeding disinformation into the committee.

The documentary evidence will mostly be “open source,” extracted and then cross-referenced from within the multiple silo system the national security state uses as a shield. And the origination of the documents will be traceable and easy to duplicate, thereby providing secure provenance.   The internal staff manager for this inbound portal is critical (think former HPSCI Nunes staff).

Documents found by the committee should then be uploaded to the same communication system (website), permitting the public -especially the autists- to review and then cross reference the committee material; ultimately channeling information back into the committee if important dots connect or puzzle pieces clarify.   Think of this as a massive counter lawfare operation with hundreds of Deep State subject matter experts assisting the committee.

Witness transcripts should be uploaded within 36 hours of testimony.  Then let the public do the research, background review and dot connecting from the testimony.  If you build it, they will come.

♦ Next, GO PUBLIC with everything.  Do not use the terms and conditions of the secretive administrative state.  Tell the public what you are finding as you are finding it.  You can share information without violating “sources and methods.”   Schedule a media appearance at the 8pm hour twice weekly with a high visibility broadcast media network to provide updates and answer questions.

These scheduled appearances should be in addition to random media press releases and press comments as pertinent information to the subcommittee arrives.   What this means is that you do not wait to produce a 2,000-page final report before releasing the information.  The final report should be an update and summary of all previous findings that have been released to the public along the way.

♦ At the outset, put no rules on media contacts with any subcommittee staff or member.  Counter the darkness that fuels the intelligence community agenda with maximum sunlight and transparency.  Use truth as a weapon against disinformation.  That means no nondisclosure agreements at any part of the process.

Yes, this is radical change in approach, but this is also a radical enemy you are facing.  Playing the secrecy game works in their favor, not yours.  Transparency is your tool, not theirs – use it.

Use truth as a weapon.

Every member of the committee can say anything they want about any of the material or witness testimony they hear during the course of the investigation.  Public hearing or closed-door sessions, it matters not.  The same rule applies.  Committee members are completely free to discuss any findings as the information is reviewed.

The goal should NOT BE accountability on those who may have perpetrated or supported weaponized activity against American Citizens.  The goal SHOULD BE for maximum public information, transparency and sunlight about the weaponization as it is discovered.  This approach makes We The People the accountability portion of the process.  As a result, the next section is again rather groundbreaking….

♦ Every witness to the committee should be granted full legal immunity provided by the House and House Speaker for anything said during the testimony or admitted as being done as part of the evidence fact-finding.  Again, the goal is transparency and openness, not prosecution and accountability.  Use sunlight as a weapon to draw out the truth, then let the American people be the judges of what that truth means when contrasted against the constitution of our nation.

Let me repeat this… There should be ZERO legal liability for any conduct that happened as a part of any witness effort to weaponize the United States government against the American people.  The immunity should cover everything *except* perjury from the witness to the committee itself.   If the witness lies the immunity evaporates.

Why this approach?  Because (a) it circumvents any issues that might impede testimony, removes hurdles; (b) immunity compels confession, honest sunlight and the urgency of the situation; (c) immunity makes the truth more likely; and finally, (d) you are not going to get legal convictions anyway.   The truth has no agenda.

Another reason for the immunity is because the operation of the subcommittee should be heavily focused on witness testimony, not documents.  The documents can come as part of the follow-up to the witness testimony, but it is the witness testimony needed; the publication of the transcripts then provides the public sunlight.  This is key.

90% of the committee work should be focused on witnesses and questions therein.  Only 10% of the committee work should be seeking documents.   Avoiding the documents shortens the time needed for investigative disclosures and avoids protracted legal battles therein.  If the people on the committee, those who are asking the questions, do not already know the details behind the questions and the locations of the supportive documents, then you have the wrong people on the committee.

Every response to a questioned witness should come with the following question: “how do you know this?”   That is how you will discover the nature of the documents, communications, emails etc that support the fact-finding mission.  “How do you know this” also leads to more witnesses.  Work the issue from the bottom up.   How do you know this; who told you this; why did you do this; what authority guided you; who authorized this approach? etc. etc. etc.

Use fully immunized witnesses to tell the story, then go look for the documents to corroborate the witness statements using the ‘under oath’ transcript as part of the impenetrable subpoena itself; but don’t wait, keep questioning witnesses.

DOCUMENTS – Once you identify the location of documents that would assist the sunlight objective, don’t only rely on the government side of the conversation as the targeted source for retrieval.  If the document contains communication to external parties, ie public-private partnership, then move to gain the documents from the private side, thereby avoiding the roadblocks inside government.

Regardless of the status of the document search, and regardless of whether legal battles will be needed to retrieve those documents, keep moving forward with the witness testimony.  Do not stop committee work just because internal silo opposition is being fought.  Keep working the plan and bringing immunized witnesses, both inside government and outside government, forward for questioning.  Leaders within organizations and agencies are important, but clerks, staff, and administrative aides in/around those same leaders could also provide important information.

This subcommittee approach, along with the people needed, will obviously take more time to assemble.  However, once put together everything thereafter moves at a very rapid pace, which is also part of the strategy.  Flood the information zone with maximum sunlight and keep the opposition off balance.

The goal is sunlight. Rip the Band-Aid off, call the baby ugly and start the process to fix this crap by exposing it. Restore the First and Fourth Amendments and heal the injury.

From the Church Commission we got the secret FISA court and more tools for violations of our Fourth Amendment rights.  From the 911 Commission we got The Patriot Act, DHS, TSA, DNI and many more violations of our rights and Fourth Amendment protections.   We do not need any legislation as an outcome of the House “Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government.”

We do not need your legislative help.  All prior legislative help only ended up making things worse.

What we need is a full, uncensored, brutally honest expose’ of how bad things have become and how that system can be dismantled.  The existing constitution is the protection, just remove the stuff that is violating it.

I know this approach is rather different from the norm.  However, if this roadmap seems reasonable, I am certain you will find support from within the silo system that is currently operating, and from people outside the government who will volunteer time and effort to assist.

Summarized: (1) Know the scale of opposition.  (2) Formulate a communication strategy around it & build a website. (3)  Communicate findings by telling the story to the American people as it is discovered. (4) Grant immunity to all witnesses. (5) Don’t wait until the end to generate another useless report that few will read. (6) Make sunlight the motive of the committee. (7) Consider success when the American people can see the problem.  (8) Dissolve any weaponized systems.  (9) Don’t create new ones.

If you tell us the truth, We The People will fix it ourselves.

Source

‘Soviet-Style Propaganda’: Republicans Rip Biden White House for Redefining ‘Recession’ amid Economic Contraction

‘Soviet-Style Propaganda’: Republicans Rip Biden White House for Redefining ‘Recession’ amid Economic Contraction

Republican officials in the House and Senate ripped into the Biden administration after it attempted to redefine what constitutes a recession while concerns mount about a significant decline in economic activity this year.

On Thursday, ahead of a potentially negative GDP report expected later this week — the annualized economic growth rate shrank by 1.6% in the first quarter of this year and appears to have contracted even more in the second — a White House blog post attempted to redefine the term “recession.”

“While some maintain that two consecutive quarters of falling real GDP constitute a recession, that is neither the official definition nor the way economists evaluate the state of the business cycle,” it reads, concluding that it is “unlikely that the decline in GDP in the first quarter of this year — even if followed by another GDP decline in the second quarter — indicates a recession.”

In addition, White House National Economic Council director Brian Deese claimed that a second consecutive quarter of negative GDP growth was technically “not a recession.” 

In response, Republicans took to Twitter to rip the Biden team for seeking to redefine what a recession is.

“Soviet-style propaganda from the Biden White House,” Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) wrote. “Redefining recession is not a solution to get our country out of one.”

“You can’t message your way out of a recession!” Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) exclaimed.

“The Biden Administration’s top economic priority appears to be changing the definition of a recession,” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) wrote.

“The left tried to redefine ‘woman.’ Now they’re trying to redefine ‘recession,’” Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) wrote.

“Changing the definition of a recession does not take away the pain @POTUS’s economy is inflicting on the American people,” Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) wrote.

“There are very real actions we can take to reverse course and get our economy back on track. Attempting to redefine ‘recession’ is not one of them,” Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID) wrote.

“The Biden Administration is trying to redefine what a ‘recession’ is to cover up the President’s failing policies,” Rep. Claudia Tenney (R-NY) wrote.

“But no matter how hard he tries, Joe Biden cannot change reality!” she added.

“They can change the definition of ‘recession’ all they want,” Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) wrote. “But the American people know.”

“First, Democrats change the definition of ‘woman.’ Now, they change the definition of ‘recession.’ What’s next? Changing the definition of ‘definition’ ?” the GOP House Judiciary tweeted.

“Nobody is buying this White House’s sudden redefinition of what a ‘recession’ is,” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) wrote.

“Biden’s policies caused our economic crisis and his team is desperate to avoid accountability,” he added. “It won’t work.”

“When the vaccines failed to prevent infection, they redefined vaccination. When the economy fails to grow, they redefine recession,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) wrote.

“If the press allows Biden to change the definition of ‘recession’ to gaslight the American people, then we know the media is irredeemably corrupt and partisan,” Rep. Mary Miller (R-IL) wrote. “A major test for the so-called ‘fact checkers!’”

“Instead of being honest with the American people and admitting their policies caused a recession, Biden and Harris are REDEFINING THE WORD!” Miller wrote in another tweet.

“This is creepy Orwellian behavior & the entire media MUST call them out for this!” she added.

“If we weren’t in a recession, the White House wouldn’t be redefining the word ‘recession’ on their website,” Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) wrote.

“This administration has a habit of changing definitions!” Rep. Buddy Carter (R-GA) wrote.

“What is a woman? What is a recession? What is a reasonable price to pay for gas?” he asked.

“The White House claims two straight quarters of negative GDP growth doesn’t indicate a recession is looming,” Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) wrote.

“They also told us inflation would be ‘transitory,’” he added.

“While the majority of Americans already think we are in a recession, the White House and Democrats are scrambling to redefine the term ‘recession’ to avoid admitting what the American people already know,” Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) wrote, attaching an “#OutOfTouch hashtag.

“In true Soviet fashion, the White House has decided to change the definition of a recession right before the coming GDP numbers are expected to show we are in one,” Rep. Gary Palmer (R-AL) wrote.

“Two things the Biden administration cannot answer: What is a woman? What is a recession?” Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) wrote.

On Monday, Deese argued that the “technical definition” of recession “considers a much broader spectrum of data points.” 

He also emphasized the need to look ahead rather than focus on “technical debates about backward-looking data.”

On Sunday, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the U.S. economy was not in recession.

Admitting the economy is “slowing down,” Yellen stressed that the labor market is currently “extremely strong.”

These statements come as most adult Americans believe the United States is “currently in an economic recession,” according to an Economist/YouGov poll, and as President Biden’s economic approval rating has plummeted to a new low, according to a recent CNBC All-America Economic survey. 

Follow Joshua Klein on Twitter @JoshuaKlein.

Source

“This Bill Promoted Internet Censorship And Violations of The 1st Amendment”: Rep. Massie Lone Vote Against ‘Anti-Semitism’ Bill

by Chris Menahan
Information Liberation

The House on Wednesday voted 420-1 in favor of a bill that “promoted internet censorship and violations of the First Amendment” in the name of “combatting anti-Semitism.”

Republican Kentucky Rep Thomas Massie was the lone vote against the bill.

“I don’t hate anyone based on his or her ethnicity or religion. Legitimate government exists, in part, to punish those who commit unprovoked violence against others, but government can’t legislate thought,” Massie said Thursday after getting attacked by the media. “This bill promoted internet censorship and violations of the 1st amendment.”

The bill, which was sponsored by Democratic Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and appears to have been written by the Anti-Defamation League, does indeed promote internet censorship and violations of the First Amendment, as you can see below:

Haaretz reported in 2012 that Jewish groups get 97% of of Homeland Security’s Vital Nonprofit Security Grants.

In 2014, that number was 94% according to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

“The Department of Homeland Security allocated to Jewish institutions $12 million, or 94 percent, of $13 million in funds for securing nonprofits,” JTA reported.

I can’t find any more recent numbers but the Biden regime is currently asking for $360 million in funding for the aforementioned Nonprofit Security Grant Program and the ADL is leading the charge to get it passed.

For voting against the bill, Massie was immediately smeared as an anti-Semite.

Massie was targeted by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) last year for repeatedly voting against giving billions of US taxpayer dollars to Israel.

“How is THIS not foreign interference in our elections?” Massie commented on Twitter, highlighting an ad AIPAC was running against him on Facebook targeting voters in his district.

Massie said after the voting against giving another billion to Israel to fund their Iron Dome that people have a fantasy that “foreign aid buys US influence abroad” when the reality is that “foreign aid is the result of foreign influence exerted on US politicians at home.”

Despite AIPAC targeting him, Massie easily secured a victory in the Republican primary on Tuesday with 75% of the vote and is likely going to sail to victory again during the general election in November.

Read the full article at Information Liberation

Related:

See Also:

Understand the Times We are Currently Living Through

Are You on the Right Path in Life? There May Not be Much Time Left to Decide

What Happens When a Holy and Righteous God Gets Angry? Lessons from History and the Prophet Jeremiah

Insider Exposes Freemasonry as the World’s Oldest Secret Religion and the Luciferian Plans for The New World Order

Identifying the Luciferian Globalists Implementing the New World Order – Who are the “Jews”?

Published on May 20, 2022

Source

Lawmakers demand FDA Publish CVVV Jab Safety & Efficacy Data

Lawmakers demand FDA Publish CVVV Jab Safety & Efficacy Data


GOP lawmakers demand FDA publish COVID Vaccine Safety and Efficacy Data

Epidemiologist says CDC and FDA have “generated more confusion than clarity” from public vaccine data, obscuring the crucial question: “likelihood of a serious adverse reaction occurring per vaccination dose.”

By Greg Piper

Two months after the CDC acknowledged hiding the vast majority of its COVID-19 data, partly to protect the reputation of vaccines, the FDA is under pressure to release its current and future safety and efficacy data on COVID vaccines and therapeutics.

“The fact that the data in the FDA’s possession has remained behind an FDA firewall for more than 18 months is appalling,” Rep. Bill Posey (R-Fla.) wrote to Commissioner Robert Califf, noting the agency unsuccessfully asked a court to dribble out Pfizer vaccine data over 55-75 years.

Nine House GOP colleagues joined Posey’s April 11 letter, including Kentucky’s Thomas Massie, the leading libertarian in the caucus, and Alabama’s Mo Brooks, who sponsored a bill to defund vaccine mandates.

In light of mandates and liability shields for manufacturers, “[n]othing is more important to physicians, parents, patients, public health officials and elected officials than having access to as much information as possible when evaluating immediate and long-term responses to the pandemic,” the letter says.

The House Republicans want the agency to “immediately” release safety and efficacy data for COVID products granted emergency use authorization (EUA) and full approval, and ongoing publication of data within 14 days of receipt by the FDA.

It’s already requiring manufacturers to submit most of this information “in redacted and releasable form” and “should have been preparing to immediately release data once licensure was granted” to enable “rigorous independent review,” they said.

••••

The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)

••••

Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.

••••

Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.

••••

Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.

Share this…
Share on FacebookPin on PinterestTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn

Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)