I Was Right About The Pfizer CEO!

by Emerald Robinson

Were media outlets paid to publish false "fact checks" in order to smear journalists investigating the deadly COVID vaccines?

Telling the absolute truth is a dangerous business these days — which explains why so few journalists do it anymore. And, as we should all know by now, lies don’t get you banned on Twitter — only the truth gets you “permanently suspended.”

Exhibit A: My tweet about the CEO of Pfizer not being fully vaccinated and having to cancel a trip to Israel over it.


A veritable firestorm erupted on social media — as various frauds and fakes surfaced from the Washington swamp to “fact-check” my tweet. Twitter added a “context warning” to the original tweet. An emergency life-raft for neo-cons and NeverTrumpers called The Dispatch printed a full page rebuttal — which is a giant red flag that certain people were probably taking money from Big Pharma to push the COVID vaccines.

According to Stephen Hayes, I am “a frequent purveyor of bad information” which is practically the highest compliment one can receive in American journalism — when you consider the source.


A year later, Jordan Schachtel bothered to read the Pfizer CEO’s new biography and found, of course, that my tweet was accurate.

It was the “fact check” that was false.


He pointed interested readers to a key passage in a recent Wall Street Journal review of the Pfizer CEO’s new book as well.


Was Pfizer’s PR department making false statements?


Why did The Dispatch try to smear me?

Did The Dispatch receive any funding from Big Pharma or its affiliates? Or from the federal government’s HHS to push the COVID vaccines?

My attorneys will be asking them such questions very soon.







Dr. Jane Ruby: Two new stunning discoveries found in blood clots from the COVID vaccinated – Brighteon.TV

Posted by Kevin Hughes


(July 22, 2022 - Natural News) Physician and author Dr. Jane Ruby shared more bombshell findings from board-certified embalmer Richard Hirschman during the July 18 episode of “Live with Dr. Jane Ruby” on Brighteon.TV. The veteran medical professional said there are two new stunning discoveries related to the white fibrous clots Hirschman found in the dead bodies of vaccinated individuals. (Related: Dr. […]

The white fibrous clots were pulled out of all the major arteries and veins in the thigh, groin, arms and neck.

White fibrous clot with chunky ball sacs and micro clotting

Ruby, also a pharmaceutical drug development expert, showed the audience one of Hirschman’s latest discoveries – a white fibrous clot with chunky ball sacs. She pointed out that they may have grown intermittently and are almost like outgrowths of the original white fibrous clot.

Hirschman said the chunky ball sacs, which were all from vaccinated individuals, reminded him of spider eggs covered by spider web.

Secret Documents: How Pfizer Covered Up a Flood of Adverse Events

by Stevan Looney


I am a civil trial and appellate attorney in New Mexico, with experience litigating complex matters. My prior essay for DailyClout.io regarding the Pfizer WarRoom Document Review — for which I volunteer as one of 250 attorneys — argued that the documents clearly show evidence of fraud on the part of Pfizer. The latest tranche of documents, released on April 1, 2022, show an equally dramatic revelation: Pfizer knew by February of 2021, that there were had been ‘a large number of adverse events’ in the three months prior

Pfizer also realized that these adverse events were so abundant — and they expected so many more in the months to come — that they advised the FDA that they would hire 2400 additional staffers to deal with the paperwork and data processing they expected due to the anticipated volume of adverse events!  

I reviewed the April 1, 2022, tranche of Pfizer documents the FDA produced pursuant to a federal court order. A document produced on November 17, 2021, was also produced as “reissued” on April 1, 2022. At first glance they appear identical, but they are not. Importantly, information redacted (deleted) from the document produced in the March 2022 production, was included in the April 1, 2022, production. This information is quite telling and some conclusions can be drawn.

The document produced on November 17, 2021, is titled “5.3.6 postmarketing experience.pdf” (November 17, 2021 (984 KB)). That same document in the April 1, 2022, production is titled “reissue_5.3.6 postmarketing experience.pdf”. (April 1, 2022 (958 KB)). The word “reissue” is absent in the November 2021 version. That made me curious, so I did a comparison of the two documents. Here is what one will find on page 6. (The “Bates” number in both documents in the bottom, right-hand corner is “FDA-CBER-2021-5683-0000059.”)

The lengthy paragraph on page 6 of the November 2021 document concerns adverse events reports received by Pfizer as of February 28, 2021. The third sentence of that paragraph in both documents reads: “Due to the large number of spontaneous adverse events reports received for the product [i.e., BNT162b2], the MAH [Marketing Authorization Holder] has prioritized the processing of serious cases, in order to meet expedited regulatory reporting timelines and ensure these reports are available for signal detection and evaluation activity.”

This paragraph ends: “Pfizer has also taken a [sic] multiple actions to help alleviate the large increase of adverse event reports.” Think about that sentence.

“This includes significant technology enhancements, and process and workflow solutions, as well as increasing the number of data entry and case processing colleagues. To date, Pfizer has onboarded approximately 600 additional full-time employees (FTEs). More are joining each month with an expected total of more than 1,800 additional resources by the end of June 2021 [emphasis added].”

Also on page 6, under the heading “3. RESULTS”, at “3.1.1 General Overview”, Pfizer discloses in the document produced on April 1, 2022, what it redacted from the same document produced in November of 2021. What Pfizer had produced in April 2022 to take the place of the redacted document in November 2021 document was the fact that for the three-month period beginning December 1, 2020, to February 28, 2021, Pfizer shipped “approximately 126,212,580 [emphasis added] doses of [the FDA emergency use authorized] BNT162b2″ worldwide.

The 126,212,580 figure is redacted in the document produced in November 2021 but is included in the “reissue” document of April 1, 2022.

Likewise, the new, full-time 600 and 1,800 employees, amounting to a total of 2,400 full-time employees, hired to deal with all the anticipated adverse events, are included in the document produced on April 1, 2022, but had been redacted from the same document the FDA had produced in November of 2021. Why the foregoing data were redacted, but then disclosed, we do not know, yet. We do know that the redacted information is damning. What did we learn by comparing the two documents?

First, between December 1, 2020 and February 28, 2021, a period of three months, “a large number of spontaneous adverse events reports” were made to Pfizer regarding the administration to humans of the BNT162b2 “vaccine” for which the FDA had provided emergency use authorization (EUA).

Second, by February 28, 2021, (the date of the document) Pfizer knew that by June of 2021 it would hire at least an additional 2,400 full-time employees to process the adverse events reports Pfizer was receiving. (Appendix 1 to these documents is a list of 1,290 adverse events of special interest (AESI) received in connection with the BNT162b2 “product.” Based upon my research to date, I have found no evidence that these AESI were disclosed publicly prior to November of 2021.)

Lastly, and incredibly, despite having this information, on August 23, 2021, the FDA granted continued EUA status for the BNT162b2 “vaccine” and also approved Bio-N-Tech/Pfizer’s product known as COMIRNATY. Notably, according to the FDA, both the EUA BNT162b2 and the “approved” COMIRNATY are identical and interchangeable products. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that COMIRNATY also causes “a large number of spontaneous adverse events,” including the adverse events and AESI listed in Appendix 1 to these documents.

In sum, Pfizer did not only apparently commit fraud, but they also compounded the fraud by hiring 2,400 full-time employees to deal with the flood of adverse events that they expected – and yet they told no one about this publicly.

 I will continue to issue analyses of these historic documents.

Mr. Looney is a civil trial and appellate attorney with 42 years of experience, concentrating on complex matters.  Mr. Looney is licensed in New Mexico and practices in all its courts, as well as the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, the US Tax Court and the US Supreme Court.  Mr. Looney served in the U.S. Army as an infantryman from 1970-1972, assigned to the 82nd Arbrn. Div.

Article Source: https://dailyclout.io/how-pfizer-covered-up-anticipated-adverse-events/ 







War Room: Dr. Naomi Wolf Reports Vaccine Dangers for Unborn Babies Are Becoming Clearer

by Linnea Wahl, Team 5 (War Room group led by Dr. Naomi Wolf)

In this video, volunteer Linnea Wahl from Team 5 discusses dangers faced by vaccinated, pregnant women and their babies. Are pregnant women who get the Pfizer mRNA vaccine putting their unborn babies at increased of dying? DailyClout’s Team 5 looks at the Pfizer data and answers this question.