Knowledge Fight Interactive Search Tool

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 19, 2022 - Epoch Times

19:30

School Secretly Offers 13-Year-Old Boy Pizza to Get Jabbed, Doesn't Get Mom's Consent | Facts Matter

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Good evening, and boy do we have a program for you today.
	To start with, over in Los Angeles, two parents are accusing a local school, particularly the Barack Obama Global Prep Academy, of giving their children the vaccine without the parents' consent and then bribing the kids with food and pizza in order to keep them from talking about it.
	Meanwhile, the Federal Elections Commission, they just voted on a new rule which will allow foreign nationals, meaning citizens of other countries, to potentially finance American ballot initiatives, referendums, as well as recalls.
	And then lastly, you might remember that a few weeks ago, the FDA asked a federal judge if they can have permission to take 55 years to fully release all of the documents that are in their possession, Just yesterday, the FDA went back to that very same judge, and they are now saying that 55 years is actually too short, and that they will need 75 years to release all of the documents.
	Let's go through it all together.
	This is your daily Facts Matter update, and I'm your host, Roman, from the Epoch Times.
	And now let's begin today's discussion by talking about foreign funding of America's elections.
	So, about three weeks ago, there was a very little publicized vote that took place inside of the Federal Elections Commission.
	In fact, very few media picked up on it at all, even though the consequences of that particular vote are quite far-reaching.
	Specifically, what happened was that the Federal Election Commission, they voted, and they decided that ballot initiatives do not count as elections as defined by the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, meaning that in the eyes of the federal government, at least in respect to this particular law, a ballot initiative is technically not at least in respect to this particular law, a ballot initiative is Now, you might ask, why is this so important?
	Well, the reason, at least in my opinion, the big reason, is that this decision opens the door for foreign nationals to potentially fund ballot initiatives, referendums, recalls, and even congressional redistricting.
	Meaning that quite literally, a wealthy foreigner, they can influence how a state's congressional map is drawn up.
	Because again, these things are now technically, at the very least, not regarded as elections.
	And so what this actually means in practice is that foreign nationals, meaning for instance citizens of China, citizens of Iran, citizens of Russia, they can now go ahead and fund signature collecting drives, they can fund different qualifying measures, and they can financially support different campaigns And again,
	because all these ballot initiatives are now no longer counted, at least officially, as elections, well, that means that it's not only Mark Zuckerberg that can fund them, but citizens of other countries can get in on the action as well.
	And even though technically they wouldn't be funding campaigns for actual elected officials, if we look back at history, these different ballot measures, they can actually be used to sway the votes in a midterm or presidential election.
	How?
	Well, it's rather simple.
	Ballot initiatives, as well as referendum, particularly when they concern controversial issues, they can increase voter turnout by something like 5-10%.
	In fact, let's take a look at Arizona as an example.
	Last year, during the 2020 presidential election, Arizonians were also asked to vote on Proposition 207, which asked whether recreational marijuana should be legalized.
	And so, take a look at the total votes.
	Proposition 207 drove more votes than either Joe Biden or Donald Trump.
	In fact, if Proposition 207 was a presidential candidate by itself, it would have won Arizona by over 200,000 votes.
	However, The big question here is what effect did this have on the actual presidential race?
	And according to some post-election analyses, they showed that Joe Biden, he actually rode on the coattails of this recreational marijuana bill.
	That's because over in Arizona, Proposition 207, it drove hundreds of thousands of young Democrat voters to vote for Proposition 207.
	And then while they were there, while they were in the ballot box, they also took the chance to vote for Joe Biden as well.
	And so you see how this works.
	If you are a foreign national and you would like to support a particular candidate, well, you can fund a ballot referendum during a particular election cycle, which can bring out the exact demographic of people that you are looking for.
	And that, by the way, is only one aspect of the problem.
	The other aspect concerns money.
	Specifically, the fact that unlike election committees, which have very strict finance limitations, ballot measure committees, they can accept an unlimited amount of money.
	And so what that means is that individuals, committees, associations, as well as businesses, they are allowed to contribute as much money as they want to either support or to oppose any ballot measure.
	They just typically, in most states, have to disclose the amount of money that they gave on a campaign contribution report.
	And so what that now means is that, let's say, a wealthy person over in Iran, he can legally spend a billion dollars to finance or to oppose some kind of ballot measure here in the United States.
	And so generally, this is the problem that we are facing with this new Federal Election Commission rule.
	However, the silver lining here is that this rule only applies to federal issues on individual states' ballots.
	And so fortunately, the states themselves, they do retain a level of both authority as well as autonomy, which can allow them to enact their own rules, which are stricter than what the federal government allows.
	And so, since each state sets its own rules for ballot measures, that means that they all have the ability to mitigate this potential manipulation by foreign nationals.
	But in order to do so, the states themselves would actually have to be proactive, meaning that the individual states would have to go out and they would have to pass laws to outlaw foreign funding of their state registered ballot committees.
	And for your reference, by the way, at this very moment, only seven states throughout the entire country have done so.
	And sometimes, the reason that it's so few states is because it's an uphill battle.
	For instance, let's look at the state of Maine, where right now, right at this very moment, a Canadian power company has spent about $10 million to finance the opposition to a ballot referendum.
	That particular ballot referendum, it's trying to close down a power plant project, but this Canadian power company is spending millions of dollars to convince people in Maine to vote against it.
	Now, the Maine legislature, they're not happy about it.
	They were not thrilled with having a Canadian company pouring millions of dollars in their local referendum elections.
	And so, they voted and they passed bipartisan legislation to ban foreign funding of their local elections.
	However, when that piece of legislation, which passed both the House and the Senate in Maine, when it reached the desk of Miss Janet Mills, who is the governor of Maine, she's a Democrat, she vetoed it.
	She killed the bill.
	Why?
	Why?
	Well, here was her reasoning that she gave in a statement.
	Entities with direct foreign investment employ thousands of Mainers.
	Legislation that could bar these entities from any form of participation in a referendum is offensive to the democratic process, which depends on a free and unfettered exchange of ideas, information and opinion.
	Just an aside, it would be great if social media companies had the same opinion.
	Regardless though, on the flip side, the executive director of an organization called Maine Citizens for Clean Elections, she said that this was essentially just a loophole which can allow foreign governments to interfere with our American elections.
	Here's specifically what that executive director said.
	We are disappointed that the governor has vetoed this important legislation to get foreign government money out of Maine politics.
	LD 194, which was the name of this bill, which received overwhelming public and bipartisan lawmakers' support at its public hearing, would close an important loophole in our laws by preventing foreign governments from spending in ballot-question campaigns.
	This common-sense reform was supported by a majority of the U.S. Congress as a part of the For the People Act, and we agree with a majority of Congress and the Maine legislature that this bill is neither unconstitutional nor offensive to the political process.
	Regardless, though, the bill was vetoed, and the Maine legislature does not have a supermajority to override that veto.
	And so perhaps it's situations exactly like this one here, which explains why only seven states in the entire nation have laws in their books which directly ban foreign investment in ballot referendums.
	If you'd like to read more about the situation over in Maine, or about this new rule from the Federal Elections Commission, as well as the impact that it'll have on the future of American elections, I'll throw several links into the description box below this video for you to check out.
	And all I ask in return is that no matter which nationality you are, take a quick moment to smash, smash, smash that like button, And help this video out via the YouTube algorithm.
	Now, before we move on over and discuss how the FDA is requesting permission to take 75 full years to release all of their Pfizer documents, I'd like to take a quick moment and introduce our sponsor for today's episode, and I will do so from the sound booth.
	I mean, everything from the cost of lumber, cars, houses, food, gas...
	Everything is increasing at an accelerated pace.
	However, in my opinion, what the most amazing aspect of the system is, is that you can take this money, which I actually think is as fake as monopoly money because the Fed and the Treasury just print this out of nothing, and you can use it to buy real money from American Hartford Gold, which is gold and silver coinage.
	Take a look.
	This is a box that I get every single month from American Hartford Gold sent to me.
	Because I believe it's a great hedge against inflation.
	This is something that has had value for 5,000 years.
	It's had value across the world in Russia, China, America, India.
	I mean, this is the real stuff right here.
	This is a beautiful, actually, Canadian maple.
	And this right here is some silver coinage.
	I don't know if you can see how shiny and beautiful it is.
	Yeah, but I just get these every single month because I believe that unfortunately the U.S. dollar will eventually fall as the global reserve currency, as sad as that is.
	And I just want to hedge against those people in Washington, D.C., continuously printing our prosperity into oblivion.
	I would highly recommend that you do the same.
	Go on over to the website for American Heart for Gold and consider doing business with them.
	They're an awesome company.
	They sponsor a program like ours, so they obviously care about the truth getting out there, but they also have an A-plus rating with the Better Business Bureau.
	They have a great customer support staff when you call them.
	They're super friendly, and they make the entire process super simple because not only can you get...
	These packages here deliver directly to your doorstep, but you can call them up and set it up so that you can actually get gold and silver directly deposited into your IRA account, again, making it all super simple.
	And right now, they're offering a special to viewers of Facts Matter, where depending on how much you buy, how much gold and silver you buy, they will throw in $1,500 worth of free silver on your first order.
	So give them a call at 866-242-2352 or text Roman to 65532.
	Also, I'll throw a link to their website down in the description box below.
	And American Heart for Gold, thank you so much for sponsoring this episode.
	Now, Roman in the studio, back to you.
	And now let's move on over and talk about the FDA.
	Now, you might remember that on a previous episode, we already discussed how the FDA went over to a federal judge and they asked him for permission to take 55 years to fully release all of the documents that are in their possession that pertain to the approval of the Pfizer vaccine.
	However, there has now been a development to that story.
	Because just yesterday, the FDA went back to that same judge and they are now saying that they will need 75 years to fully release all of the documents pertaining to the approval of the Pfizer vaccine.
	Meaning that if the judge actually approves this request, we might not be able to see all the documents until the year 2096.
	Although of course it won't be you and me seeing those documents, it'll very likely be our grandkids, who by that point will likely be on their 47th booster shot.
	Now, the lawyer who is actually fighting against the FDA in this particular lawsuit and trying to get these documents released, here's what he said in a statement in regards to the request from the FDA. If you find what you are reading difficult to believe, that is because it is dystopian for the government to give Pfizer billions, mandate Americans to take its product, prohibit Americans from suing for harms, but yet refuse to let Americans see the data underlying its licensure.
	Now, just as a quick refresher regarding this lawsuit, it was initially brought forth by an organization called the Public Health and Medical Professional for Transparency.
	It's a non-profit group because they were saying that the FDA was not complying with their Freedom of Information Act request in a timely manner.
	And specifically, this group was making two arguments.
	The first one is that since the FDA took only 108 days to review all of the documents before granting emergency use authorization to Pfizer, Then it's a little bit ridiculous for them to then turn around and say that it'll take dozens of years for them to release those documents to the public, especially given the second point, which is that people are now being mandated to get the shots, which this group says raises the stakes and makes it much more important for people to have access to the underlying documents.
	Here's again what the lawyer representing this group said in a statement.
	As the present pandemic rages on...
	Independent review of these documents by outside scientists is urgently needed to assist with addressing the shortcomings and issues with the response to the pandemic to date.
	However, on the flip side, the FDA is making the argument that they are understaffed.
	Specifically, even though the FDA is an organization that's comprised of over 18,000 people with a budget of about $6 billion, they are claiming that they only have 10 staff members who are in charge of maintaining these records, and that two of those staff members are new.
	And the FDA says that since every line of every page of every document must be reviewed to make sure that all sensitive information is redacted, well, that process will take 75 years.
	As to whether the court will actually buy that argument or not, well, only time will tell.
	However, in this process, while the court case is still playing itself out, the FDA is continuing to release about 500 pages of documents every single month.
	And if you'd like to see some of the documents that they've already released thus far, I'll throw a link into the description box below this video so you can check them out for yourself.
	And again, all I ask in return is that if you haven't already, take a quick moment to smash, smash, smash that like button for the YouTube algorithm.
	And now, since we're on the topic of vaccines, let's move on over to Los Angeles.
	Recently, two sets of parents came out and they said that their children were given the vaccine while they were at school without the consent of the parents.
	Specifically, Here's specifically what this mother said, quote, The lady that gave him the shot and signed the paper was the one who told my son, Please do not say anything.
	I don't want to get in trouble.
	Now, what is interesting to note here is that the mother, she says that she is not against vaccines.
	In fact, she says that she is vaccinated herself.
	But in regards to her son, she says that it's a different story.
	Here's specifically what she said, quote, And it's also worth noting that besides just hurting this mother's feelings, it also broke state law.
	Because over in California, a minor cannot legally consent to getting the vaccine without their parents' approval.
	And so...
	The situation that happened here where these minors got the shot without even knowledge of their parents, that was illegal because they needed to get that consent.
	Now, the Los Angeles Unified School District, they came out and they said, for one, they cannot comment on these specific matters because it involves specific children.
	However, secondly, they touted their Safe Schools to Safe Steps incentive program, which is a program in the Los Angeles School District where they actually reward vaccinated students with all types of prizes.
	However, Ms.
	Jennifer Kennedy, who is a lawyer who closely follows the vaccine mandate debate over in the state of California, she said that these types of incentive programs for children are rather grotesque.
	Here's specifically what she told an affiliate of NBC News over in California.
	These grotesque contests and displays of treatment and candy and gifts and favors, raffles and cash prizes inducing the kids to the vaccination.
	Here's the problem.
	Kids in California cannot consent to vaccination.
	The LAUSD, which is the Los Angeles Unified School District, does not have the power to add a vaccine shot to the California school schedule.
	You do not have that legal authority.
	Kennedy said that all of these vaccine mandates for children, overall, they're creating a negative atmosphere at school.
	Here's specifically what she said in this front.
	Even the existence of the mandates in the schools has created these environments of pressure and bullying, segregation and discrimination, and accidental vaccination of kids without parental consent.
	Now, it is also worth noting that according to California state law, specifically according to several pieces of legislation that were recently passed by Governor Gavin Newsom, by January 10th, if a child is now vaccinated, he can no longer go to school and he will need to do online learning.
	Furthermore, it's not exactly clear whether the parents in this particular case, the parents whose...
	We're essentially tricked into getting the vaccine.
	Whether they're going to file lawsuits against the Los Angeles Unified School District, they have not announced one way or the other.
	Also, it's worth noting that the Barack Obama Global Prep Academy, they have not released any comment on this matter as of yet.
	Regardless, if you'd like to read more about this particular story, I will throw the link to an article about it into the description box below this video.
	And all I ask in return is that if you haven't already, take a quick moment to smash that like button for the YouTube algorithm.
	And now, since you've completed this episode of Facts Matter, I would highly recommend that you go on over to Epic TV and check out an awesome episode of Cash's Corner, where Cash Patel goes in deep and examines three bombshell cases that are currently working their way through the courts here in America.
	The case of Ghislaine Maxwell, the case of Elizabeth Holmes, as well as the case of Jussie Smollett.
	Here's a trailer for that awesome episode.
	What Maxwell might do is say, I, a female, was victimized by Jeffrey Epstein.
	The advantage she has here is he's dead.
	He can't provide testimony.
	I'm interested to see who the cast of characters is.
	There's a lot of people that have been named in the quote-unquote Jeffrey Epstein world.
	And the prosecutors have put forth evidence to say that they have a videotape of Smollett recording a practice of the hoax crime.
	The bigger the fraud amount, the more prison time she's facing.
	And a hundred million dollars plus is a substantial fraud amount.
	If you want to check out that episode as well as all the other phenomenal content over on Epic TV, I'll throw a link to it.
	It'll be right there at the very top of the description box.
	I hope you click on it.
	I hope you check it out.
	I hope you subscribe.
	And I hope that you join us on this journey of exploring this beautiful, beautiful world through honest journalism that is based on truth and tradition.
	Now lastly, if you haven't already, smash that like button for the YouTube algorithm.
	Subscribe to this YouTube channel if you haven't already in order to get this type of honest news content delivered directly into your YouTube feed while YouTube still allows it.
	Also, consider hitting that notification bell so you can actually be notified of any new videos as we release them.
	And then lastly, if you happen to have a Telegram account, I would consider following us at factsmatter underscore roman.
	We publish all of our links there, so in case anything ever happens on any social media platforms like YouTube, if we get kicked off or one day you log in and you are not able to find us on Telegram, You will always be able to get a link to wherever we're publishing our videos.
	Until next time, I'm your host, Roman, from The Epoch Times.

▲