All Episodes
Previous Next
June 18, 2024 - Ron Paul Liberty Report
25:24
Kansas Sues Pfizer Over Bogus Vax Claims

Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach has filed a lawsuit against the Big Pharma heavyweight Pfizer over alleged false claims by the company over the safety and effectiveness of its mRNA Covid-19 shot. Are the floodgates about to open? Also today: the US Surgeon General wants to put cigarette-like warning labels on social media...for the children!

|

Time Text
Kansas Sues Pfizer 00:04:30
Hello, everybody, and thank you for tuning in to the Liberty Report.
With us today, we have Daniel McAdams, our co-host.
Daniel, good to see you.
Good morning, Dr. Paul.
How are you today?
Are you set to go?
Yes.
Okay, let's start.
Let's start.
Let's start the show.
Okay.
Well, we're going to talk about an issue that we haven't talked very much about, except it might be the one that we've talked the most about in the last several years, and it has to do with COVID vaccinations.
And there's a lot of criminality involved in this over the years, and a lot of suffering has occurred that has not been reconciled yet.
But it looks like Kansas, the city of Kansas, is unhappy with Pfizer.
The article came out from Hill and the research, Kansas city state, sues Pfizer over misleading statements.
Can you believe that?
That's my words.
About COVID vaccine.
You know, when I read this, I thought, why did they make it so soft?
If you're filing something misleading, it's such a, I mean, people make little minor mistakes and mislead people, and they might have subtle reasons for doing it.
But I think they flat-out lied.
And that should be a crime, you know, misleading fraud and contempt and the whole work.
But anyway, they filed the suit, and who knows what's going to happen.
There's been other people, you know, filing suits and winning some victories, but I have this terrible negative feeling that the people who have suffered, the many people who have suffered, are not going to be compensated.
No, no.
Because they're going to be unknown.
And, you know, and even the ringleader, I think his name is Faucio or something.
Dr. Fauci.
He's the ringleader.
And he is still honored and respected on national television.
Of course.
So most people, though, have less respect for him now than before.
And some physicians got really annoyed with him because he had never seen a patient in his life.
Some people reported.
So this is, I think, good that it's happening, but it's a tragedy.
But it exposes, once again, that we talked about the pharmaceutical industrial complex.
And they've been able to coordinate with media, university professors, other drug companies, all chanting to the point where the Justice Department was evil in being able to put doctors and others in prison and lose their jobs and they get away with that cancellation.
That was far and above a little intellectual discussion that's gone on.
And now we're going to straighten out.
Well, a few people made some misleading statements.
We'll straighten that out.
But we still have some more straightening out to do because I saw something today that be prepared.
There is a flu epidemic coming down.
So they're always prepared.
And it's been around for a long time.
But at least some truth is coming out.
That's what my main hope is that when they have a suit like this, that if there's some real evil done, that there is some compensation.
That truth is registered, and maybe we'll wake up and maybe they'll look at the basic flaw in that when you get into something as delicate as medicine in government, it should be as delicate as government and religion, and you should keep the two separated.
Yeah, now you start out, you make a good point about how they use the word misleading rather than lying.
And I think the reason is because this is the Hill, and The Hill, like all of the other mainstream publications at the time, they said the same things.
They said the same misleading statements.
They went along with the narrative.
They pushed the narrative.
They demanded that you follow the narrative.
So they're all complicit in this big lie.
So if they say anything stronger than misleading, then they themselves are going to be subject to scrutiny.
So that's why they're trying to soft-pedal this.
But nevertheless, put this first clip up.
This is from The Hill.
Misleading Narratives 00:15:37
And this is Kansas sues Pfizer over misleading statements, as you say, about COVID vaccine.
Go to the next one.
The state of Kansas filed a lawsuit Monday against pharmaceutical company Pfizer, alleging the company made misleading claims.
The suit filed by Kansas Attorney General Chris Kobach, the district counsel of Thomas County, claims Pfizer misled Kansas residents when it claimed it was safe enough and allegedly hid the evidence, this part, hid the evidence of the shots linked to myocarditis and pregnancy issues.
Let's listen to Chris.
Interestingly enough, I know Chris fairly well.
We were together in Switzerland as American Swiss Foundation young leaders quite a few years ago, so it's nice to see him doing some good work.
Let's listen to that first a minute 28.
It's a longer clip than I usually play, but I want to get both aspects of two of the three things at least of what he's talking about here.
So let's listen to Pfizer marketed its vaccine as safe for pregnant women.
However, in February of 2021, Pfizer possessed reports for 458 pregnant women who received Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy.
More than half of the pregnant women reported an adverse event, and more than 10% reported a miscarriage, many within days of the vaccination.
Pfizer also possessed information from its own October 2020 study on pregnancy in rats, indicating that its COVID-19 vaccine was likely linked to infertility, loss of litters, and stillborn offspring.
Number two, safety relating to heart conditions like myocarditis.
Pfizer consistently denied any evidence of a connection or safety signal between its COVID-19 vaccine and myocarditis or pericarditis.
Indeed, on January 18th, 2023, when asked whether its vaccine caused strokes or myocarditis, Pfizer chairman and CEO Alan Burla stated, quote, we've not seen a single signal, although we have distributed billions of doses, end quote.
A signal that he was referring to as a safety signal, which refers to a negative consequence.
However, as Pfizer knew, the United States government, the United States military, foreign governments, and others had found that Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine caused myocarditis and pericarditis.
Number three, effectiveness regarding variants.
Yeah, I mean, we could go on, but that's a longer clip than we usually do.
The point that he's making is that they had the data at the time, and they flat-out lied.
That's how Chris puts it.
Those seem like high percentages of problems, doesn't it?
You know, he brought up the subject of pregnancy.
Yeah.
It was just something else.
I recall going, starting in medical school, looked at the professors as giants, and compared to what I knew about medicine, they were gigantic.
And I think the medicine was a little bit more honorable back in just a few several decades ago.
And we really looked up to the professors.
But as the time went on, I became more questioning of what was going on.
And I drifted toward this, you know, if a woman comes in and she's early pregnant, it was just avoid anything that you have a question about.
Don't try to ask the question.
And I talked to other physicians about being stricter, and they would say, well, the FDA approved this.
You know, something said, it's okay with pregnancy, and they weren't told not to do it.
And I said, but I, you know, went in that direction and just used the common sense of, you know, if you don't have to take this medication, or there's so many things.
They couldn't possibly have tested every medication that's been available.
So I thought, you know, common sense.
But that's not what happens here.
And I was disappointed, you know, even during this epidemic with the medical profession because they were the major participants.
They gave it credibility.
They were the big liars.
And if you stood up for telling the truth and protecting your patients and doing these things, you might lose your, you lost your life, could lose your license.
And this was very serious.
That is so disappointing.
But, you know, sometimes basic overall rules of non-aggression and who's responsible for safety.
You know, these basic principles avoid so much of this.
They say, yeah, but you might miss out.
So we always, we don't want to miss out the opportunity to have Dr. Fauci giving us advice.
And they let him give the advice.
And that's why when government takes over, you know, it's magnified.
That doesn't mean that there's been times they probably say, yeah, but what about when Dr. so-and-so did this and saved a lot of lives?
But there's no reason they don't cancel it out, but they don't also get the government dictating and conspiring too strong a word.
No, no, no, no, not artists.
Getting together and they have a scenario that they pushed and there was a lot of money involved.
Money was a greater motivation than health.
Yeah, that's the thing.
It's almost like we're a failed society.
If a company can get away with doing this when they knew, I mean, the 10%, now we don't know that every one of those 10% was directly related to the shot, but I mean, if something like that came up in the radio, isn't that so high, like 10% miscarriage?
That's just crazy.
Well, here are the four things that he is suing them over.
We only covered two in that video for the sake of time, but put up this next clip.
Go forward.
Go forward.
One.
Here we go.
So here are the four issues, Dr. Paul, that Chris Kobach is bringing up.
Safety related to pregnant women, heart problems or related issues.
We covered those.
Lying regarding vaccine efficacy.
That's a big one.
And colluding to censor questions about the vaccine.
Very, very important things.
Now, our own, Ken Paxton, our own Attorney General here in Texas, he filed suit late last year in a similar way.
I would just say, I hope this opens the floodgates of state lawsuits against this.
I mean, I think that's the only way we can get justice.
Maybe that'll make him a little more cautious.
I don't know whether it'll make him more honest.
But you know who I think this poses a problem for is President Trump.
Because remember, my beautiful vaccines, my beautiful vaccines.
As this continues to progress, he's looking more and more foolish.
If I were advising Trump, and unfortunately we're not, I would say, wow, this new information is incredible.
They must have been keeping these things from me.
Those scoundrels, they should all be jailed.
I'm the innocent one.
Something like this.
You know, he needs to distance himself, I think.
You know, when I think about how medicine is practiced once, you know, the majority takes over through votes and putting politicians in charge and passing out grants for research.
But I think it is symbolic of and represents a democracy.
You know, the collective gets together and say, well, you know, Congress voted for it.
You know, the collective came together.
And, you know, I'm very much annoyed by the sanctity that they give pure democracy.
I think it's very, very dangerous.
The founders convinced me of that.
Very dangerous.
So they get together and, you know, and then they get a speaker for this collective approach to medicine.
And they put him out on television and he gets a pay raise.
But it's a good thing we have bipartisanship.
I mean, bipartisan, two-party.
Oh, you mean they both agreed?
Both sides were agreeing with it, almost all of them.
So it's a shame.
Yeah.
Well, we'll keep an eye on it and we'll report on it because, I mean, I hope it's successful.
And I hope these guys go down.
They deserve it for all the lives they've ruined.
The second story we're going to cover today is kind of tangentially related to COVID because it's one of the leading actors in the tragedy.
It's worse than a tragedy.
If you can put that next clip on, remember this guy, Surgeon General Vivek Murthy?
He now, he's back.
He was hiding for a while, but he's back.
And guess what, Dr. Paul?
He wants to have more censorship.
This is from Politico.
Surgeon General Murthy wants social media warning labels.
Try telling that to Congress.
Of course, Politico loves the idea of censorship and warning labels.
That's why it has that kind of tone.
And in fact, the next clip says a push by Murthy to slap tobacco-style warning labels on social media has galvanized supporters on Monday.
Yeah, right.
Everyone's scrambling for it.
Yeah, but how would the people be protected?
This is representing the majority opinion.
You know, they get together and they want protection from the government.
The labeling is all, and they say, yeah, well, we put it on alcohol.
Yeah, but alcohol is still a greater killer on some articles, greater killer than fentanyl.
So this is the labeling.
And there's nothing that says that labeling couldn't occur without the government deciding what and when and how things should be labeled and people made to be safe.
So that is just a gimmick for control.
They're obsessed with it.
And the disbelief that individuals, an independent doctor that practiced holistic type medicine and a lot of common sense and knew of the history is not to be accepted.
How could he know that?
How could he challenge the FDA and these billions of dollars of research that we have and all the universities supporting this position?
And that's a real problem.
They like it to have the majority opinion behind them.
And then they march on and then they know how to manipulate the bureaucracy as well as the media.
The media has to come in.
That rant on why you had to have those vaccines, the media coordinated that as much as anybody.
And in this case, it's social media.
He wants to slap labels on social media to prevent kids, I guess, from accessing it because it makes them depressed.
Well, it makes everyone depressed.
But anyway, it's usurping the role of the parents.
It's the parent to say, hey, you can't have an account on Instagram.
You're too young.
Put that thing down.
You can't have a phone.
No, you can't do that.
Stay offline.
Go outside.
But it's the government, in the person of this guy and so many others, they want to take over the role of the parents.
You know, there's this argument between truth and people who lie.
There's a contest going on.
It's been going on for a few years.
And so if we decide we want truth, and a majority does vote for truth, the question is, well, who's going to define it?
Who's going to be the finer arbiter of what truth is?
And they will start labeling things or doing anything.
Then it's social media, too.
And how can they not be involved?
And they've essentially, through the back door, they have taken over the control of the news system.
And this does not solve the problem because the people are still pondering who is going to tell the truth.
And they think, NIA, they'll take care of the World Health Organization.
These are smart people.
They'll tell us the truth.
So we will label it.
So they want to label because they want to warn us of the danger.
And maybe one out of 100, they're correct in doing it.
But they're assuming that if you don't have the government doing that, nobody will warn us.
Maybe there would be a different source of our warnings that's more trustworthy.
Just think of trust in a university degree.
I was seeing something on that, too.
Well, that was Jonathan Turley wrote about that, yeah.
Yeah.
But people have lost confidence in it.
And yet, and the parents are getting poorer, and parents are figuring, well, if you don't even have a better chance at a better job and you're not getting education, oh, but we're learning how to demonstrate.
We're out there practicing the truth.
We have our marching orders here.
This is more fun.
This is more fun than studying and thinking for ourselves.
So we'll avoid that.
Yeah, well, you use a great word because it's a good segue, trustworthiness.
Because this is what Vivek Murthy is saying.
He said, you've got to trust us.
And actually, skip one clip and go to the next one.
Murthy said that getting tech companies, if you can find that one, I'm going to skip one.
But it's a key word, Dr. Paul.
It's trust.
Murthy, the Surgeon General, said getting tech companies to disclose harms is a good goal, but that a Surgeon General's warning has specific advantages.
So he's saying it's better that I'm warning than they do.
Many people know about the Surgeon General's warning.
They've seen them on alcohol bottles or tobacco products, he said.
I think our office has a long history of being trusted on issues related to public health.
Trusted.
Put on the next clip.
This is the same Vivek Murthy during COVID.
The Surgeon General calls on big tech to turn over COVID-19 misinformation data.
By misinformation data, he's talking about, and in fact, we have a clip of him, Dr. Paul, at the time.
This is when he released his report.
What was that date on there?
I don't know if we can go back and see.
It's in 2021, I think it was.
Yeah, 2021, July of 2021, Dr. Paul.
Here's what Murthy, who says that he has a high degree of credibility, put on your ear.
This is what he was talking about back then about COVID.
Today, I issued a Surgeon General's advisory on the dangers of health misinformation.
Surgeon General advisories are reserved for urgent public health threats.
And while those threats have often been related to what we eat, drink, and smoke, today we live in a world where misinformation poses an imminent and insidious threat to our nation's health.
Health misinformation is false, inaccurate, or misleading information about health, according to the best evidence at the time.
And while it often appears innocuous on social media apps, on retail sites or search engines, the truth is that misinformation takes away our freedom to make informed decisions about our health and the health of our loved ones.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, health misinformation has led people to resist wearing masks in high-risk settings.
It's led them to turn down proven treatments and to choose not to get vaccinated.
This has led to avoidable illnesses and death.
Misinformation's Deadly Consequence 00:02:38
Like literally everything he said was false at the time.
This misinformation led people to resist wearing masks.
Okay, now we know they don't want to miss anything.
We're in misinformation.
From him, from him.
He's a purveyor.
This is classic.
He's a purveyor of misinformation, but he's back telling us that he's going to protect us again from misinformation.
You know, this article we were quoting from quoted a couple senators because there was some complaints from two senators.
There's a Republican, Marsha Blackburn, and Democrat Richard Blumenthal.
They're bipartisan, so that makes us all happy.
It's better for democracy.
These two key senators, they have their own bill.
So this was their chance to get on there.
Maybe because they wanted more regulations and more controls.
So why didn't they jump on it?
Oh, well, it wouldn't be their bandwagon.
So the two senators supporting kids online safety, Blackburn and Blumenthal jumped on Murphy's op-ed to push their own legislation.
They called for the passage of their Kids Online Safety Act.
Well, that's good, isn't it?
Yeah, sure.
To force, oh, that's where it gets bad.
To force tech platforms to prevent the spread of harmful content online.
Yeah, we'll hire these guys.
They've been practicing for a long time, forcing harmful content, which has been introduced multiple times, but never gone to our floor vote.
Well, good.
But this other trash gets to the floor.
But this is a very good question.
That's so classic.
I don't imagine there's a lot of people saying, oh, yeah, we don't like that.
And you're right.
We need something that makes more sense.
To me, it doesn't make more sense than you're doing something you shouldn't even be trying to do because you're incapable.
It just shows they're not going away.
They love this power over us.
So anyway, I'm going to close out if you think we've covered everything.
And I'm just going to do our last clip here to remind everyone, get your tickets for the Liberty platform.
We've got great speakers.
They're lining up as we speak.
I will put that last clip on just so you get a look at what we're all about.
We are that yellow flower trying to rise out of that hot, miserable concrete.
That's our goal in one photo here.
It's going to be great speakers.
It's going to be a great day.
I forgot to put links in before the show, but right after the show is over, I'll put links into this and to apply for being a Ron Paul Scholar.
People who are students are going to want to do that.
It's a great program as well.
I'll put the links in, get more info, and click on it.
And we look forward to seeing you.
Dr. Paul over here.
Yeah, very good.
Principle of Safety 00:02:23
You know, we've been talking about how to make it safe for the patients and the people on the various things that the government does.
And so they want to use labels.
And they say, well, we labeled tobacco and all these other things.
And it hasn't done much good, but nevertheless, labeled.
But that's what government's in the business of.
If they want something done, they label.
And sometimes there is a commercial reason for this.
You label your opponent's opponent's product, And that'll satisfy them.
But the principle is what I want to say a few words about, and that is most of the arguments for doing all of this, vaccines, everything, is to keep the people safe.
Now, who's against safety?
I'm very much for safety, and I'm very sensitive to that.
But the big question is: who's responsible?
Is it the politicians?
Is it the dictators?
Is it the drug companies?
Is it the military-industrial complex?
Who's to take care of safety?
Because everybody is for safety.
But almost, I'll bet you if you did a polling and ask an open-ended question about, does the government have a responsibility to keep the people safe?
And of course, absolutely.
We have to be safe.
We have to have people protecting our borders so nobody invades us.
We have to have all these things to make the people safe.
And of course, it doesn't work.
And safety is something different than that.
People can voluntarily get together.
And in the beginning of time, in the beginning of our country, they had, it wasn't like when they went out and developed and moved into the West, the settlers, you know, were kept safe, but they were in charge.
They were in charge of their safety.
So this whole idea that governments can make us safe, the government should make us work for our freedom to protect our liberty to make our own decisions that would keep us safe.
And that principle has been essentially lost.
There's no place in the Constitution that says number one issue is keep the people safe, safe from sickness and injuries and wars and all these things.
It doesn't work that way because the responsibility should be on the people.
That's what it would be like in a free society.
Export Selection