To begin UK Column’s comprehensive coverage of the 8th Red Pill Expo, held in Indianapolis on 9–10 July 2022 under the auspices of Freedom Force International, this article focuses on the remarks and announcements of Stanford Graham. Mr. Graham (pictured here and interviewed in audio at the foot of this page), along with fellow Red Pill 2022 presenter Dr. David Martin, co-founded Prosecute Now, a private, non-profit legal outfit that provides a “platform for communicating with elected state-level officials to appoint special prosecutors to investigate Covid crimes involving the creation and implementation of the alleged pandemic”, as Graham described the matter for UK Column.
As part of his Red Pill presentation on Day 2 of the Expo, entitled Language, the Ultimate Weapon of War, Graham—who has a Juris Doctor degree from the Villanova School of Law—announced to a highly appreciative capacity audience that a critically important federal lawsuit is afoot which, due to the fact that the US Government’s vulnerable definition of the word “vaccine” is being challenged in the lawsuit, has the potential to topple the entire Covid medical “machine”.
Since early 2020, the Malthusian medical establishment, with the full connivance of the mass media cartel, has suppressed human liberty to an unprecedented degree while subjecting millions of adults—and children as young as six months old in the US—to often-dangerous Covid “vaccines” which, as Graham repeatedly told the Expo audience, are not actual vaccines at all. Proving what these injections aren’t, and what they really are, is the pivotal factor in the lawsuit, he said.
Griner v. Biden
Directly after his Expo remarks, Graham sat down with UK Column and recapped the civil lawsuit Griner v. Biden et al., filed on 3 March 2022 in the US District Court of Utah (case No. 2:2022cv00149). The others named as defendants, besides Joe Biden Jr. in his capacity as US President, are:
- US Department of Health and Human Services Secretary, Xavier Becerra;
- Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Administrator, Chiquita Brooks-Lasure;
- Meena Seshamani, an Oxford-educated economist and Johns Hopkins-trained surgeon who leads the Medicare section of CMS;
- and Daniel Tsai, a Taiwanese national and billionaire who was recently named as deputy administrator and director for US Medicaid and CHIP (Children’s Health Insurance Program) services.
Prosecute Now, whose lead litigator is George R. Wentz of the Davillier Law Group, LLC, of New Orleans, is representing the plaintiff, Devan Griner, MD, a plastic surgeon from Provo, Utah.
“We had oral arguments on two motions, the first motions on that case, on 6 July,” Graham noted, adding:
We have a motion for a preliminary injunction. The purpose of the preliminary injunction is to terminate the remaining injection mandate for [US] healthcare workers. They’re required to be injected with this bioweapon or they lose their ability to practice medicine—nurses, doctors, administrators and any hospital that receives any funding from the Social Security Administration, from the CMS arm of the government. Anybody that gets Medicare, Medicaid support, if you get those dollars, this mandate is in effect.
The plaintiff, Dr. Griner, brought this legal action to challenge the enforcement of the CMS mandate against his medical practice. The mandate, according to the complaint, “prevents Dr. Griner from continuing to heal children unless he takes one of the [Covid] Injections, which he refuses to do.”
The complaint specifies that the mandate requires “nearly every employee of any healthcare facility” receiving the above-noted government funding to “receive one of three injections authorized for emergency use by the Food and Drug Administration[.]”
Dr. Griner’s “passion is healing children who suffer from cleft palates and other congenital defects”, the complaint also notes.
Graham continued: “The second motion that was argued was filed by the Biden Administration—a motion to dismiss our case.”
Case progress
At the end of the oral arguments, the judge only indicated he would take the matter under advisement, Graham went on to say, while noting that “in terms of the law governing that case,” all the pleadings in the non-moving party’s documentation must be regarded as true and factual unless a jury were to decide otherwise.
Asked by UK Column whether this meant that the documents lodged by Dr. Griner’s side of the case would stand unless overturned by a jury, Graham replied: “That’s correct. The judge will have to regard as true all factual allegations in our complaint.”
The court’s obligation to treat those allegations as true is a critically important aspect, Graham went on to explain:
The allegations include statements from the likes of Dr. [Anthony] Fauci, from the chief medical officer of the World Health Organization, and from the CEO of Pfizer [Albert Bourla] et cetera [including also the head of the CDC] that the Pfizer injections and the Moderna injections are not vaccines because they do not prevent transmissibility—which means they do not prevent infection or re-infection, when the basis of the mandate to begin with was to “stop the spread”, stop transmission of the disease. And now we have statements from Fauci et al. that these injections do not stop transmission; therefore, they’re not a vaccine. That’s the argument that we’re making.
Notably, the complaint specifies: “The CDC Director has admitted that the Injections do not prevent infection or transmission of SARS-CoV-2[.]” This argument is based on a New England Journal of Medicine article of September of 2021 and a CNN Health news report from August 2021.
“So, the key word is ‘vaccine.’ Earlier in your presentation here at the Expo, you talked about the manipulation and weaponization of language, which seems to apply to this lawsuit,” UK Column noted while interviewing Graham.
Unconstitutional
“That’s correct,” Graham replied. “They call these a ‘vaccine’ because if they were labeled for what they truly are, which is a ‘medical treatment’, it would be unconstitutional to mandate them.”
“That’s because the US Government, by law, cannot force you to do something medically?” UK Column queried. “Correct,” Graham replied. “The government cannot force you to undergo a medical treatment. It’s simply unconstitutional.”
Graham meant that when government authorities change the name of a medical treatment—and in this case label it a ‘vaccine’—it suddenly becomes “acceptable” to mandate. That’s because “President Reagan in 1986 signed the Liability Protection Act to hold vaccine manufacturers harmless and make vaccines a “sacred cow”, Graham told UK Column by phone subsequent to the Expo.
Disturbingly, he added that because vaccines supposedly “provide immunity where there is none to ‘stop the spread’ of a specific disease, and since in that context they’re typically given to children, the manufacturers have no liability [regarding deaths or adverse reactions from vaccinations]. The situation is the antithesis of what it ought to be.”
Asked whether his side’s only necessity in the Griner v. Biden suit is to demonstrate that the injections are not a vaccine, or whether it must also be proven in court what the Covid jabs actually are, Graham replied: “Actually, both approaches. Proving they’re not a vaccine is mandatory, we need to do that; but at the same time, the question is, what is it?”
Graham added the compelling detail that admissions have been forthcoming from Moderna and Pfizer/BioNtech that the injections “are gene therapy”, which means they are not vaccines. Sources of those admissions have been submitted to the court via Prosecute Now’s complaint.
Regarding his lawsuit, Graham continued: “Think about this: here you have the federal government inserting itself into the private relationship between the physician and his or her patient.”
UK Column summarized: “And they’re calling it a vaccine and therefore they say that they can force it on that patient, and that patient has no defense against it[.]”
Graham agreed and added that, currently, “if your doctor is not going to get injected then he cannot be your doctor any more”, describing the very scenario that this federal lawsuit addresses.
Worthless tests, ultra vires agencies
Graham also answered in the affirmative when asked whether all of the Covid “cases” that have been paraded across newspaper pages and television screens are based on outright conjecture, since “testing positive” with the universally-used PCR test is not only notorious for giving false positives; but the actual PCR inventor, the late Kary Mullis (1944–2019), said the test was never intended to be a diagnostic to begin with.
Graham recalled:
We learned last year, in terms of the testing mechanisms, that it was a sliding scale in order to determine whether somebody was infected—whether they were coming into the infection or going out of the infection. It looked like a bell curve, in terms of the testing mechanism.
So, say we have a metaphorical measure of one to ten, and at seven you can transmit the so-called disease. Well, if you’re at a seven, and if there’s a bell curve there, two sides of that curve can measure seven. On one side, you’re ‘heating up,’ and on the other side, you’re ‘cooling down’. Which is it? The test doesn’t say. And when they want more cases, they can just reduce the value on the test to six.
He added: “Some people have lost faith in our judicial system. I’d like to say, don’t lose faith in our judicial system! There are still very good judges in this country and very good lawyers. Lots of times, lousy decisions come about as a result of lousy legal work.”
To avoid US-based shutdown of Prosecute Now’s online presence, ProsecuteNow.com redirects to a British Indian Ocean Territory-registered website, where readers can learn more about Griner v. Biden and can also can download a pivotal decision from a US District Court in Florida in which the court set out why it was terminating the federal travel mask mandate, as well as enumerating where the CDC had exceeded its authority and where that agency did not adhere to its own rules under applicable federal regulations.
Specifically, as a press summary described that ruling:
On Monday, April 18, 2022, District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle of the United States District Court, Middle District of Florida, Tampa division, ruled that the CDC’s requirement to wear masks on public conveyances in the United States, pursuant to President Biden’s Executive Order 13998, exceeded the CDC’s statutory authority, violated the procedure required for agency rule making under the Administrative Procedures Act, and was therefore declared unlawful and vacated in its entirety.
“So, for a great example of some very good law, go to our website and download that decision; it’s there to read, in Freedom Health Forum v. Biden et al., about the travel mask mandate case,” Graham said.
Motivation
Prosecute Now describes its mission as follows:
Our mission is to organize and amplify individual and collective citizen voices in the ears, minds, and hearts of our elected and appointed state officials for the singular purpose of demanding and obtaining the immediate appointment of special prosecutors and independent counsel to initiate criminal investigations and pursue criminal proceedings against the perpetrators for violations of criminal statutes in their pursuit of planning, orchestrating, and executing the alleged SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and all consequent actions taken and infringing the inalienable rights and liberties of we, the people. We pledge to do all necessary and possible to ensure that all monies obtained pursuant to such prosecutions be distributed to those who have suffered any injury from the commission of these crimes.
And Prosecute Now’s raison d’être is:
[. . .] to maintain, magnify, and augment the individual and collective liberties and social compacts and relations of Humanity upon which this, the Great American Experiment, was conceived. We exist to represent humanity’s voice for liberty and to stand as the bulwark against the rising tide of despotism and tyrannical autocracy overtly and shamelessly displayed across the world and here at home in the United States of America.
“Any government that’s not lawful government delegitimizes itself; it doesn’t matter what our criticisms are,” UK Column observed while talking with Graham. “Unlawful government is its own worst enemy.”
2009: Pfizer paid largest healthcare fraud fine in DoJ history
This article would be incomplete without mentioning that since the Griner v. Biden lawsuit essentially involves how drug giants like Pfizer market their products—in this case promoting an mRNA gene therapy injection as a “vaccine”—it is in many respects a recapitulation of the 2009 ruling in which Pfizer was found guilty of deceptively marketing the drug Bextra. As the Department of Justice announced in September 2009:
American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Company Inc. (hereinafter together "Pfizer") have agreed to pay $2.3 billion, the largest health care fraud settlement in the history of the Department of Justice, to resolve criminal and civil liability arising from the illegal promotion of certain pharmaceutical products, the Justice Department announced today.
Pharmacia & Upjohn Company has agreed to plead guilty to a felony violation of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act for misbranding Bextra with the intent to defraud or mislead. Bextra is an anti-inflammatory drug that Pfizer pulled from the market in 2005. Under the provisions of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, a company must specify the intended uses of a product in its new drug application to FDA. Once approved, the drug may not be marketed or promoted for so-called "off-label" uses—i.e., any use not specified in an application and approved by FDA.
Too big to nail
However, companies like Pfizer have a Houdiniesque skill of slipping out of the noose. According to a 15 July 2022 report circulated online by Need to Know News (NKN, a production of Red Pill Expo founder G. Edward Griffin), that landmark ruling against Pfizer thirteen years ago failed to serve justice, contrary to the hype.NKN noted:
Under the law, a company convicted of fraud would automatically be kicked out of Medicare and Medicaid[,] and Pfizer would no longer be able to bill any federal health programs for any of its products, which would collapse the company. But Pfizer was 'too big to nail.' [It] cut a deal with federal authorities and created a shell company (Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. Inc.) to take the rap with a criminal plea that allowed Pfizer to continue doing business.
Thus, Pfizer could be said to be engaging in questionable marketing now by calling mRNA injections "vaccines", just as it engaged in proven deceptive marketing in 2009 by taking a drug only approved for arthritis and menstrual cramps and recommending it for other illnesses and ailments, sometimes at higher-than-approved doses.
At the Red Pill Expo, Graham also cited the general history of language manipulation and propaganda as a central tool of warfare, one originating in wars of antiquity, as far back as the Peloponnesian War. This clearly underscores what has become axiomatic: that all wars are information wars, regardless of whether physical violence is present or not.
Part II: Drug history, social credit, Great Reset
Part III: Defending yourself from the entrenched technocracy
