As reported yesterday, on April 22, 2022, Pfizer filed a motion to dismiss whistleblower Brook Jackson’s False Claims Act case.

In its motion for dismissal, Pfizer doesn’t argue that the clinical trials, for the products marketed by the US government as ‘Covid-19 vaccines,’ were not fraudulent.

Instead, Pfizer argues that the corporation never had an obligation to conduct sound, non-fraudulent trials under the terms of its Base Agreement with the US government (Exhibit A to Pfizer’s Motion to Dismiss filed 04/22/2022) and the Statement of Work (Exhibit 10 to Jackson’s Complaint filed 01/08/2021 and her Amended Complaint filed 02/22/2022).

“Because of pandemic-related exigencies, the agreement was not a standard federal procurement contract, but rather a ‘prototype’ agreement executed pursuant to 10 U.S.C. § 2371b[.]…

The [contract’s Statement of Work] describes a ‘large scale vaccine manufacturing demonstration’ that imposes no requirements relating to Good Clinical Practices (‘GCP’) or related FDA regulations.”

Pfizer further argued:

“The Government’s ‘actual behavior’ here says it all. Both the complaint itself and the public record show the Government has been fully aware of [whistleblower Jackson’s] Relator’s allegations for nearly two years without withdrawing authorization or stopping payment for Pfizer’s vaccine.”

This is true. Jackson told the FDA the trials were being conducted in corrupt and illegal ways in September 2020, and the FDA moved ahead anyway.

Jackson told the Department of Justice in January 2021 when filing her original False Claims Act complaint. The DOJ gagged her from speaking publicly, and declined to prosecute Pfizer or its subcontractors.

10 USC 2371b has been renumbered. It’s now 10 USC 4022 - Authority of the Department of Defense to carry out certain prototype projects.

Here’s where 10 USC 4022 sits under Title 10, Military Law:

Title 10 - Military Law

→ Subtitle A - General Military Law

→ →Part V - Acquisitions

→ → →Subpart E - Research and Engineering

→ → → → Chapter 301 - Research and Engineering Generally

→ → → → → Subchapter II - Agreements

→ → → → → → Section 4022 - Authority of DOD to carry out certain prototype projects

Subchapter II - Agreements, includes:

• § 4021. Research projects: transactions other than contracts and grants

• § 4022. Authority of the Department of Defense to carry out certain prototype projects

• § 4023. Procurement for experimental purposes

• § 4024. Merit-based award of grants for research and development

• § 4025. Prizes for advanced technology achievements

• § 4026. Cooperative research and development agreements under Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980

• [§ 4027. Disclosure requirements for recipients of research and development funds]

The first part of 10 USC 4022 explains:

“[T]he Director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the Secretary of a military department, or any other official designated by the Secretary of Defense may, under the authority of section 4021 of this title, carry out prototype projects that are directly relevant to enhancing the mission effectiveness of military personnel and the supporting platforms, systems, components, or materials proposed to be acquired or developed by the Department of Defense, or to improvement of platforms, systems, components, or materials in use by the armed forces.

That’s what the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic and the Covid-19 injection program are: a military prototype project.

Related: The US Congress in 1997 pretended to stop unethical US government experimentation on military personnel, while actually expanding the pool of human subjects for DOD experiments to include the military and the rest of the American population, by moving the experimental programs from the Department of Defense to the Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration, and then merging HHS with DOD through subsequent legislation.

From the statutory timeline at the American Domestic Bioterrorism Program post:

• 1997 National Defense Authorization Act for FY98 - PL 105-85, 111 Stat. 1915 (450 pages). Section 1078, “Restrictions on the use of human subjects for testing of chemical or biological agents,” repealed and replaced a 1977 section of 50 USC Chapter 32, the Chemical and Biological Warfare Program. The 1977 provision (50 USC 1520) had added a requirement that DOD report to Congress about DOD human experimentation programs. In 1997, Congress replaced 1520 with 1520a, purportedly to prohibit DOD conducting experiments on soldiers without the individual soldiers informed consent. It was passed by Congress in response to public outrage over injuries and deaths caused by mandated anthrax injections of soldiers during and after the 1991 Gulf War. However, the authority for federal government experimentation on non-consenting human beings continued; Congress simply transferred the program to the Food Drug and Cosmetics Act, 21 USC 360bbb (see below, passed three days after the NDAA) under declared emergency situations (Emergency Use Authorizations/EUA).

• 1997 Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act - PL 105-115, 11 Stat. 2296. (86 pages). Added new section to Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act (21 USC 9) to expand access to investigational drugs and devices during emergency situations (21 USC 360bbb). This was the beginning of the Emergency Use Authorization framework that culminated in the federal government’s psychological, social and economic coercion program aimed at universal injection of all American citizens with products marketed as Covid-19 vaccines, operational from mid-2020 to the present.

There’s much more to dig into here, starting with the history of amendments to 10 USC 4022, and the Pfizer contracts with US government military branches.

Congress passed 2016 National Defense Authorization Act. PL 114-92, 129 Stat. 893 on 11/25/2015. Section 815 added the ‘prototype’ contracting language to Title 10, Military Law (10 USC 2371b, later renumbered 10 USC 4021), authorizing Department of Defense to contract with pharmaceutical corporations to conduct otherwise illegal medical experiments on the American and global public without notice or consent. [This paragraph was added 05/27/2022]

Also related: One of the factors to be considered by HHS secretary in making determinations about qualified security countermeasures to be purchased, using the DOD Special Reserve Fund, to stock the Strategic National Stockpile of pharmaceuticals, from pharmaceutical corporations is "whether there is a lack of a significant commercial market for the product at the time of procurement, other than as a security countermeasure." 42 USC 247d-6b (c)(5)(B)(iii), as revised by Congress in 2004.

In other words, if no consumers would buy a product under normal commercial circumstances, but the pharmaceutical companies want to sell it, and the US government wants to conduct research and development on its military applications, the HHS Secretary classifies it as a qualified security countermeasure, the pharmaceutical contractor manufactures it, the US government buys it in bulk, and the US government forces the population to take it.

Side Note: A reader recently sent me a link to a page containing Covid-related US government contracts. The Pfizer contracts aren’t there, but two Moderna contracts are there, both issued by ASPR-BARDA (HHS Assistant Secretary of Preparedness and Response, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority). Both are heavily redacted. Other contracted corporations in that list include American Blood Center, Genentech, Janssen, Phlow, Protein Sciences, Regeneron and Vyaire.