'It’s All Up to the Judge Now': 'Pfizergate' Covid Vaccine Fraud Case is in Jeopardy of Being Dismissed

The final motion to stop the 'Pfizergate' Covid vaccine fraud case from being dismissed has been submitted to the judge, and it is "all up to the judge now."

This is according to the whistleblower in the case, Brook Jackson, who provided the court documents and spoke to Wildfire News.

In the lawsuit United States of America ex rel. Brook Jackson against the Pfizer contractor Ventavia Research Group, the whistleblower's lawsuit alleges, "payment was contingent upon the vaccine receiving emergency use authorization ('EUA') and that the FDA in making that decision was reliant upon the accuracy of the data produced in the clinical trials. If, as Relator witnessed and alleges, the clinical trial protocol was egregiously broken, then the very basis upon which the EUA was granted would be irrelevant."

"The government initially recognized the merits of Relator’s claims," the motion argues. "The government made several requests to extend its deadline to either intervene or allow Relator to continue independently, ultimately deliberating for nearly a year prior to the unsealing of this action. Had the government truly believed at the time, as they now try to claim, that Relator’s complaint was devoid of evidence, they would never have required such ample time to investigate. Clearly, the government had an interest in her allegations upon the initial filing of this action."

The lawsuit rebuts the defense that the standard for dismissal is not actuality, but materiality to the decision-making.

"The United States claims the inference must be that the violations at the Ventavia site 'actually' altered the FDA’s decision, but the FCA pleading standard is not one of actuality but of materiality (imposing liability under the FCA on any person who 'knowingly makes, uses, or causes to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim')," the motion adds. "Whether a false statement is material depends on whether the false statement has a 'natural tendency to influence, or is capable of influencing, the decision of the decision making body to which it was addressed'."

"Clinical trial fraud is not only a sound basis for a FCA claim, it is also the basis for criminal charges," the motion adds.

Jackson, a former clinical trial auditor with more than 15 years’ experience in clinical research coordination and management, makes the following serious claims about the Pfizer contractor Ventavia's clinical trials:

• [C]linical trial participants were given their second injection outside of the protocol- mandated nineteen to twenty-three day window. On at least four occasions the vaccine concentrate was over-diluted, which directly affects potency and reduces potential side-effects.

• Ventavia failed to report Serious Adverse Events (“SAEs”) to Pfizer and Icon, though that information was available via the clinical trial participants’ “electronic diary” entries. This is perhaps the most egregious violation not only of clinical trial protocol but of public trust.

• Ventavia’s documentation practices were careless, sloppy, inaccurate, and many times falsified. Pfizer had access to this data and equally failed its oversight responsibilities which rightfully draws the presumption that data from other clinical trials is just as bad if not worse.

As reported earlier, Brook Jackson was given until October 27, 2022 to respond to the defendant's Motion to Dismiss the case, which cites the False Claims Act.

"It’s all up to the judge now," Jackson told Wildfire News, noting that there is now two options. "1. He allows us to move forward with discovery. 2. Dismissed."

This is one of the last opportunities for the American people to get transparency and accountability against Big Pharma for the false claims made about the Covid-19 vaccines.

Support Brook Jackson’s case by donating to her legal defense.