FBI Corrupt??? NOOOOOOOO. LOL

 https://www.tiktok.com/@darboie/video/7159147264525536555

 

FBI agent pleads guilty

COVID DEATHS

 

95 Percent of Corpses Had Received COVID Vaccination Within 2 Weeks of Death: Funeral Director

COVID Vaccine Injuries

Oct 20 2022

A COVID-19 vaccine is prepared in a file image. (Stephen Zenner/Getty Images)

A funeral director from New Zealand says that 95 percent of the corpses he has been seeing had received a COVID-19 vaccine within two weeks of their passing away.

“Ninety-five percent of the people who have passed away through the work that I’ve done have been vaccinated within two weeks,” Brenton Faithfull said.

Faithfull has been working as a funeral director for the last 41 years and has been running his own mortuary business for the last 26 years. He recently spoke out about the apparent relationship between the COVID-19 vaccines and the deaths he has been observing.

“It’s very obvious, they die within two weeks of receiving the vaccination, a lot of them … almost appear to have died from anaphylaxis, almost a reaction straight away to the booster.”

Anaphylaxis is an acute reaction of the body to an antigen, such as that of a bee sting, or an injection.

“They die the same day, the following day after receiving the COVID-19 vaccination. This isn’t a one-off case, this is the majority of cases that have come through our facility,” Faithfull said in an interview.

UK Funeral Director

Similar data has been discussed by funeral director John O’Looney in the UK and Richard Hirschman from Alabama, previously reported by The Epoch Times.

“From the very moment these injections went into arms, the death rate soared beyond belief. They labeled them all as COVID deaths, but the reality is they were almost exclusively the people who were vaccinated,” O’Looney told The Epoch Times.

“We now see record numbers of deaths in the vaccinated and in record numbers of young people. They die from a mixture of sudden very aggressive cancers or blood clots, which cause heart attack and stroke,” he added.

Doctors Comment

Dr. Sherri Tenpenny, who has been informing the public on the dangers of vaccines for over two decades, weighed in on Faithfull’s testimony:

“On Dec. 2, 2020, UK regulators granted emergency-use authorization (EUA) to Pfizer’s COVID-19 shot. Within a week, MHRA [Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency] Chief Executive Officer June Raine said in a statement that ‘Any person with a history of anaphylaxis to a vaccine, medicine or food should not receive the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine.’ She went on to say that ‘allergic reactions had not been a feature of Pfizer’s clinical trials,'” Dr. Tenpenny told The Epoch Times.

However, Tenpenny further noted that anaphylaxis was the “first identified risk.”

“Pfizer was forced to release their findings by a Texas federal judge in January 2022. Within that first tranche of documents, you will find Table 3–Safety Concerns–on page 10 of this document [pdf]. The first identified risk is anaphylaxis. In a risk survey … conducted between Dec. 1, 2020, and Feb. 28, 2021, a mere three months, 1,833 cases of anaphylaxis had been observed and four individuals died from anaphylaxis on the same,” she said.

The Epoch Times reached out to Pfizer for comment.

In certain cases, Faithfull and his staff try to get the coroner involved.

Faithfull shared one instance where a man insisted that his father should not get the vaccine, but his sister pressured their father. When the father conceded and took the shot, he died four days later.

“When I started counting in August of last year, it was one after the other, after the other, after the other, and when I got to 20, it was 19 who had died within two weeks [of getting the vaccine],” Faithfull said.

“So the first 20 days, I counted 19 of them—that’s 95 percent,” the funeral director explained. “The next number was 100 percent of the people who died had been vaccinated within two weeks.”

Dr. Sanjay Verma is a cardiologist practicing in California who has been seeing a dramatic increase in heart problems since the rollout of the vaccines.

“Previous work by Dr. Gundry demonstrated an increase in cardiac inflammatory markers after COVID-19 vaccination. Interestingly, from Dec 2021 thru Jun 2022, 100 percent of the patients needing urgent cardiac catheterization for heart attack had been vaccinated, many of them with booster doses. More than half had been recently vaccinated (within a few weeks). In a county where 60 percent of the population is vaccinated, this trend was worrisome,” Verma told The Epoch Times.

“There have been 31,470 deaths after COVID-19 vaccination reported in VAERS. The vast majority of them are clustered within seven days after vaccination. Additionally, there are some other worrisome trends. Data from CDC indicate there were 60,000 deaths in Sept 2019 and Sept 2020. However, in Sept 2021 that number surged to 90,000. We also have numerous social media posts on people, especially athletes, who ‘died suddenly’ with no apparent cause,” Verma said.

Verma believes that any unexplained death within a few weeks or even months after vaccination should be “investigated with a thorough autopsy,” specifically evaluated for spike protein in the brain, major blood vessels, and heart.

“We know the spike protein is toxic to blood vessels, causing endothelial dysfunction. The spike protein is also toxic to heart muscle, causing myocardial injury. There are also case reports of autopsy proven vaccine-mediated encephalitis (inflammation of the brain), myocarditis, and vasculitis, all of which can cause death,” Verma added.

Reporter

Enrico Trigoso is an Epoch Times reporter focusing on U.S. politics, health news, social issues, and a wide range of topics.

COVID SUMMIT Saturday in The Villages

 https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/florida-summit-covid-ii-future-medicine-post-covid-america/

COVID JAB recipient DIES unexpectantly

 

Ok, I admit it, we were right. RIP

“Those of you who think the vaccine kills people can use me as a test. If I die, you were right. If I don’t die, and have no ill effects, you were wrong, and should admit it (at least to yourselves). Better yet, you should admit that you were misled, and tell the world who misled you, so other people can benefit by avoiding those fearmongers." https://bit.ly/3T7XYgz

Young men and woman join the military and die, why?

The Republican Freedom Caucus is calling on the DOD to repeal the vax mandate or it will delay the defense bill. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/freedom-caucus-calls-gop-delay-defense-bil-vaccine-mandate-not-repealed/

Here is a damn good reason why you must demand your representative join the Freedom Caucus in this effort. Marines are dying https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/18-year-old-marine-recruit-dies-collapsing-training-exercise-camp-pendleton/

Army? Yup, dying as well https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/10/u-s-army-identifies-18-year-old-active-soldier-found-dead-barracks-cause-death-unknown/

Speak up today.

 

Corrupt criminal justice system

 For those who question the justice system in the country. the attached story, the video, the corrupt DOJ, the biased jury, and the dishonorable judge should be enough evidence to demonstrate that anyone can not only be indicted but tried and convicted regardless of the law (which the government routinely breaks), the facts, and the actual evidence. The system is broken and good people get destroyed because of it. It must change. https://bit.ly/3ExOoPB

SICK COMMIES IN CALIFORNIA want your kids

SICK: Radical California Legislature Passes Bill Allowing State to Subvert Parental Rights and Take Custody of Out-of-State Minors Seeking Trans Surgeries – Awaits Gov. Newsom’s Signature

By Julian Conradson
Published September 19, 2022 at 5:39pm

Late last month, the California legislature voted to pass a bill that would allow the State to take custody of out-of-state minors seeking gender transition surgeries and cross-sex hormones – even if these actions go against the wishes of the child’s parents.

The measure, SB 107, which was introduced in July by Democrat state Senator Scott Wiener as part of efforts to turn California into a “sanctuary state” for trans mutilation of children (aka. gender-affirming care), passed both the house and the senate on August 31st with “overwhelming Democratic support.”

The sickening legislation now sits on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk, awaiting his signature. He has until September 30th to sign or veto the bill. Despite not taking action as of yet, Newsom is expected to sign the measure into law before the timeframe ends this month.

When introducing the bill, Senator Wiener – the same radical who introduced pieces of legislation that would allow anyone 12 or older to get vaccinated without parental consent, mandate drag queen story hour in grade school, and relax the punishment for child sex offenders, among others – claimed it was necessary for the state to take action because of laws passed elsewhere in the US that restrict minors who identify as transgender from accessing radical and destructive treatments such as cross-sex hormones and surgeries to remove healthy organs. Wiener characterizes these laws that protect American youth as “brutal attacks on transgender children.”

Unbelievably, there are seemingly no restrictions or qualifications for the law to take effect. In other words, if the whim of any child is to access these destructive sex-change treatments, but one or both parents aren’t allowing it, California’s courts can take custody of that child in order to administer the drugs and/or surgery. All the court would need to prove is that the minor has been ‘mistreated or abused’ which is defined as being ‘unable to obtain gender-affirming health care.’ As of now, it is unclear if the child has to enter California before the law takes effect, or if the state can interfere and assist the child in traveling and accommodations.

The bill states that a child must be present in the state for the measures to take effect, but, continues to say that physical presence in the state is “not necessary” to make a determination about custody. Either way, this law goes far beyond any established form of government intervention in personal family matters.

From SB 107:

“…(c) Physical presence of, or personal jurisdiction over, a party or a child is not necessary or sufficient to make a child custody determination.

(d) The presence of a child in this state for the purpose of obtaining gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, as defined by Section 16010.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, is sufficient to meet the requirements of paragraph (2) of subdivision (a)….

…3424.(a) A court of this state has temporary emergency jurisdiction if the child is present in this state and the child has been abandoned or it is necessary in an emergency to protect the child because the child, or a sibling or parent of the child, is subjected to, or threatened with, mistreatment or abuse, or because the child has been unable to obtain gender-affirming health care or gender-affirming mental health care, as defined by Section 16010.2 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.

What’s most troubling is that the bill seemingly incentivizes minors to travel to California behind their parent’s backs in search of this type of ‘care.’ As the California Family Council points out, radical activists in the state can easily “weaponize” the law to prey on out-of-state children.

From California Family Council:

It’s not hard to see how activists could quickly weaponize SB 107. Since the bill instructs state agencies to ignore the circumstances of how a child came to the state for gender transitioning, SB 107 invites children to run away from their families or even be trafficked across state lines.

As for the children’s wellbeing, once the state takes custody, the text of the bill does not describe any specifics when it comes to how these children will be cared for, let alone where they will be housed. The only information given is that the out-of-state minors would be under the “temporary emergency jurisdiction” of the state.

Opponents of SB 107  rightly view the measure as a direct assault on parental rights and a gross overstepping of authority by the notoriously ‘progressive’ state. Additionally, the issue goes much deeper than parental rights, as the very notion of gender-affirming care has been widely proven to cause severe long-term consequences (sterility, bone loss, other health issues) and increased suicide rates among young people who are coerced into medically transitioning.

Thankfully, several notable advocacy groups in California are mobilizing against the legislation and are already gearing up their legal challenges for if, and when, Newsom signs the bill into law.

Jonathan Keller, the president of California Family Council, called the measure “one of the gravest threats to parental rights in recent years” and vowed to fight the state through the courts in a statement last week. In addition to his and others’ efforts to reverse this bill, Keller called on the Attorney Generals of other states to come together and figure out a solution.

From Keller:

Advertisement - story continues below

“If Gov. Newsom foolishly signs this measure, California should brace for lawsuits. Other states’ attorneys general will not sit idly by as California steals children from parents who don’t want them sterilized with these trans-treatments.”

Many are also pointing out that the law is undeniably unconstitutional, as it strips away several rights that are enshrined in our country’s founding document. In a damning statement released last week, the Alliance Defending Freedom, a legal advocacy group, hammered the California legislature and called into question the measure’s ability to stand up to the most basic legal challenges.

From ADF’s statement:

“SB 107 violates parental rights protected by the U.S. Constitution by giving California courts the ability to strip parents who reside in another state of their parental rights if their child travels to California to obtain gender transition procedures…

Advertisement - story continues below

…[SB 107] would override the jurisdiction of courts in a family’s home state that are usually the proper forum for custody determinations. SB 107 could also conflict with various federal laws, including those governing which state courts have jurisdiction to determine child custody and federal laws governing extradition requirements between the states.”

At no other point in history has a government entity seized custody of children from parents at the behest of a child’s manipulated views about reality. Not only that, but, the reasoning behind it – to allow children access to these destructive and life-altering medical treatments – is making the issue worse, not better.

It shouldn’t take a scientist or a clinical study to see that we should not be giving young children, who don’t have the faculties to make these types of life-altering decisions on their own, drugs that are used to chemically castrate pedophiles (Lupron, puberty blocker) – let alone giving young, healthy girls’ double mastectomies in the name of ‘gender affirmation’ – it’s unspeakable what these monsters are doing to America’s children.

And now we have SB 107 thanks to Commiefornia… The precedent this law sets alone should terrify every American.