Feds Ask for Covid-19 “Misinformation” — Indiana Attorney General Sends Them CDC Remarks

Feds Ask for Covid-19 “Misinformation” — Indiana Attorney General Sends Them CDC Remarks
Melpomenem/iStock/Getty Images Plus

When the U.S. Surgeon General’s office asked states to supply it with examples of Covid-19 misinformation, it probably did not expect what it got from Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita: a list of false statements from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officials.

Rokita’s letter, dated May 2 but released to the public Monday, was compiled with the help of his co-signatories, Stanford University medical professor Jay Bhattacharya and former Harvard University medical professor Martin Kuldorff.

In their letter, the three “agree” with the Surgeon General “that misinformation has been a major problem during the pandemic,” but they contend that much of the misinformation has come “from the CDC and other health organizations.” To prove it, they cite several categories of such disinformation. (See link for article)



  • CDC vastly over counts COVID deaths by not distinguishing primary, contributing, or entirely unrelated factors causing death.
  • Incidentall testing positive for COVID does not mean it caused death.
  • Officials downplay or deny natural immunity and pushed “vaccines” that they said would prevent transmission – which they blatantly don’t.
  • The decision to shutter schools was based on false claims that it would be protective. Sweden served as a control group and demonstrated to the world that keeping society open did not cause any negative consequences.  Further, Sweden has had near ZERO overall excess death during the ‘pandemic.’
  • Officials state that everyone is at risk when in reality there is more than 1,000-fold difference between the risk of hospitalization and death for the old relative to the young.
  • Lockdowns are an aberration and a catastrophic failure of public health policy.
  • Cloth masks are useless, N95s have only limited effectiveness, and mask mandates are not effective at all.
  • PCR tests are flawed and contract tracing is a waste of resources.
  • Mass testing has failed to slow the ‘pandemic’ but have imposed great costs.
  • ZERO COVID is not nor ever will be attainable.
  • It will take decades to repair the public’s trust in science and public health.


Biden’s “Disinfo” Board Paused, “Scary Poppins” Drafts Resignation

By Tyler Durden

The Department of Homeland Security has “paused” its newly created Disinformation Governance Board, after its head, Nina Jankowicz, was called out for being a Russiagate truther, and going full “libs of TikTok” with creepy Disney-themed songs in a fake British accent – lending to the nickname “Scary Poppins.”

According to the Washington Post, the 33-year-old Jankowicz “was thrust into the spotlight by the very forces she dedicated her career to combating,” and has been “subject to an unrelenting barrage of harassment and abuse.”

Yes, because the head of a brand new Orwellian department shouldn’t be questioned.

Now, just three weeks after its announcement, the Disinformation Governance Board is being “paused,” according to multiple employees at DHS, capping a back-and-forth week of decisions that changed during the course of reporting of this story. On Monday, DHS decided to shut down the board, according to multiple people with knowledge of the situation. By Tuesday morning, Jankowicz had drafted a resignation letter in response to the board’s dissolution. – WaPo

(See link for article)



  • Please see this article to learn about Biden’s ‘Ministry of Truth’, and ‘Scary Poppins.’
  • Earlier this month, 20 attorneys general threatened legal action unless DHS Sec. Alejandro Mayorkas immediately disbanded the board.
  • In a May 5 letter, they said the board was not only “unconstitutional, illegal, and un-American” but also “Orwellian.”
  • Evidently fierce backlash has caused the DHS to “pause” it’s disinformation board, but the mainstream media is blaming only Republicans and refuses to believe that people of every distinction might actually care about privacy.
  • Predictably a DHS spokes person states the board’s purpose has been grossly mischaracterized and will not police speech.
And war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength. 

HFDF and 70+ Global Public Health and Policy Leaders Oppose New Binding International Health Regulations on ‘Health Emergencies’

The World Freedom Declaration, signed by 37 organizations and 39 leaders from around the globe, aims to defend individuals’ health freedom and self-determination – and protect national sovereignty – by objecting to proposed U.S. amendments to the International Health Regulations (IHR).

The amendments would authorize the World Health Organization (WHO) to seize executive governance powers over member states, granting government powers to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats – all in the name of combating a future health emergency.

The amendments will be considered at the 75th World Health Assembly which begins May 22, 2022.


Click the button below and add your signature to cast your vote for freedom! Please send it to your public servants and share it on social media.

WORLD FREEDOM DECLARATION  Go here to contact your Representatives & Senators

Get US Out! of the UN

Alert Summary

Many see the United Nations as a global organization working toward the noble goals of world peace and global justice. Yet, the UN’s own actions demonstrate loud and clear the true purpose of the organization: to build a world government at the expense of the liberty and independence of its sovereign nation members.

URGENT: The American Sovereignty Restoration Act (H.R. 7806) has been reintroduced for the 117th Congress. This bill would fully withdraw the U.S. from the United Nations and its associated entities, thus restoring U.S. national independence. Contact your U.S. representative and senators and urge them to support this bill!

MEANWHILE: The World Health Organization is planning an unprecedented power grab to build a global biomedical surveillance state — this is yet another reason why the U.S. must fully withdraw from the United Nations, and why Congress must reintroduce and enact the American Sovereignty Restoration Act. Although the WHO’s power grab seriously threatens American sovereignty and liberty, the root of this threat lies in the U.S.’s membership in the UN itself. The UN’s very purpose is to establish a one-world government at the expense of its members’ sovereignty; withdrawal is imperative!

The United Nations is one of the greatest threats to U.S. national sovereignty and the God-given freedoms of Americans. It is imperative that Congress pass and the president enact the American Sovereignty Restoration Act (ASRA), which would fully withdraw the U.S. from the UN and all its associated entities. 

Also, please read this important excerpt from this article:

When this document is signed (and it will be), there will be those who believe that the WHO has the right to make decisions for Americans without their consent. This is the creation of an illegitimate government that operates without the consent of the governed.

Forced lockdowns of your small town, medications being added to your municipal water supply, forcibly killing off of all your livestock due to “disease risk,” groups of men pinning your children down while they are at school in order to inject an mRNA substance into their bloodstream – these are all very real possibilities of this piece of paper being signed by those who have no right to control either you or your children.

The video within shows eviction notices being given to those in the Ronald McDonald House who are not ‘vaccinated’.
For more on the top link regarding the WHO power grab:

Declaration of Opposition to the Proposed International Health Regulations Amendments

We, the undersigned, oppose the proposed amendments to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) existing 2005 International Health Regulations (IHR) and stand in support of all people’s right to health sovereignty and self-determination.

The United States’ proposed amendments to the IHR are set to be considered at the 75th World Health Assembly, which begins on the 22nd of May, 2022. The proposed amendments, however, create an ambiguity relating to the date they become effective as the proposed amendments expressly state they will become effective six months after the date of notification by the Director-General, whereas the existing IHR provides that amendments become effective 18 months after notification by the Director-General.

If accepted, these legally binding amendments would come into effect for all member states except those that explicitly reject them. Under Article 59 of the IHR, de facto approval is assumed for any member states that fail to reject or take reservation to the amendments.

The existing IHR, adopted in 2005, respect the sovereignty of all member nations. The proposed amendments, however, would expand and codify the WHO’s authority to implement global health mandates in direct violation of national sovereignty and citizens’ rights.

These proposals attempt to eliminate a nation’s autonomy, during times of real, assumed or anticipated public health emergencies, affording the WHO unilateral power in assessing and determining a health emergency and empowering the WHO to dictate policy and response.

All of this comes on the heels of the COVID-19 crisis during which the WHO grossly mismanaged all facets of the global health response by encouraging economy-destroying lockdowns, suppressing early preventive treatments and recommending interventions that have proven to be neither safe nor effective.

Under the guise of health regulations, these amendments would permit the WHO to seize executive governance powers over member states, granting governing powers to unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats.

Below are just a few of the many ambiguous and concerning provisions in the amendments proposed by the US Department of Health & Human Services on January 18, 2022.

Proposed new text is displayed in bold underline, and proposed deletions to existing text are shown as strikethrough exactly as written in the proposal. All other text remains unchanged.

Article 5: Surveillance

NEW 5: WHO shall develop early warning criteria for assessing and progressively updating the national, regional, or global risk posed by an event of unknown causes or sources…

In practice this would accord the WHO unilateral authority to enact a universal health surveillance system devoid of public scrutiny or transparency, leaving open the possibility of manufactured sources of pandemics and other emergencies.

Article 9, Section 1

WHO may take into account reports from sources other than notifications or consultations and shall assess these reports according to established epidemiological principles and then communicate information on the event to the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring. Before taking any action based on such reports, WHO shall consult with and attempt to obtain verification from the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring in accordance with the procedure set forth in Article 10.

This excision from Article 9 eliminates consultations with the member state during an “alleged” health emergency while placing the WHO in a position to dictate how a State Party must proceed within its own territorial boundaries. This constitutes a threat to national sovereignty and self-determination.

Article 10, Section 4

If the State Party does not accept the offer of collaboration within 48 hours, WHO shall may, when justified by the magnitude of the public health risk, immediately share with other States Parties the information available to it, whilst encouraging the State Party to accept the offer of collaboration by WHO, taking into account the views of the State Party concerned.

Any nation rejecting the WHO’s declaration will have only 48 hours to reconsider its position and comply, or be subjected to pressures from other nations and/or penalties such as economic sanctions. The views of the affected nation will no longer be considered.

Article 12, Section 2

If the Director-General considers, based on an assessment under these Regulations, that a potential or actual public health emergency of international concern is occurring, the Director-General shall notify all States Parties and seek to consult with the State Party…. If the Director-General determines and the State Party are in agreement regarding this determination that the event constitutes a public health emergency of international concern, the Director-General shall, in accordance with the procedure set forth in Article 49, seek the views of the Committee established under Article 48 (hereinafter the “Emergency Committee”) on appropriate temporary recommendations.

Article 12 creates a new subclass of health emergency empowering the WHO Director-General to unilaterally trigger pandemic protocols based on mere supposition of a “potential” threat. The stipulation that a nation must agree with the Director-General’s assessment is eliminated. Distant bureaucrats would be empowered to enact health policy not only for entire nations, but by extension for individuals – irrespective of the wishes of the nation or the people.

New Chapter IV (Article 53 bis-quater): The Compliance Committee

1. The State Parties shall establish a Compliance Committee that shall be responsible for:

(a) Considering information submitted to it by WHO and States Parties relating to compliance with obligations under these Regulations;

(b) Monitoring, advising on, and/or facilitating assistance on matters relating to compliance with a view to assisting States Parties to comply with obligations under these Regulations.

One of the IHR amendments’ most insidious changes is the creation of a “Compliance Committee” that will serve as the administrative and enforcement mechanism to ensure member states comply with WHO emergency directives involving infrastructure, capital expenditures, information gathering and implementation of emergency responses.

In sum, the IHR amendments would, among other changes:

  • Intensify the surveillance of all countries and their citizens.
  • Grant the WHO the authority to tell other member states when one member state isn’t reporting and launch punitive actions.
  • Empower the WHO Director-General to declare when and where a pandemic or “alleged” emergency is occurring using undisclosed sources.
  • Confer unrestricted powers to the Director-General to define and implement interventions.
  • Give the WHO the ability to access and mobilize capital in the event of a pandemic.

This power grab by the WHO, its donors, and stakeholders represents a direct attack on the political and economic sovereignty of all nations and their citizens.

By repeatedly promoting policies that caused catastrophic economic, social, physical, emotional and mental damage across the globe, the WHO has failed in its mission as global steward of public health and cannot be entrusted with setting policy for all citizens of the world.

Of note, the WHO enjoys immunity from every form of legal action, arrest, and searches of their papers, documents, and facilities.

The WHO should not be allocated more money, power, or authority nor should it be allowed to further control the world’s health agenda or implement biosecurity measures.

Global agreements brokered by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats must never be permitted to rule any nation.

It is imperative that each nation and territory retain its sovereignty, especially during times of crisis, so that the entire global community can be protected from globally directed policies that primarily benefit powerful financial and ideological stakeholders.

The undersigned respectfully request that all nations and their representatives repudiate such agreements.

We strongly oppose the proposed IHR amendments which would require nations and their citizens to adhere to the dictates of an unaccountable global body.

We oppose any involvement in a treaty, agreement, or other legally binding global document that would hinder any nation’s sovereignty in the area of public health.

We assert that nations and their citizens are best-positioned and -equipped to make health decisions appropriate to their communities.

We demand that the people of each nation be in charge of determining their response to health crises.

As citizens of the world, we defend the rights, freedoms, and privacy of all members of the global community by calling for the rejection of the IHR amendments and the WHO’s attempt to usurp the power and authority of health policy from its rightful place – at home amongst the people.

On May 18, 2022, this declaration was authored and signed by,

Leslie Manookian
Health Freedom Defense Fund

Click here for more information from our partners.


  • Children’s Health Defense
  • National Vaccine Information Center (
  • Corona Investigative Committee
  • Stand for Health Freedom
  • Doctors for COVID Ethics
  • Global Health Responsibility Agency
  • World Council for Health
  • Alliance for Natural Health USA
  • US Freedom Flyers
  • Truth for Health Foundation
  • Unity Project
  • Freedom Travel Alliance
  • Transformative Health Justice
  • African Sovereignty Coalition
  • Idaho Freedom Foundation
  • No College Mandates
  • The Institute for Pure and Applied Knowledge
  • GreenMedInfo
  • The Solari Report
  • Viruswaarheid, The Netherlands
  • Federal Employees for Freedom
  • The Truth About Cancer & The Truth About Vaccines
  • Medical Forum
  • Teachers For Choice
  • Children’s Health Defense Africa
  • Informed Choice WA
  • TN Coalition for Vaccine Choice
  • Liberty Counsel
  • Liberty Counsel Action
  • Advocates for Children
  • Weston A. Price Foundation
  • Faith and Liberty
  • Chek Institute
  • New Mexico Stands Up
  • World Wide Demonstration
  • UK Medical Freedom Alliance
  • Children’s Health Defense Europe
  • Children’s Health Defense Australia
  • Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Chair Children’s Health Defense
  • Mary Holland, President and General Counsel CHD
  • Dr Reiner Fuellmich, Attorney, Germany
  • Dr Peter McCullough, MD, MPH
  • Dr Naomi Wolf, CEO Daily Clout, author, Other People’s Bodies
  • Dr Stephanie Seneff, Senior Research Scientist, MIT
  • Dr Mike Yeadon, former Pfizer CSO
  • Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi
  • Prof. Michael Palmer
  • Dr Judy Mikovits
  • Brian S. Hooker, Ph.D.
  • Dr James Lyons-Weiler, IPAK
  • Sally Fallon Morell
  • Dr Joseph Mercola, Founder/Owner
  • Michele Bachmann, former US Representative
  • Catherine Austin Fitts, President, Solari Inc.
  • Willem Engel, Founder Viruswaarheid
  • Dr Tess Lawrie, World Council for Health
  • Shabnam Palesa Mohamed, World Council for Health
  • Mat Staver, Founder/Chair Liberty Counsel
  • Leigh Dundas, Esq
  • Dr Andrew Wakefield
  • Dr Elizabeth Mumper, MD, FAAP, IFMCP
  • Virginie de Araujo-Recchia, Attorney, France
  • Dr Elizabeth Evans MA, MBBS, DRCOG, UK Medical Freedom Alliance
  • Ana Garner, lead counsel New Mexico Stands Up
  • Dexter L-J. Ryneveldt, attorney (Adv.) South Africa
  • Paul Chek, Chek Institute
  • Sarah Pope, The Healthy Home Economist
  • Orsolya Győrffy
  • Justyna Walker
  • Philipp Kruse, Attorney, Switzerland
  • Thomas Binder
  • Taylor Hudak
  • Josh Yoder, US Freedom Flyers
  • Miste Karlfeldt, ED, Health Freedom Idaho
  • Sarah Clendenon, ED, Health Freedom Idaho
  • Charlene L. Bollinger
  • Ty Bollinger
  • Susan Sweetin

http://  Approx. 8 Min

April 29, 2022

Reporter at U.S. Right to Know, Emily Kopp, describes recent steps to get to the bottom of the United States’ involvement in gain of function research in Wuhan.

  • A FOIA lawsuit has been filed by U.S. Right to Know against the State Department for documents related to a State Dept. investigation of the origins of COVID, Ecohealth Alliance, gain-of-function research, dual use research of concern and the Global Virome Project.
  • Kopp gave a fitting quote: “The problem with modern society is that we have medieval institutions but godlike technology.”
  • EcoHealth Alliance concealed COVID Research data in effort to preserving funding.
  • A recent NIH public talk had virologists and lobbyists representing life sciences professionals pushing back on the idea we need to take a second look at how we regulate dangerous research that could lead to pandemics. Further, these virologists want to limit FOIA requests.
  • American virologists & lab directors stated they had more access to what was going on in Wuhan than what they actually did, making it a fairly one-sided collaboration without oversight.
  • Privately, these U.S. virologists worry about a lab leak but publicly assure the public it’s all good.

For more:

If it weren’t for these FOIA requests we wouldn’t know a half of what we now know.  These scientists need to be held accountable for their work and transparency is required, particularly with dual research as it can be dangerous and have long-term ramifications to the public.


Top US Scientist Tried to Help Wuhan Lab Counter Virus Leak Concerns

Efforts coincide with push to deepen collaboration with China
By Eva Fu
Updated: May 16, 2022

As the pandemic engulfed the world in 2020, a top U.S. scientist that had for years worked with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) actively tried to help Chinese researchers at the lab counter concerns that the virus might have originated from the facility, newly released emails show.

These efforts include alerting Chinese scientists of U.S. investigations into the lab and providing them with a list of questions to answer to help respond to outside concerns.

Meanwhile, the U.S. scientist James LeDuc, the then-director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), and his colleagues, engaged in a concerted effort to strengthen their partnership with the Wuhan institute, even as scrutiny over the lab as a potential source of the outbreak mounted as the pandemic progressed, the emails revealed.  (See link for article)



  • Due to an email trove released under the Texas Public Information Act requests made by U.S. Right to Know and Judicial Watch we now know prominent U.S. scientists publicly and privately came to the defense of their colleagues at the WIV and China’s health agencies.
  • LeDuc offered suggestions to his Chinese contemporaries on how to counter “misinformation.”
  • The Chinese government has not allowed outside investigators to inspect records and data from the facility.
  • The lab collaborated with the Chinese military and has actively suppressed information – particularly that staff were hospitalized with COVID-like symptoms in Nov., 2019.
  • The Galveston National Laboratory is a federally-funded P4 facility that has trained staff from the WIV and conducted joint research projects with them since 2013. LeDuc and other senior UTMB staff maintained close contact with WIV scientists, including Shi.
  • A 2017 signed memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and with the WIV entitles the WIV to request the destruction of “secret files” of virtually any and all documents.
  • A 2020 draft statement on Galveston letterhead describes Shi’s bat-associated coronavirus research from a 2015 meeting where she states there was significant potential risk of transmission of some of these viruses to humans.
  • LeDuc publicly defended Chinese initial response to the pandemic as he and some colleagues privately expressed frustration at the Chinese scientist’s lack of response.

Ticks killed nearly 90 percent of moose calves tracked by scientists in 2 Maine counties last year

Maine is home to the largest moose population in the lower 48 states. But in one of the moosiest corners of the state, nearly 90 percent of the calves tracked by biologists last winter didn’t survive their first year.

And the culprit? A tiny critter that is thriving in parts of Maine as the climate warms.

“You look at one data sheet after another of what we found in the woods on these moose and it’s the same profile every time: it is winter tick,” said Lee Kantar, the lead moose biologist with the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife.

Winter ticks, which are sometimes called moose ticks, have been pestering Maine moose for about a century and likely longer. But their numbers have exploded in parts of Maine, New Hampshire, Minnesota and southern Canada. It’s not uncommon for biologists or hunters to find moose infested with 40,000, 75,000 or even 90,000 ticks. Some infested moose rub themselves virtually bald trying to scrape off the irritating ticks, creating the phenomenon known as “ghost moose.”

Many adult cows can survive such a massive tick load. Calves are another story, however. (See link for article)



  • Winter or moose ticks hunt in packs unlike deer and dog ticks.  Another tick that is becoming more of a problem and also forms clusters is the Asian Longhorned tick.
  • While the article focuses on shortened winters and longer falls and calls this “climate change,” an independent tick researcher has shown that ticks are virtually impervious to weather conditions.  Further, nobody wants to discuss the very real climate engineering our government and nefarious players are doing that is to blame.
  • They are studying whether reducing the adult moose populations in the same areas where the calves were collared can improve overall health by lowering tick numbers.
  • Research suggests ticks are leading to fewer moose births.
  • One moose Kantar did a field necropsy on showed bony hips, patches of missing hair, bone marrow devoid of fat, and white organs suggesting severe anemia caused by the lack of blood due to tick infestation.  Even while being dead 4 days, the carcass is covered with ticks. Her unborn calf never would have made it due to being malnourished.

A Maine Farmer’s Tick Is So Bad, She’s Going to Burn Up Her Property

After relocating from Florida last year to start an organic farm in Maine, Elizabeth Jimenez is on a mission to rid her land of ticks.

Part of his tick management plan is getting scorched.

Jimenez, along with Guy Johnson and Adrian Sotropa, are turning the three-acre farm in Friendship into organic parks and orchards. She and a team of volunteers are also starting a Karuna Healing Center on the property. (See link for article)



  • Jimenez stated he was surprised from the amount and the aggressiveness of ticks.
  • He decided to conduct a series of controlled burns using a propane torch as he wanted to avoid chemicals.
  • The manager of The University of Maine’s tick lab states that it was even worse last year.
  • Local farmers are talking to fire department officials on how to safely and effectively burn.
  • After the burn, Jimenez plans to build a wide buffer of wood chips to discourage them from going back inside. The wood chips are not tick deterrents; however, and really only serve as a visual cue to humans.
  • Research shows that burning underbrush in woodland settings to be very effective in reducing tick populations short term.  The problem is once vegetation reproduces it creates a perfect tick habitat, requiring ongoing tick management techniques
  • Once winter arrives Jimenez plans to keep the field plowed and snow free so the ticks are exposed to the cold which may kill dog ticks but will probably have little to no effect on deer ticks that tend to be in more woodland areas.
  • The best way to target ticks is a multidisciplinary approach using multiple methods.

Tick-borne diseases and co-infection: Current considerations rights and content


Over recent years, a multitude of pathogens have been reported to be tick-borne. Given this, it is unsurprising that these might co-exist within the same tick, however our understanding of the interactions of these agents both within the tick and vertebrate host remains poorly defined. Despite the rich diversity of ticks, relatively few regularly feed on humans, 12 belonging to argasid and 20 ixodid species, and literature on co-infection is only available for a few of these species. The interplay of various pathogen combinations upon the vertebrate host and tick vector represents a current knowledge gap. The impact of co-infection in humans further extends into diagnostic challenges arising when multiple pathogens are encountered and we have little current data upon which to make therapeutic recommendations for those with multiple infections. Despite these short-comings, there is now increasing recognition of co-infections and current research efforts are providing valuable insights into dynamics of pathogen interactions whether they facilitate or antagonize each other. Much of this existing data is focussed upon simultaneous infection, however the consequences of sequential infection also need to be addressed. To this end, it is timely to review current understanding and highlight those areas still to address.



Timely is an understatement.  Long over due is more appropriate.

For more: