Decorated Veteran and FBI Analyst Sues FBI after Falsely Being Accused of Disloyalty to the United States
FDA Records: Significant Number of mRNA Test Rats Born with Skeletal Deformations
Driver’s License Security Law Delayed Another Two Years over COVID
This week, we filed a lawsuit on behalf of FBI analyst Marcus Allen in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina against FBI Director Christopher Wray for violating Allen’s constitutional rights by falsely accusing him of holding “conspiratorial views,” stripping his security clearance, and suspending him from duty without pay (Marcus O. Allen v Christopher Wray (No. 22-cv-4536)).
The FBI revoked his security clearance because apparently, the FBI believes that any views contrary to its own regarding what occurred on January 6 constitutes disloyalty to the United States.
The new lawsuit details Allen’s outstanding military and FBI service:
Because of his outstanding military service, [Allen] was awarded the Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal and the Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal. In 2004, [Allen] was designated the Marine Corps Intelligence Activity Runner-Up for Intelligence NCO of the year.
In 2015, [Allen] joined the FBI as a staff operations specialist. Among other tasks, he has provided ad hoc all-source analytical support to the FBI Charlotte Field Office Joint Terrorism Task Force. He has consistently been rated “Exceeds Fully Successful” on his FBI performance evaluations. He received the FBI Charlotte Field Office Employee of the Year Award in 2019.
[Allen] first received a Top Secret security clearance in early 2001.
Despite Allen’s exemplary service, in a January 10, 2022, letter the FBI asserted:
The Security Division has learned you have espoused conspiratorial views both orally and in writing and promoted unreliable information which indicates support for the events of January 6th. These allegations raise sufficient concerns about your allegiance to the United States and your judgment to warrant a suspension of your clearance pending further investigation.
In a February 17, 2022, letter the FBI further notified Allen that he was being placed on administrative leave without pay due to the suspension of his security clearance.
The lawsuit states:
[Allen’s] allegiance is to the United States, as he has demonstrated during his years of exemplary military and law enforcement service to his country.
[Allen] was not involved in the events of January 6 and did not support them in any material way. The FBI has made no allegation or offered any evidence to the contrary.
[Allen] has expressed no view that could be reasonably interpreted as personally expressing support or sympathy for any unlawful activity that occurred on January 6.
The FBI has not identified any specific statements or actions supporting its contention that Plaintiff has done otherwise.
We contend that the FBI did not give Allen a chance to clear himself, despite his repeated inquiries. In early May 2022, however, the FBI requested that Allen appear for an interview. He promptly complied. The interview request came only days after FBI Director Wray was confronted by members of Congress over concerns that the FBI was weaponizing the security clearance process to target politically conservative employees. Since that time, Allen has received no further word on the status of the FBI’s investigation.
On June 7, 2022, Rep. Jim Jordan, ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, sent a letter to Wray regarding the firing of FBI employees, noting that, “Multiple whistleblowers have called it a ‘purge’ of FBI employees holding conservative views.”
The lawsuit alleges several violations of Allen’s First and Fifth Amendment rights and asks that Allen’s security clearance and employment be restored.
The FBI can’t purge employees based on political smears. We are reminding the FBI that it is not above the law with this civil rights lawsuit for Mr. Allen, a decorated Marine veteran and highly regarded FBI employee.
FDA Records: Significant Number of mRNA Test Rats Born with Skeletal Deformations
We continue to investigate the government’s approval of the COVID vaccines.
Most recently, we received 699 pages of records from the Department of Health and Human Services regarding data Moderna submitted to the FDA on its mRNA COVID-19 vaccine, which indicate a “statistically significant” number of rats were born with skeletal deformations after their mothers were injected with the vaccine.
The documents also reveal Moderna elected not to conduct a number of standard pharmacological studies on the laboratory test animals.
We obtained the records through a September 2021 FOIA lawsuit we filed after the FDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) failed to respond to a June 2021 FOIA request biodistribution studies and related data for the Pfizer, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccines (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:21-cv-02418)).
These previously hidden records about the COVID-19 vaccine safety and efficacy studies raise a number of disturbing questions. The fact that it has taken a federal lawsuit to get access to this material is yet another scandal.
The records include a “Nonclinical Overview” prepared by Moderna and submitted to the FDA for approval of its vaccine revealing that a number of rats were born with skeletal deformations, known as “wavy ribs” and “rib nodules,” to mothers injected with the mRNA vaccine. The study dismissed the anomalies as “not considered adverse:”
mRNA-1273-related variations in skeletal examination included statistically significant increases in the number of F1 rats with 1 or more wavy ribs and 1 or more rib nodules. Wavy ribs appeared in 6 fetuses and 4 litters with a fetal prevalence of 4.03% and a litter prevalence of 18.2%. Rib nodules appeared in 5 of those 6 fetuses. Skeletal variations are structural changes that do not impact development or function of a developing embryo, are considered reversible, and often correlate with maternal toxicity and/or lack of other indicators of developmental toxicity (Carney and Kimmel 2007). Maternal toxicity in the form of clinical observations was observed for 5 days following the last dose (GD 13), correlating with the most sensitive period for rib development in rats (GDs 14 to 17). Furthermore, there were no other indicators of mRNA-1273-related developmental toxicity observed, including delayed ossification; therefore, these common skeletal variations were not considered adverse.
(Non-adverse deformations receive a different perspective in the July 2009 Environmental Research article, “Dose–response relationships of rat fetal skeleton variations: Relevance for risk assessment:”
(Whether or not a substance-induced increase in the incidence of fetal skeleton variations should be taken into account for human risk assessment is a long-standing controversial issue. It has been argued that chemical-produced increases in variations are not to be considered for risk assessment because they are “unlikely to adversely affect survival or health.” The counter argument is that even not being overtly adverse and conveying no apparent selective disadvantage, a treatment-induced increase in the occurrence of variations means that the chemical agent has the potential to perturb skeleton development. According to this view, under a different condition of exposure, or in another species, this perturbation of normal bone formation may give rise to a different and more severe outcome.))
A “Pharmacokinetics Written Summary” marked “Confidential,” indicates that the information it contains is related to the mRNA-1273 (Moderna vaccine) strain; however, much of the data comes from work with mRNA-1647. The study states:
The results of a biodistribution study of mRNA-1647 support the development of mRNA-1273.
The biodistribution of mRNA-1647 was evaluated in a non-Good Laboratory Practice (GLP), single-dose, intramuscular (IM) injection study in Sprague Dawley rats…. mRNAs that are within an LNP of the same composition (e.g., mRNA-1273 and mRNA-1647) are expected to distribute similarly.
The “Summary” indicates:
No absorption studies with mRNA-1273 [used in Moderna’s COVID vaccine] have been performed.
No metabolism studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
No excretion studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
No PK [pharmacokinetic] studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
No other PK studies with mRNA-1273 have been performed.
(According to PubMed.gov, “Pharmacokinetics studies are performed to clarify the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of drug candidates…[and] are required for establishing the efficacy and safety in humans.”)
A separate study submitted to the FDA sponsored by Moderna Therapeutics Inc. and conducted by Charles River Laboratories in Montreal, Canada, is titled “A Single Dose Intramuscular Injection Tissue Distribution Study of mRNA-1647 in Male Sprague-Dawley Rats” in which “[t]he objective … was to determine the tissue distribution of mRNA-1647,” as opposed to mRNA-1273 used in Moderna’s COVID vaccine.
In one appendix to the study, a “clarification” was issued in the toxicokinetic report regarding the half-life of mRNA injected into the rats, noting: “The average value of terminal half-life for the muscle (i.e. injection site) in Sections 4.2 and 5 of the toxicokinetic report should be read 14.9 [hours] instead of 8.39 [hours] based on the results of the toxicokinetic evaluation.”
The study further notes that the wording of the conclusion was modified to read, “The half-life … of mRNA-1647 was reliably estimated in muscle (site of injection), proximal popliteal and axillary distal lymph nodes, and spleen with average values for all construct t½ [half-life] of 14.9 8.39, 34.8, 31.1 and 63.0 hours, respectively.” [Emphasis in original]
Another appendix, titled “Summary Mean (±SE) mRNA-1647 Pharmacokinetic Parameters in Sprague-Dawley Rat in Plasma and Tissues Following 100μg Intramuscular Injection Administration of mRNA-1647 on Day 1,” reveals that, in addition to distributing to the muscle site, lymph nodes and spleen, the mRNA particles also distributed to the bone marrow, brain, eyes, heart, liver, lungs, stomach and testes.
A separate study indicates that the mRNA-1647 particles injected into rats were “observed in muscle (i.e. site of injection), followed by proximal (popliteal) lymph nodes, axillary lymph nodes and spleen, suggesting the mRNA-1647 distribution to the circulation by lymph flow.” (The mRNA was delivered via “lipid nanoparticle dispersion.”)
Through FOIA we have uncovered a substantial amount of information regarding COVID-19 issues:
In October 2020, we received FDA records that detailed pressure for COVID-19 vaccine booster approval and use.
NIH records revealed an FBI “inquiry” into the NIH’s controversial bat coronavirus grant tied to the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The records also show National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) officials were concerned about “gain-of-function” research in China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2016. The Fauci agency was also concerned about EcoHealth Alliance’s lack of compliance with reporting rules and use of gain-of-function research in the NIH-funded research involving bat coronaviruses in Wuhan, China.
HHS records revealed that from 2014 to 2019, $826,277 was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat coronavirus research by the NIAID.
NIAID records showed that it gave nine China-related grants to EcoHealth Alliance to research coronavirus emergence in bats and was the NIH’s top issuer of grants to the Wuhan lab itself. The records also included an email from the vice director of the Wuhan Lab asking an NIH official for help finding disinfectants for decontamination of airtight suits and indoor surfaces.
HHS records included an “urgent for Dr. Fauci ” email chain, citing ties between the Wuhan lab and the taxpayer-funded EcoHealth Alliance. The government emails also reported that the foundation of U.S. billionaire Bill Gates worked closely with the Chinese government to pave the way for Chinese-produced medications to be sold outside China and help “raise China’s voice of governance by placing representatives from China on important international counsels as high level commitment from China.”
HHS records included a grant application for research involving the coronavirus that appears to describe “gain-of-function” research involving RNA extractions from bats, experiments on viruses, attempts to develop a chimeric virus and efforts to genetically manipulate the full-length bat SARSr-CoV WIV1 strain molecular clone.
HHS records showed the State Department and NIAID knew immediately in January 2020 that China was withholding COVID data, which was hindering risk assessment and response by public health officials.
University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB) records show the former director of the Galveston National Laboratory at the University of Texas Medical Branch (UTMB), James W. Le Duc warned Chinese researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of potential investigations into the COVID issue by Congress.
HHS records regarding biodistribution studies and related data for the COVID-19 vaccines show a key component of the vaccines developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, lipid nanoparticles (LNPs), were found outside the injection site, mainly the liver, adrenal glands, spleen and ovaries of test animals, eight to 48 hours after injection.
Records from the Federal Select Agent Program (FSAP) reveal safety lapses and violations at U.S. biosafety laboratories that conduct research on dangerous agents and toxins.
HHS records include emails between National Institutes of Health (NIH) then-Director Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci, the director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), about hydroxychloroquine and COVID-19.
HHS records show that NIH officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.
Fauci emails include his approval of a press release supportive of China’s response to the 2019 novel coronavirus.
Driver’s License Security Law Delayed Another Two Years over COVID
The Biden administration is not in a hurry to enact a commonsense safeguard, adopted after the 9/11 attack in 2001, to protect against the misuse of driver’s licenses by terrorists. Two decades later, we’re still waiting, as our Corruption Chronicles blog reports.
More than two decades after the worst terrorist attack on U.S. soil, the Biden administration is using COVID-19 as an excuse to further delay enforcement of a law requiring minimum security standards for driver’s licenses and identification cards. The measure, known as the REAL ID Act, was passed by Congress after 9/11 to establish a more secure national system less prone to fraud after several of the hijackers exploited loopholes to obtain dozens of driver’s licenses from various states. The cards allowed them to take flight lessons and board planes to carry out the 2001 attacks. At the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission Congress passed the law in 2005 and states originally had until 2011 to comply, though the Obama administration tried to drastically weaken the legislation. Obama Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano granted a 20-month extension on the deadline as she worked behind the scenes to undermine the REAL ID Act, asserting that it violates civil liberties and privacy.
In the fall of 2020 the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced that, after multiple delays, all 50 states were finally in full compliance with the REAL ID Act with most states becoming compliant under pressure from the Trump administration. “To date, the 50 states have issued more than 105 million REAL ID-compliant driver’s licenses and identification cards, representing 38 percent of all driver’s licenses and identification card holders,” DHS revealed at the time. In less than a year full enforcement of REAL ID will take effect at all federally regulated airports, federal facilities, and nuclear power plants, the 2020 bulletin further states. That means federal agencies, such as the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), will be prohibited from accepting licenses and ID cards that do not meet the law’s standards. Though it was welcome news at the time, it was still outrageous that it took 15 years after Congress passed the legislation to protect national security.
This month, the Biden administration is extending REAL ID full enforcement for another two years to give states more time to ensure residents have driver’s licenses and identification cards that meet the law’s security standards. “The extension is necessary, in part, to address the lingering impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the ability to obtain a REAL ID driver’s license or identification card,” according to a DHS notice issued last week. The pandemic hindered REAL ID progress, the agency writes, because state driver’s licensing agencies had to work through backlogs and many automatically extended license expiration dates and shifted operations to appointment only. Keep in mind the agencies had more than enough time to comply before COVID. Rest assured however, DHS continues to work closely with states to finally meet REAL ID requirements, according to Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. “We will continue to ensure that the American public can travel safely,” Mayorkas said.
The continued delays are inexcusable considering what is at stake. The measure’s crucial verification process requires states to certify the authenticity of every driver’s license applicant by requiring that documents, such as a birth certificate or passport, be submitted to get the card are legitimate and that the applicant is in the United States legally. It also calls for a newly created federal database to link all licensing information that must be checked before states issue new cards. This will establish a much-needed standardized national driver’s license system less vulnerable to fraud and will prevent terrorists from abusing it as did September 11 hijackers. Once the law is fully enforced, federal agencies will be prohibited from accepting driver’s licenses or ID cards from noncompliant states for official purposes, including boarding an aircraft, accessing a federal facility, and entering a nuclear power plant.
It is not clear how the Biden administration plans to handle the dozen states—including Arkansas, California, Maine, and Oregon as well as the District of Columbia—that offer gender-neutral licenses and ID cards in violation of the REAL ID Act. Title II of the act specifically states that “features on each driver’s license and identification card issued to a person by the State” must include: The person’s full legal name; the person’s date of birth; the person’s gender; the person’s driver’s license or identification card number; a digital photograph of the person; the person’s address of principle residence; the person’s signature; physical security features designed to prevent tampering, counterfeiting or duplication of the document for fraudulent purposes; a common machine-readable technology with defined minimum data elements.
Until next week,