Happy Friday, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome back to Rounding the News.
Your weekly news roundup presented by me, Liam Sturgis, and of course, Rounding the Earth,
this wonderful fun platform of engaged thinkers and curious investigators of truth.
I just came up with that on the spot and I'm going to trademark that.
All right, so welcome to today's show. This is March 17, 2023, Chief Influence of Justice.
Before we get into the show, just a quick shout out to everybody who's joining us over on Rumble
and on Locals. Thank you for being in the chat with us and wherever else you may be watching
and wherever that is, whether Rumble, Rockfin, Odyssey, each of these have a way for you to
support the show if you'd like to. Rumble has this thing called Rumble Rants. They're like paid
comments. If you're in the Rumble chat, you'll see a little green dollar sign. Click on that,
click on the amount, send your love. Rockfin and Odyssey have their own tip options as well,
but even better, come join us over at roundingtheearth.locals.com. That is our
Locals community where a ever growing group of very kind, intelligent people are coming together to
share research and mostly just be cool people together in the same space.
You can be a free member. You don't have to sign up for anything paid if you don't want to,
and you can keep track of everything we're doing. However, you can also get a free month of
premium support by using the promo code that is pinned on the top of our Locals feed,
and you can get access to our weekly supporters exclusive live streams where we talk about stuff
that we're thinking out loud about, not quite ready to put into the public sphere, but yeah,
come hang out roundingtheearth.locals.com. For example, this past week, Matthew gave a very
interesting discussion on the current global banking implosion, as he put it, very informative
as always. So after just a quick check to make sure everything is working okay, we are going to
jump right in. All right, let's do this. So, do do do do do. First of all, I'm going to do a series
of recommended watches for this week. Item one, Jay Cooey and Paul Alexander joined forces. Dr.
Paul Alexander, Ph.D., joined forces with our friend Jonathan Cooey on a pair of live stream
discussions this past week on Giga-Ohm Biological. The pair brought together their converging
perspectives on what actually happened during the COVID-19 era from 2020 to present, working
through the nuances of how infectious clones of an RNA virus may have been used as a multi-pronged
biological and psychological attack on people around the world. As Dr. Alexander repeatedly
reminds the audience, the genius behind their discussion is not that either person claims to
have the full picture, rather that both sides are openly exploring the possibility that the entire
mental model of the COVID-19 pandemic needs to be revisited and reassessed based on the evidence
as it is. I recommend you follow Dr. Paul Alexander on Substack and Giga-Ohm Biological on Twitch,
and I will mention as well that today the show notes are available to follow along with where
you'll find the links to basically everything we discussed. So if you're in the Rumble chat or the
Locals chat, that will be available to you. And yeah, and it's also posted on the randomgirth.locals.com
feed which is in the description. So moving forward, Banking Collapse and FedNow. On the
Unlimited Hangout podcast yesterday, writer and researcher Whitney Webb was joined by guests
Marty Bent and Michael Krieger to discuss the background and implications of the escalating
global banking crisis that seems to have just popped out of nowhere for most people.
One thing I want to point out in particular that I found really interesting from this show is
Whitney's mention of a service being rolled out right now by the Federal Reserve System called
FedNow, which looks like it could operate as the basis of a central bank digital currency.
I'm sure nobody is too surprised, but I highly recommend checking out this episode of Unlimited
Hangout. And finally, very excited about this, on Tuesday, Rounding the Earth founder Matthew
Crawford appeared for an interview with Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, founder of Brighteon
and Natural News. Of course, one of the platforms on which Rounding the Earth podcast gets posted
is Brighteon. So we're very happy to be there. For some reason, Facebook doesn't let us post
that link though, which I find very interesting. Their open and friendly discussion focused on
Matthew's Chaos Agents series and touched on a number of other interesting areas of discussion.
I'm very happy to have helped set this one up and I look forward to their next conversation,
hopefully very soon. All right, moving into our first real story of the day,
Moderna patent lawsuit goes to Discovery. Pfizer is not the only company fighting to keep COVID-19
vaccine-related evidence hidden from the courts and by extension, the public. After a March 10th
decision by District Court Judge Mitchell Goldberg, Moderna will have to face the process of
Discovery. Moderna is defending themselves in a lawsuit that centers around the company's use of
patented lipid nanoparticle technology in their COVID-19 genetic vaccine products, technology over
which some half a dozen or more biotech companies continue to wrestle over ownership. For a deeper
dive into the developmental history of the lipid nanoparticles and the dozens of associated
patents, I recommend everyone take the time to read through my prior article titled, Follow the
Patents, Lipid Nanoparticles and COVID-19 Genetic Vaccines. It's long, but it's worth the read.
And don't do what my friend Sonya did and skip to the end. Totally missing the point.
So in March 2022, Vancouver-based Arbutus Bio Pharma and its partner company,
Genovant Sciences, or sorry, Royvant Sciences, Genovant or Royvant? Hmm, no, Genovant. There you
go. I used the wrong logo, but the correct company in there. Ah, filed a lawsuit asserting that
Moderna had knowingly violated its intellectual property rights. The complaint cites the following
specific patents under its control. I'm not going to list all the numbers, but two of them refer,
well, one, two, three, four, five of them refer to lipid formulations for nucleic acid delivery,
and one of them refers to lipid compositions for nucleic acid delivery. So presumably these patents
are all referenced. They're all used in the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine product.
Notably, the United States government filed a so-called statement of interest on February 14,
2023, asserting that the mRNA-1273 product in question was developed for the government,
requesting that they take over for Moderna as defendants in the case. And of course, it is true
that NIAID, the United States government, is accepting royalty payments for that particular
product. Okay, here's the good news, going off script for a second. Once discovery occurs,
that then has the potential to become public as a part of public court filings. So things that
Moderna is compelled to release to the plaintiff. So hopefully that will be the case. And that is
what's going on as well with the Pfizer lawsuit that Brooke Jackson brought. They're right now
fighting tooth and nail to keep discovery from happening. So we've now reached that same part
here. Okay, next topic. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. seems to be moving ahead with his presidential run.
The heir to the legendary Kennedy political dynasty, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. seems to be
moving ahead with the initial steps in a run for president of the United States. On March 11,
2023, RFK published an article on his Substack newsletter calling for funding and volunteers
to explore the viability of a presidential run. The statement coincided with the third
anniversary of the World Health Organization's declaration that COVID-19 was officially
considered a pandemic, a move perhaps not lost on Kennedy's allies. Now there's an interesting
series of events that went into this. Steve Kirsch, an ally of RFK, published an article on his,
oh forgive me, had started discussing his intentions to create a super PAC or a super
political action committee to draft Kennedy to run for president as early as January, 2023,
announcing as much on this January 23 live stream of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation
alongside Dr. Robert Malone. He followed this up with a February 13 article on his Substack titled
I'm forming a super PAC to draft RFK Jr. to run for president, requesting volunteers. But as I was
writing that, I realized in fact, I remember him saying this even sooner or alluding to the idea
that Kennedy might be interested in running for president way back in December 2021 during an
appearance on the Alex Jones show. And I thought I would play that for you now.
Segment in all your other big news, but why can't we get Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to run again?
I mean, I guarantee you Republicans and Democrats would vote for him. He'd be the next president.
I agree with you, Alex. He has no intention, does he? Let's just say I can't talk about that, Alex.
Oh boy, well he's what we need. How coy of him.
I don't know how many people were aware that that had happened or that Steve Kersh even
appeared on the Alex Jones show. So there you go. Now in terms of public reaction, well,
Politico described Kennedy as the vaccine apostate. I'm not even sure what that word means,
to be honest, and implied it wouldn't necessarily be ideal if he was given a platform on the debate
stage, but that's okay. All right, now to our main story for the day, potential conflict of interest,
who's surprised, in British Columbia vaccine passport lawsuit. This lovely gentleman right here
is Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson. So here's what happened. Chief Justice Hinkson, Chief of the
Supreme Court of British Columbia is under new scrutiny, as the media people say, for a potential
conflict of interest involving his position on the board of directors for the Vancouver Foundation.
On March 12th, Kip Warner of the Canadian Society for the Advancement of Science in Public Policy,
or CSAP, published an investigative article outlining this concern. So here's some background.
CSAP had filed several legal challenges in response to government measures introduced
related to COVID-19. One of these cases, centered on so-called vaccine passports,
which CSAP argued violated the rights and freedoms of Canadians. British Columbia's Provincial Health
Officer, Dr. Bonnie Henry, was named as the defendant. Although the hearings themselves
seemed to suggest that Hinkson was weighing the evidence reasonably, and potentially in fact,
in favor of CSAP, he returned with a disappointing decision to dismiss the case in September 2019.
As Warner explained in his status update, he disagreed, we disagreed with his disagreement.
Warner argued that Hinkson made several mistakes in his ruling, particularly failing to recognize
that for various reasons, he was in fact legally required to evaluate whether the public health
orders related to vaccine passports violated Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and
Freedoms. Section 7 describes protections to life, liberty, and security of the person. In fact,
we previously covered the specific reason why this was an error that he did not perform this
constitutional evaluation. Nonetheless, he needs to. Now, disagreement on the law does not
necessarily suggest that the other side of the argument is corrupt. Not everyone you disagree
with is a bad guy. Even good judges make bad decisions from time to time, whether as a personal
failure or simply a different reading of the law. In this case, it seems clear that the court will
have to take a closer look at the basis on which Judge Hinkson dismissed the case and return to
the table if CSAP is correct in their argument. But what if the judge is wrong? What if the
judge is wrong? What if there exists another factor around Hinkson that is at risk of interfering
in the decision-making process? As Warner revealed in his article, just such a factor may have been
identified. So in addition to serving as the province's chief justice, a tremendously
important role in the court's decision-making process, he also serves as a member of the
board of directors for the Vancouver Foundation. As Kip explains, this isn't new. The board seat
that he occupies has been reserved for whoever holds the office of chief justice since the
year before. Like other foundations, the Vancouver Foundation receives money from donors and also
gives money to people and organizations for various uses. So Warner explains, I quote,
the foundation, like most, endeavors to not disperse the principle of their funds. Instead,
they invest it with the assistance of portfolio managers that work at major financial institutions
like Toronto Dominion or TD Bank. These portfolio managers are tasked with generating dividends,
returns from investments, to regularly increase the CTF. These proceeds are then distributed
to various nonprofits and charities seeking donations in response to applications.
But problematically, Hinkson is privy to which specific investments the fund is making. It is
not a blind trust. That means he has direct knowledge of, for example, which pharmaceutical
companies the Vancouver Foundation has a financial interest in, either directly or through exchange
traded funds, ETFs, like groups of investments. Kip does a great job in his status update,
laying out why this is a problem for those who can't put two and two together. I quote again,
the potential conflicts transcend merely CSAP's affairs. With the Vancouver Foundation donating
to various policing charities and the chief justice potentially presiding over criminal matters,
endless new questions are raised about every destination of the foundation's money.
Ah, now Kip and I spoke on the phone a couple days ago after I read the story, and it's clear
there's an even deeper set of relationships that the general public should know about and understand.
I have taken it upon myself to attempt to expand on what Kip has thus far presented
and add a further dimension to the problematic exchanges of money and
soft influence around the Vancouver Foundation.
So let's start by expanding on the donations to various public health agencies that Kip covered
in his article. So here's a nice little graphic I put together. In fiscal year, so I'm now going to
quote from his article, in fiscal year 2021, the Vancouver Foundation donated to the Public Health
Association of British Columbia $193,072 and to four public health agencies, including the
$192 and to Fraser Health Authority, some $93,000. The year prior of 2020, Vancouver Coastal Health
Authority received $100,000 from the foundation. A charity set up by the British Columbia Centre
for Disease Control to receive donations, the BC CDC Foundation for Population and Public Health
received $13,000. During the onset to the alleged pandemic in 2019, many of you will recall the
traditional intellectual safeguards were largely mute. The British Columbia Civil Liberties
Association received $151,000. Other recipients during that fiscal year include the BC CDC's
Foundation at $57,000, Fraser Health Authority at $41,000, the Registered Nurses Foundation of
British Columbia at $4,000 and a charity set up by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation at $1,000.
The previous fiscal year of 2018, the BC CDC Foundation again received $57,000, Fraser Health
Authority $41,000, the BC Civil Liberties Association $36,000 and once again $1,000 for the
CBC's charity. Okay, there you go. So those are the logos of those organizations. If you live
around where I do, you'll recognize some or all of them, at least two of them. Well, let's just say
Fraser Health and Vancouver Coastal Health have taken great steps to influence how I live my
day-to-day life. Let's just say that. So let's focus on the BC CDC Foundation for Public Health.
So it is, as mentioned, it is the fundraising partner for the British Columbia Center for Disease
Control. They are separate organizations. As Kip outlines, the foundation has repeatedly
turned around and re-donated the funds given to it by not just the Vancouver Foundation,
but re-donated to just a couple of recipients. I'm going to quote again, in fiscal year 2021,
the BC CDC Foundation donated to the Provincial Health Services Authority $140,000. $147,000.
Man, these numbers start to roll together. The year prior of 2020, an amount of $487,000
was donated to the DHSA. In 2019, they received $588,000. In 2018, they received $290,000.
$290,000. 2017 was $426,000. And the BC CDC Foundation in 2017 donated to the CDC itself
$15,000. Too many numbers. Recall that PHSA is Dr. Bonnie Henry's employer. And Dr. Bonnie Henry
is a defendant named in all of our litigation, including the petition in which the Chief Justice
presided over. It is impossible for any reasonable person to characterize the movement of substantial
sums of money in this manner under the direction of the Chief Justice as, at the very least,
not carrying the perception of a conflict of interest." End quote. I'll also add that Henry
used to work for the BCCDC from December 2013 to August 2014. Yeah, I'd say this looks like a
pretty cozy long-term financial relationship. But the intrigue continues. Until recently,
the BCCDC Foundation's board of directors counted as an advisor one Jennifer Gardy,
who went on to be hired as Deputy Director of Surveillance, Data, and Epidemiology at the Bill
and Melinda Gates Foundation in February 2019. She had advised the BCCDC Foundation starting in 2011
and continued to do so at least into the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020,
while in her new role at the totally not involved Gates Foundation.
And furthermore, the BCCDC Foundation's donors over the last several years include none other
than Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, AbbVie, and Gilead Sciences, all pharmaceutical companies whose
therapeutics and vaccines were aggressively promoted during the province of British Columbia's
COVID-19 response. And just to make sure we're being specific for those who don't know,
Pfizer, they were promoting their Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine, otherwise known as BNT162B2,
as well as PaxLimit. GlaxoSmithKline, they were promoting a couple of different monoclonal
antibody products, as well as MediCoggo's virus-like particle plant-based vaccine. They
were MediCoggo's partner on that one. Merck, obviously, Molnupiravir, AbbVie, Calitra,
which I think was another monoclonal antibody. And Gilead Sciences, the ever deadly Remdesivir.
Now, it was not a passing relationship between the Foundation and these pharmaceutical companies. In
fact, in the Foundation's 2017-2018 annual report, they specifically highlight Pfizer as one of their
original partners. I quote, this year, we would like to acknowledge Pfizer, one of our original
partners, supporting activities since early days and demonstrating a remarkable relationship
and successful partnership. Pfizer's support has enabled us to develop our capacity and
key activities, such as our strategic planning process and to support innovative immunization
activities, such as Kids Boost Immunity. Keep that in your head, we're going to come back to that.
And the Western Immunization Forum. We truly appreciate the ongoing commitment, support,
and confidence in our mission and are optimistic that Pfizer will continue to be part of our
success. Oh, I have no doubt they wound up being part of the success, if you want to call it that.
Talk about a glowing review. Funnily enough, though, if you go to the Foundation's Public Health
Champions donor page now and look for Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, or Gilead in particular,
they're not there anymore. I wonder why. Okay, now moving on. Another of the Vancouver Foundation's
grant recipients is the Public Health Association of British Columbia. PHABC is largely focused
on combating vaccine hesitancy, as affirmed in the organization's most recent annual report.
Now, I said keep Kids Boost Immunity in your head. Well, this organization co-leads Kids Boost
Immunity, a vaccine promotion initiative funded by, well, there they are, none other than Pfizer,
GlaxoSmithKline, and Merck, among a bunch of others. Yikes, you can't make this stuff up, guys.
So let's leave it at that for now. I think the point is made here. And
as someone in the Province of British Columbia, I'd like to wave a little, which color flag should I
wave? Sam, which color flag should I wave? White. You want me to wave a white flag? She showed me a
book that is the color white. Okay, so we give up. Good job, everybody. It was a good run while it
lasted. Well, I have some friends who are doctors who don't intend to, and let's speak about that.
The Province of British Columbia, everybody, is in dire straits, and apparently we're supposed to
give up now. But many people don't know the extent to which BC is in dire straits. Our new premier,
David Eby, pushed through the terribly concerning Bill 36 without fanfare, threatening to consolidate
all of British Columbia's professional health colleges, including allied health colleges,
into an authoritarian, censorship-prone system without recourse for practitioners or patients
alike. It even contains language that basically, actually explicitly paves the way for the World
Health Organization's pandemic treaty with teeth to actually become enforceable law in the province.
This is not good. How did this happen? I think I was just born into this. But it's becoming more
and more clear each day that British Columbia's institutions, in particular, have been captured,
perhaps more than others. Maybe they were grown captured. Many people can feel it,
but we've lacked the understanding, I think, of how to deal with this.
But we've lacked the understanding, I think, of how or what such corruption looks like
in the real world. We get it conceptually, but how does it actually manifest?
Now, Kip made it clear to me on the phone that he is not asserting that Judge Hinkson did exercise
any hard influence over the outcome of his COVID-19-related cases, including Kip's,
or that hard influence was exercised over Judge Hinkson by outside forces such as Pfizer, per se.
Rather, what we're looking at is a system of soft power, one which by its very nature
causes interest to become confused and misbalanced. Intention is not necessary to define outcome here.
Of all institutions, of course, the judiciary is supposed to be the most independent,
the fair balancing, the weighing of the facts and the exercise of the law.
But if this is not the case, then this must be addressed by an informed and enthusiastic public.
The Western Standard reported that concerns over Hinkson's potential conflict of interest
quietly circulated via email threads and private messaging groups since last week.
You know the ones. We're all in them, maybe not these ones specifically,
but we're overloaded with signal and telegram chats that we'll never keep up with.
People usually jump to conclusions in those or get all excited about things as they come,
and it's understandable. But in this case, I applaud the cautious approach taken by Warner,
the CSAP and their peers, and I look forward to seeing where the case goes from here.
Now that's all for today, folks. So please don't forget, if you haven't yet, join us at
www.roundingtheearth.locals.com, join our community and become part of the, what do we call it,
the burgeoning research community to help us unflatten the earth and perhaps clean up
British Columbia's judicial system if you have some extra time to help us do so.
And you can find me at liamsturgis.com, and I look forward to seeing you all again very, very soon.
Thank you for watching. Have an excellent rest of your afternoon.