How powerful is the nexus of Big Pharma, Google, and the fake (controlled) media?
This is an object lesson.
It's worth taking a step back here and considering that one of the biggest news stories of the year was stillborn. It really did NOT break – yet.
Let's recap it.
The news organization Project Veritas released an undercover video of a Pfizer executive bragging on camera about how his company conducts business – particularly how it conducts what is calls "gain of function" or, more to the point, "directed evolution" in dangerous laboratory games. The executive interviewed was Jordon Trishton Walker, Pfizer's "director of research and development for strategic operations and mRNA scientific planning."
Here's what he said: "You know how the virus keeps mutating? Well, one of the things we're exploring is, like, why don't we just mutate it ourselves so we could focus on, so we could create … develop new vaccines, right? So, we have to do that. If we're going to do that, though, there's a risk of, like, as you could imagine, no one wants to be having a pharma company mutating f––ing viruses. So, we're like, do we want to do this? So, that's, like, one of the things we're considering for, like, the future, like, maybe we're going to create new versions of the vaccine and things like that."
To which the undercover journalist said the following: "OK. So, Pfizer ultimately is thinking about mutating COVID?"
WALKER: "Well, that is not what we say to the public. No."
JOURNALIST: "When is Pfizer going to implement a mutation of all these viruses?"
WALKER: "I don't know. It depends on how all the experiments work out because this is, like, something we're trying, right?"
JOURNALIST: "It sounds like gain-of-function to me."
WALKER: "I don't know. It's a little bit different. I think it's different. It's like this, it's definitely not gain-of-function."
JOURNALIST: "Sounds like it is. I mean, it's OK."
WALKER: "No, no, no. Directed evolution is very different."
JOURNALIST: "Direct evolution?"
WALKER: "Directed evolution."
JOURNALIST: "Directed evolution, OK. So, I mean, is that what it is then?"
WALKER: "Maybe. I don't – well, you're not supposed to do gain-of-function research with the viruses. They rather we not, but you do things like selected structural mutations to try to see if you could make it more potent. So, there is research ongoing about that. I don't know how that's going to work. There better not be any more outbreaks because, like, Jesus Christ."
JOURNALIST: "Tell me more, like, what's developing with the whole, you know, virus mutation process?"
WALKER: "Well, they're still kind of conducting experiments on it, but it seems like from what I've heard they're kind of optimizing it, but they're going slow because everyone is very cautious. Obviously, they don't want to accelerate it too much. Still, I also think they are just trying to do it as an exploratory thing because you obviously don't want to advertise that you're trying to figure out future mutations. You have to be, like, very controlled to make sure that this virus that you mutate doesn't create something that, like, you know, just goes everywhere."
JOURNALIST: "Something crazy."
WALKER: "… which I suspect is the way the virus started in Wuhan to be honest, like, it makes no sense that this virus popped out of nowhere."
JOURNALIST: "Yeah, I know."
WALKER: "It's b–––-."
JOURNALIST: "Isn't that the best business model, though? Like, just control nature before nature even happens itself, right?"
WALKER: "If it works."
JOURNALIST: "What do you mean if it works?"
WALKER: "Because, like, sometimes there were just mutations that pop up and we're not prepared for it, like with delta or omicron and things like that. So, who knows? I mean, either way, it's going to be a cash cow. COVID will probably be a cash cow for us for a while going forward, which I obviously like. …"
JOURNALIST: "Well, I think the whole, you know, I think the whole, like, research of the viruses and mutating it, like, would be the ultimate, like, cash cow."
WALKER: "Yeah, it'd be perfect. … is a revolving door for all government officials for any industry though. So, in the pharma industry, all the government officials who review our drugs eventually come work for pharma companies and the military … defense government officials eventually go work for the defense companies afterwards."
JOURNALIST: "How do you feel about that revolving door?"
WALKER: "It's pretty good for the industry to be honest. It's bad for everybody else in America."
JOURNALIST: "Why is it bad for everybody else?"
WALKER: "Because when the regulators who review our drugs know that once they stop being a regulator, they want to go work for the company, they are not going to be as harsh on the company where they're getting their job."
That was it – as far as the interview went. It was a blockbuster.
But precious few in the media ever aired it – though WND made sure it was our lead story for two days running. The Daily Mail pulled it. Tucker Carson aired it – bravely as always. And it ran on Elon Musk's Twitter. None of the other major news agencies did. Think about that. Google and the rest of Big Tech pretended it never happened.
As more people die, we're still not hearing the truth from establishment media.
Jordon Trishton Walker was immediately scrubbed from Pfizer. He also vanished into the night. He's not been heard from again. He claimed to O'Keefe he was just making the whole thing up – or just lying – since he was on a date. He threw a hissy fit. He's been wiped from the Wayback machine – a non-person.
But he was just telling us what we knew all along.
It's just that Pfizer's and Big Pharma's ads speak louder than the truth.
COVID has been a cash cow, indeed – much more deadly than Big Tobacco ever was. Where are the regulators when we really need them?