Pharma Insider Says the Department of Defense Planted Jordon Walker at Pfizer And Instigated the Project Veritas Story to Ramp Up Fear of Viruses and Lab Leaks


In this interview with Vivianne Fischer and Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg of the Corona Investigative Committee pharma insider Sasha Latypova says the Pfizer employee who was the subject of Project Veritas’ latest undercover sting was likely a Department of Defense (DOD) plant. Latypova says that the DOD, which she explains has been the true head of America’s response to COVID-19—particularly in regards to the COVID-19 “vaccines”—aims to ramp up fear of viruses and lab leaks for future planned pandemics.

In an October 2022 interview with the Corona Investigative Committee pharma insider Sasha Latypova—who has more than 25 years of experience in the industry—outlined how the Department of Defense (DOD) has complete control over the development, manufacturing, and distribution of the COVID-19 “vaccines.” Now, in a new interview with the committee, Latypova elaborates on her findings, thanks in large part to legal research conducted by paralegal and journalist Katherine Watt. Latypova also touches on the recent Project Veritas Pfizer gain-of-function story, which she says is just a propagandistic distraction deployed by the DOD in order to increase fear of viruses and lab leaks.

“[I] applaud Project Veritas for reporting it [Pfizer’s GOF research] like this, but it’s actually not secret,” Latypova tells her German interviewers. On the contrary, she says the ostensible gain-of-function (or “directed evolution”) “bombshell” revelation brought forth by Pfizer employee Jordon Trishtan Walker has been “plastered all over BARDA, DARPA, NIH, [and] DOD” websites. Latypova adds the departments and agencies “present [the research] publicly in all of their documents.”

For those unfamiliar with the recent, viral news story, Project Veritas—a non-profit journalism enterprise headed by journalist James O’Keefe—came out with another one of its now-famous undercover “gotcha” videos featuring Walker as its unwitting star. In a pair of videos—which you can watch via the post embedded immediately below—the director of research & development and strategic operations at Pfizer, who graduated from Yale in 2013, and whose supervisor reports to CEO Albert Bourla, furtively explained to a Veritas source, whom he thought was only a romantic interest, how Pfizer is involved in manipulating viruses in order to come up with corresponding “vaccines.”

This is a part of “militarized propaganda” or “fifth-generation warfare,” Latypova tells Fischer and Wodarg. Latypova says the Veritas video—unbeknownst to anyone at Project Veritas—is part of a DOD campaign to “extensively lie to people, [and] drive them into fear with various techniques used by military intelligence.”

This propaganda, Latypova explains, is “designed to make people fearful and believe that there is, first of all, such a thing as making viruses more lethal and more transmissible at the same time.” She adds, however, that gain-of-function research as it’s been sold to the public “is not possible to do” and that “it’s against the laws of nature.”

Latypova even says that Walker, in his capacity as an employee working for the Boston Consulting Group (BCG), but loaned out to Pfizer, was, in effect, working as a pawn for the DOD. This is because, Latypova claims, “BCG [had a] federal contract from DoD for COVID countermeasures.” And while a cursory online search doesn’t turn up that exact contract, ProPublica does say that the National Institutes of Health (NIH) awarded BCG with $141 million in funds for “fighting” COVID-19, including about $10.7 million for “medical countermeasures.”

Likewise, Latypova says the viral story from October of 2022 centered around gain-of-function research using SARS-CoV-2 at Boston University was also propagandistic bunk. She notes that while the topline from the university’s gain-of-function experiment may sound freighting on its face, the results were anything but. While eight out of ten of the mice infected with the scientists’ manipulated strain of the virus did indeed die, Latypova notes those mice were actually euthanized; they did not die naturally. She also notes the only way the scientists could actually infect the mice was by spraying virus particles directly into their noses and lungs. (A technique that causes pneumonia regardless of what virus is being used.)

Latypova goes into more detail describing why this kind of propaganda is being rolled out, explaining that:

[T]he main goal of this [DOD propaganda], is that… they’re saying ‘Now we’re making these dangerous concoctions because any PhD student can do it and if we don’t do it then our enemies will do it and they will unleash these scary viruses on us so we need to do it defensively. That’s the biggest… lie propagated by our government and now global governments worldwide. They do it so that they can go to our congress, appropriate trillions for defense [and] predictive pandemic preparedness, and invest in all these technologies that are designed to remove human rights. The biometrics. Biosecurity state. Tracing, quarantines. Now they are writing this language into the [World Health Organization’s] International Health Regulations that if there’s the potential for a… planned pandemic where maybe you will be ‘pre-symptomatic’ [or cause] ‘pre-transmission’ …[they then] can predict that these things can evolve, [and that] you should go to quarantine camp. Or your children.

Latypova even challenges the idea of “passaging” viruses between animals, such as monkeys or ferrets. A technique that’s often touted as a key way to manipulate viruses and make them more pathogenic.

Big pharma, the DOD, et al. say “‘Oh, we’re going to use this technique as… passing through animals. We infect one animal and then pass them through [another] and that creates a dangerous virus'” Latypova says, repeating the standard narrative ironically. She notes the technique, however, doesn’t work, as “If [a virus] infects anybody then the next person is less symptomatic, less severe, and so forth.” The pharma industry veteran adds the virus “attenuates to nothing,” which is also “why all pandemics extinguish themselves.”

Following her comments on the Veritas-Walker story, Latypova offers a cursory review of her now-viral solo presentation titled “Intent to Harm.” The presentation—which you can watch in full via the post embedded immediately below—covers the outsized—and relatively secretive—role that the DOD has played in both Operation Warp Speed (OWS), as well as the federal government’s public health response to the supposed pandemic.

The pharma industry veteran goes into detail regarding the covert DOD operation, particularly in regards to how it’s been enabled through changes in federal law over the past several decades. Key amongst those legal changes were several from 1997, when Congress passed two laws including the FDA Modernization Act and The National Defense Authorization Act, which, combined, allow for implementation of an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for a given medical product. Which, in turn, (as Latypova noted in her previous interview with Fischer“gets rid of the FDA’s safety and efficacy regulations and allows [the] FDA to issue emergency use authorizations for certain products which they deem required.” Latypova added in her previous interview with Fischer that there were “pretty strict limitations” on the scope of EUA use originally, but said it has been expanded greatly over time.

Critically, Latypova highlights the fact that the COVID-19 “vaccines” are not vaccines at all, but rather DOD “prototype countermeasures.” Per the purchase agreement the DOD has with Pfizer. (An excerpt of that agreement is immediately below.) Along with the agreement between the DOD and the pharma giant, Latypova also provides as evidence claims made by Pfizer in its motion to dismiss whistleblower Brook Jackson’s federal False Claims Act lawsuit against the company.

Image: Department of Defense

Indeed, Pfizer argues in its motion to dismiss Jackson’s claims—which are aimed at Ventavia, the operator of Pfizer clinical trial sites in Texas, and cite complaints such as injecting clinical trial participants without first obtaining informed consent and even fabricating “new numbers”—that the only stipulation of its agreement with the DOD was to obtain an Emergency Use Authorization (or EUA) or full authorization from the FDA. Otherwise, Pfizer’s clinical trials were “out of scope” of the agreement between the federal department and pharma giant, and weren’t material to whether or not the DOD bought the billions of dollars worth of “vaccine.” Meaning, explicitly, that no compliance with Good Clinical Practices (GCP) or Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) was required. (See excerpt from Pfizer’s motion to dismiss immediately below.)

Interestingly, while not directly related to Latypova’s point about the clinical trials being pure “theater,” Pfizer’s motion to dismiss Jackson’s lawsuit mentions that the FDA had “actual knowledge of [Jackson’s] allegations” when it approved the pharma giant’s wildly dangerous injection. 

Link to Pfizer’s motion to dismiss

Most critically, Latypova shows how EUA “medical” countermeasures, “once designated as such by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, shall not be considered to constitute a clinical investigation.” This is why the FDA “approving” the COVID injections has simply been a theatrical performance. Simply a farce with no legal or regulatory impact on the rollout of the undisclosed military products (i.e. the COVID injections).

As far as the national COVID-19 response plan, Latypova notes it was the National Security Council (NSC) that has developed and implemented it. The pharma insider highlights the fact that the NSC is “not a health regulator” and therefore is a “very unusual” candidate to lead the public health response to COVID-19. The NSC’s leadership does, however, of course, keep the DOD in charge of the country’s response by including members such as the Secretary of Defense, as well as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The American public was told COVID-19 was a “health event,” Latypova says, “yet the U.S. government [geared] up to it as if [it were] war.”

Latypova also shows the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), an HHS office, had been developing a “vaccine manufacturing infrastructure” portfolio prior to the COVID-19 “emergency,” which went back to 2012. Or, in the case of Maryland-based pharma company Emergent BioSolutions, perhaps much further.

Up until 2020, the vaccine manufacturers had been (in essence) orchestrated by BARDA to make “pan-influenza vaccines,” as well as other unidentified biologics, Latypova says. This means that Pfizer, Moderna, et al. have not been the real manufacturers of the COVID injections, but rather a bunch of pharma companies bankrolled by BARDA, which themselves are nameless and faceless as far as the public’s concerned.

Image: Sasha Latypova

In the slide from Latypova’s presentation immediately above, we have “Vaccine Supporting Efforts” on the right-hand side of the chart, and “Vaccines” on the left. “[W]hat they call ‘Vaccice Supporting Efforts’ is the real manufacturing infrastructure, which has been put in place… based on the contracts that are available for public review now, partially redacted… .” Latypova adds “the Department of Defense established contracting relationships with [the relatively anonymous companies on the right-hand side of the slide] to build out [the] facilities for manufacturing of biologicals and vaccines.”

Manufacturing mRNA vaccines, Latypova notes, is a “very, very complex task.” She says “It’s just as complex as making new cars or new airplanes. And involves just as many moving parts; suppliers, sub-contractors, systems, processes, everything needs to be in place.”

Ready to tap its existing army of manufacturers (previously geared to make pan-influenza vaccines), the leaders of OWS claimed the COVID-injection clinical trials could be performed alongside the ramp-up in manufacturing of the experimental substances. Latypova, notes, however, “this is actually a violation of good manufacturing practices, which is Title 21 in code of federal regulation. And that code of federal regulation was specifically established to avoid this exact thing from happening.” Latypova adds “It is not possible to manufacture safe products before safety is properly tested.” Furthermore, the pharma veteran says that BARDA has claimed that it is regulating the quality of the injections, not the FDA. Which is absurd not only because the office shouldn’t be behaving as a regulatory body, but also because BARDA has been funding the true manufacturers of the injections.

Link to case document

Latypova also shows that, over the course of many years, BARDA has actually funded various pharmaceutical companies and ancillary organizations to the tune of $47.5 billion; including $33 billion for vaccines. Without this funding, Latypova adds, many of these companies would’ve not even been profitable, nor would’ve invested in the products that they did.

Further bolstering the idea that OWS has been a fully governmental rollout, with the DOD using pharma companies like Pfizer and Moderna as well-paid fronts for its real manufacturing endeavor, Latypova notes that it was the Department of Justice (DOJ) that was responsible for defending the FDA when it was sued by the nonprofit group Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency (PHMPT) in a lawsuit related to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. PHMPT sued the FDA after it said it needed 75 years to release all of the documents related to Pfizer’s COVID-19 “vaccine” clinical trials. No lawyers from Pfizer, however, even attended the trial.

Latypova says that people should ask themselves: “Why is the U.S. government and the DOJ defending the commercial interests of Pfizer?” The pharma insider adds “Everyone should ask that question.”

Link to Pfizer’s contract with the DOD

Toward the end of her presentation Latypova offers the excerpt above taken from a Pfizer contract with the DOD. She highlights once again the fact that both parties “acknowledge[d] and agree[d]” that Pfizer’s COVID-19 “vaccine” pre-clinical and clinical trials, as well as its COVID-19 “vaccine” manufacturing activities, are “out of scope” of the contract. Meaning Pfizer only performed a “demonstration” of clinical trials and a “demonstration” of vaccine manufacturing that has had absolutely nothing to do with what’s actually being shipped out to vaccine clinics and the like, and ending up in people’s bodies.

“All of what was done” regarding Pfizer’s clinical trials, Latypova makes clear, “was just for show.”

Feature image: New York National Guard

(Visited 717 times, 1 visits today)

Accessibility Toolbar