I recently filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division (Leathers, et. al v. United States of America, et al.; Case No.: 1:23-cv-175) that challenges the U.S. government response to COVID-19 as violating the 14th Amend. Liberty Clause (overriding/vitiating informed consent to treatment and bodily integrity through "vaccine" mandates and depriving patients of the choice to treat with ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine) and the 1st Amend. right to free speech (banning/suppression of ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, censorship of speech on social media and print and broadcast media.) The lawsuit also challenges the FDA's damning of ivermectin as ultra vires under the APA. It also addresses the fraud and manipulation of data in the Pfizer clinical trial and post-authorization marketing experience. It is 173 pages long with over 300 footnotes and every allegation of scientific fact is sourced. The lawsuit seeks to enjoin the U.S. government to correct its false guidance regarding the "vaccines," stop false advertisements that portray the "vaccines" as "safe and effective" without appropriate disclaimers, caveats or warnings, stop advertising altogether that is directed to children, and remove the COVID-19 "vaccine" from the Childhood Immunization Schedule, among other things. I would be happy to provide a copy of the complaint to anyone who is interested. You may email me at gsmith1205@gmail.com.

Expand full comment

That infinitesimally tiny absolute risk reduction, and the corporate and political world demanded jabs mandates??? That tells you that any individual’s personal health was completely disregarded for a global agenda.

Expand full comment

Pfizer hung its hat (and the world) on .71% ARR, and ever since, the vast majority of physicians and judges - those who consider themselves the most learn and 'judicious' among us- didn't do that math. Someone needs to equip a judge somewhere with a calculator as it's high time a high profile decision maker be found guilty on this crime, so the many dominoes behind them also cascade to their well deserved demise.

Expand full comment

Interesting case indeed, Dr McCann does a fantastic work on the Australian front.

Back to your Pfizer trial point, there aren't much shadow of doubts left that it was completely fraudulent.

- Subjects removed from DB


- Statistically very suspicious differences of testing by arms


At your disposal if a point is unclear and if it can help to clarify.

Expand full comment

Was testing for other possible cold/flu viruses performed on the symptomatic individuals ‘testing positive for Covid’ to rule them out ( either as the actual cause of the symptoms or a concurrent cause) and what kind of laboratory testing was performed for the individuals who ‘tested positive for Covid’? The Covid ‘RTPCR test’ or antibody and/or antigen testing?

Expand full comment


Would this type of suit in the United States need to allege negligence and be brought under the FTCA?

Expand full comment

Well... that math doesn't quite work. I don't support the vaccine, but the numbers that they list do seem to make sense. As I see it the logic goes like this:

1) If we did nothing to both groups we would expect them to have the same number of cases. Thus we would expect the vaccine group to have 162 cases, just like the control group. (There is a problem here as 162 is so small compared to the original group that the math is not at all certain.)

2) We didn't get 162 cases, we got 8. (See caveat above)

3) Eight is about five percent of 162

4) So that means that 95% of the people that we would have expected to get Covid didn't get it.

The number that got it compared to how many in the study that I feel you can't actually make any claim... but if you are going to make a claim, the 95% claim seems to add up.

Expand full comment