Top-tier private sector industry, and Federal and State governments have relied upon his actuarial risk management services. He has provided answers to intellectual property (IP) questions, working with trade and finance regulatory agencies in the United States, Africa, Europe, and Asia, as well as the United States Congress.
Dr. Martin has publications in law, medicine, engineering, finance and education. He maintains active research in the fields of linguistic genomics, fractal financial risk modeling, as well as continuing his over 15 years of research in cellular membrane ionic signaling.
So, he is no dunce…
Dr. Martin wants government reform in IP, transparency, and our health establishment. He needs your help, and you can do so in three easy steps.
- Develop a common understanding of the laws, regulations, and Constitutional protections.
- Use precise language.
- Write your State Attorney General and ask he or she to take immediate action.
We need you to act. After reading this Substack, please download this draft letter and send it to your State Attorney General (AG) and tell them to act immediately. We may have a whole slew of new AGs in the very near future, and even though many refused to act to date… The new ones might realize this is their opportunity to be a hero.
Everything included below is directly attributed to the work of Dr. David E. Martin. (I added a few pictures and colorful language. You’re welcome, Martin… It would have been way too dry without my equally dry wit.)
 |
Constitutional protections and related legislation.
Dr. David Martin provides a convincing argument for Sherman Act, Clayton Act, and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) Act violations. Before providing a detailed description of the USG and pharmaceutical industry’s conspiratorial, anti-competitive fraud perpetrated against US citizens, let’s make sure we all understand the legal underpinning for this argument.
The Copyright Clause and one’s right to challenge unlawful detention are foundational Constitutional concepts one must grasp if we hope to communicate precisely, influence others, and take action.
Article One, Section 8, clause 8, To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. This clause is known as the Intellectual Property Clause or the Copyright and Patent Clause. It provides constitutional protection for the intellectual property of authors and inventors by allowing Congress to grant them exclusive rights over their creations and discoveries for a limited period. This encourages innovation and creativity by ensuring that creators can benefit from their work while eventually allowing the public access.
Article One, Section 9, clause 2, which states that "The privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." This clause guarantees that individuals have the right to challenge unlawful detention or imprisonment in court, ensuring that the government cannot hold people indefinitely without a legal basis. The only exceptions allowed are during extreme circumstances, such as rebellion or invasion, where public safety may necessitate a suspension of this right.
 |
President Benjamin Harrison
On 8 April 1890, the Senate passed the Sherman Antitrust Act by a vote of 51–1 and the House followed with a unanimous vote of 242–0 on 20 June 1890. President Benjamin Harrison signed the bill into law on 2 July 2 1890, and it has been the go-to big money producer for the USG for a very long time…
 |
As you can see from the graphic, the USG likes to break up monopolies pursued by disfavored entrepreneurs to make sure they don’t get too big to fail. If it were just a matter of lining their pockets, this litigation-happy administration would jump at the chance to go after companies like Pfizer and Moderna, which pulled in collectively over 100 billion dollars. That will have to wait. We first need to prosecute the individuals responsible for the lockdowns. The Sherman Act can help make that dream a reality. It prohibits Price fixing, Bid rigging, Market allocation, Exclusive contracts, and Monopolization., and is defined as follows.
Sherman Antitrust Act: 15 U.S. Code § 1. Trusts, etc., in restraint of trade illegal; penalty
Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal.
Every person who shall make any contract or engage in any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $100,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding 10 years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
 |
Woodrow Wilson, our first socialist President and father to the income tax and the Federal Reserve.
In October 1914, President Woodrow Wilson signed the Clayton Act into law. It prohibited Price discrimination, Tying agreements, Predatory pricing, Mergers and acquisitions that created monopolies, Exclusive dealing, Exclusive territories, and Resale price maintenance. The Clayton Act doesn't carry criminal penalties, but it does allow for trebled damage awards.
Clayton Act: 15 U.S. Code §2 Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty.
Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
Clayton Act: 15 U.S. Code § 19 Interlocking directorates and officers:
No person shall, at the same time, serve as a director or officer in any two corporations (other than banks, banking associations, and trust companies) that are—
- engaged in whole or in part in commerce; and
- by virtue of their business and location of operation, competitors, so that the elimination of competition by agreement between them would constitute a violation of any of the antitrust law.
Tell us a story Dr. Martin!
 /> |
Now that we have a common understanding of the legal backdrop, the stage is set for a wicked good yarn. Dr. Martin weaves our tangled thread into an atypical tapestry of trickery impossible to ignore…
On 25 April 2003, the United States Department of Health and Human Services Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) filed an application for a United States patent, Application Number US46592703P, subsequently issued as Patent US 7279327 (Patent 7,618,802) entitled “Coronavirus isolated from humans.” Two more patents, one for the virus US 7220852, and one for testing US 7776521A were acquired. This provided the CDC with a statutory market exclusion right to detect of and sample for severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV).
The journal Nature in 2003 (423(6936): 103) reported cooperation between CDC and Fort Detrick’s U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) on coronavirus research followed by considerable subsequent collaboration.
Securing these patents afforded the CDC exclusive right to research, commercially exploit, or block others from conducting activities involving SARS-CoV since 2003. From April 2003 until September 2018, the CDC owned SARS-CoV, its ability to be detected and the ability to manufacture testing kits. During this 15-year period, the effect of the grant of this right – ruled unconstitutional in 2013 by the United States Supreme Court in the case of Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. Myriad Genetics – meant that the commercial exploitation of any research or commercial activity in the United States involving SARS-CoV would constitute an infringement of CDC’s illegal patent.
During the period of patent enforcement and after the Supreme Court ruling confirming that patents on genetic material was illegal, the CDC and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases NIAID led by Dr. Anthony Fauci entered into trade among States, including but not limited to working with Ecohealth Alliance Inc., and with foreign nations. NIAID specifically engaged with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and the Chinese Academy of Sciences through the 2014 et seq National Institutes of Health Grant R01AI110964 to exploit their patent rights.
 |
Shi Zhengli, the bat lady…
The CDC and NIAID also entered into trade among States, including but not limited to working with University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, and with foreign nations to conduct chimeric construction of novel coronavirus material with specific virulence properties. Research work between University of North Carolina Chapel Hill represented by Ralph Baric, WIV, and The Chinese Academy of Sciences represented by Shi Zhengli, was funded through grants U19AI109761 and U19AI107810 Natural Science Foundation of China Award 81290341 (Zheng-Li Shi) et al. 2015-2016.
The research was conducted prior to, during, and following the 17 October 2014 determination made by the National Institutes for Health (NIH) that this work was not sufficiently understood for its biosecurity and safety standards.
It is presumed that the CDC and their associates were:
- Fully aware of the work being performed using their patented technology;
- Entered into explicit or implicit agreements including licensing, or other consideration; and,
- Willfully engaged one or more foreign interests to carry forward the exploitation of their proprietary technology when the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that such patents were illegal and when the National Institutes of Health issued a moratorium on such research.
Reportedly, in January 2018, the U.S. Embassy in China sent investigators to WIV and found that, “During interactions with scientists at the WIV laboratory, they noted the new lab has a serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators needed to safely operate this high-containment laboratory.” The Washington Post reported that this information was contained in a State Department cable dated 19 January 2018. Over a year later, in June 2019, the CDC conducted an inspection of USAMRIID and ordered it closed after alleging that their inspection found biosafety hazards. The CDC, for what appear to be the same type of concern identified in Wuhan, elected to continue work with the Chinese government while closing the U.S. Army facility.
 /> |
On 24 September 2018, the CDC failed to pay the required maintenance fees on this patent and their rights expired with no notification issued by CDC alerting the private sector to this decision.
The CDC reported the first case of SARS-CoV like illness in the United States in January 2020 with the CDC’s Epidemic Intelligence Service reporting 650 clinical cases and 210 tests. Given that the suspected pathogen was first implicated in official reports on 31 December 2019, one can only conclude that CDC:
- Had the mechanism and wherewithal to conduct tests to confirm the existence of a “novel coronavirus”; or,
- did not have said mechanism and falsely reported the information in January. It tests credulity to suggest that the WHO or the CDC could manufacture and distribute tests for a “novel” pathogen when their own subsequent record on development and deployment of tests has been shown to be without reliability.
12 March 2020, in an effort to enrich their own economic interests by way of securing additional funding from both Federal and Foundation actors, the CDC and NIAID’s Dr. Fauci elected to suspend testing and classify COVID-19 by capricious symptom presentation alone. Not surprisingly, this was necessitated by the apparent fall in cases that constituted Dr. Fauci’s and others’ criteria for depriving citizens of their 1st Amendment rights. At the time, the standard according to the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists Interim-20-ID-01 for COVID-19 classification is:
In outpatient or telehealth settings at least two of the following symptoms: fever (measured or subjective), chills, rigors, myalgia, headache, sore throat, new olfactory and taste disorder(s)
OR
at least one of the following symptoms: cough, shortness of breath, or difficulty breathing OR Severe respiratory illness with at least one of the following:
- Clinical or radiographic evidence of pneumonia, or
- Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS).
AND there must be no alternative more likely diagnosis.
Laboratory Criteria for Reporting
- Detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in a clinical specimen using a molecular amplification detection test.
- Detection of specific antigen in a clinical specimen.
- Detection of specific antibody in serum, plasma, or whole blood indicative of a new or recent infection.* *serologic methods for diagnosis are currently being defined
After inflicting grave harm to the citizens of the United States of America in economic hardships resulting from their allegation of an “epidemic” or “pandemic”, the CDC and the NIAID set forth, and the President of the United States and various Governors in the respective States promulgated, standards for lifting conditions in violation of the 1st Amendment to the Constitution that serve exclusively to enrich them.
The CDC and WHO elected to commit to a narrative of a novel coronavirus – exhibiting properties that were anticipated in the U.S. Patent 7,618,802 issued to the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill’s Ralph Baric – and, in the absence of testing protocols, elected to insist that SARS-CoV-2 was the pathogen responsible for conditions that were consistent with moderate to severe acute respiratory syndrome.
Both the presence of a vaccine or treatment and, or, the development of testing – both that solely benefit the possible conspiring parties and their co-conspirators – are set as a condition for re-opening the country. This appears to be an unambiguous violation of the Sherman Act and, if so, should be prosecuted immediately to the full extent of the law.
Please download this letter and send to your Governor, State AG, or. Legislator. Tell them they can still be a COVID hero.
Invite your friends and earn rewards
If you enjoy Feds for Freedom, share it with your friends and earn rewards when they subscribe.
|
||||||||||
Like
Comment
Restack© 2024 James Erdman
548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104
Unsubscribe
