Trump vs. Big Pharma, Lawfare & Ukraine Biolabs, With Super Lawyer Jeff Childers

Alex Newman 2 (00:07.04) So the deep state really went on the attack during the COVID crisis through the big pharma, through the regulatory agencies, through the bureaucracy, somehow from the WHO all the way down to your local government. They were all on the same page. No more freedom. Mass mandates, vaccine mandates for everyone. It was all very well coordinated. And our next guest was actually on the front lines of pushing back on this in a serious way, not just complaining on social media. He was actually litigating against us. He got the first court order. declaring that the mask mandates were presumptively unconstitutional. I'm referring, of course, to Jeff Childers. He is a commercial litigation attorney in Florida. He lives here with his wife and three children. And since the COVID pandemic began, he has been not just fighting in court, but also providing truth and optimism to people around the country. He's got a very, very widely read substack, hugely popular. You can find it at coffeeandcovid.com. He's one of the nation's leading attorneys standing up against these unconstitutional mandates, not just on the COVID stuff, but promoting health, freedom, medical autonomy. And he's represented a whole bunch of different clients and again, got the first pellet court decision ruling that the mandatory mask mandate was presumptively unconstitutional. He also shut down the city of Gainesville's vaccinate or terminate policy as unconstitutional, again, with a first in the nation injunction against these vaccine mandates. So he doesn't just... talk about and expose this stuff. He actually fights against it and has been doing so very, very successfully. Jeff, welcome to the program. Thank you so much for joining us. I want to start with one of your recent posts. You're talking about Big Pharma, Pharmakia, the global biosecurity state. And you say that this front here is the biggest front in the war against the deep state as RFK gets put in there and they start taking on so much of this. Talk to us about why you think this is such a critical component of what they're doing and what do you think about Trump's efforts to rein this stuff in? Jeff Childers (02:10.29) Well, that's a gigantic question, Alex. How many hours do I have to answer? Alex Newman 2 (02:14.547) Right. Jeff Childers (02:17.065) So, trying to boil down five years of uncovering puzzle pieces is going to be challenging. It's been kind of like, we've got this, my wife's got a line on some of these joke gift boxes for Christmas that you can put the real gift inside, but it looks like a made for TV product on the outside. One of them claims to be a puzzle of the moon, except the moon is this big in a black field of stars. And that's the puzzle. It says, a magnifying glass included. so trying to put together a puzzle with all black puzzle pieces is kind of like what it's been figuring out exactly how we manage to find ourselves in the mess of the pandemic. And... Even now, I'm sure that you are aware of all these USAID disclosures, all the stuff that the State Department's been up to in projecting what they call soft power through regime change operations and undermining foreign governments through NGOs that are there supposedly to provide AIDS prevention or whatever, and their favorite vehicle. is the health-related NGO. That's their preferred mechanism of destruction. And so that's just a new puzzle piece that we've gotten. But if you go all the way back to the beginning of the pandemic, when we were trying to dig into this thing to find out who we could sue, for vaccine injuries and things like that, we had a lot of trouble figuring out who actually manufactured the vaccine. Everybody thinks, you know, it's Pfizer and Moderna, but as it turns out, Pfizer and Moderna are like manufacturing subcontractors. The technologies in those shots actually came from DARPA. Jeff Childers (04:24.467) Most people don't know that. so what we found, and it took years to get through FOIA, the documents, because of course the government was resisting everybody the whole time. But what we found is that the original contracts for the vaccines were military procurement contracts. And I don't know about you, but when I think about sort of the last organization that I want in charge of healthcare, it's the military. I mean, they're not known for doing a terrific job of healthcare, let's say. And their whole job is to kill people. I mean, that's basically what Rush Limbaugh used to say, the military's job is to kill people and break stuff. Alex Newman 2 (05:04.797) Yeah. Jeff Childers (05:11.815) So it's not immediately clear why the military should be manufacturing vaccines, except, of course, that it's related to bioweapons research. And so what you have is this sort of unholy marriage between the military, the security agencies, CIA, the FBI, the state departments, know, Skunk Works, and Big Pharma. Because there's big money in these military defense contracts. And I'm sure that's not remarkable to anybody listening. So what's happened is, and again, I'm... putting this together, right? There's no single source for understanding this, but from what we can see, it looks like the big pharmaceutical companies to some substantial extent now depend on government largesse. So they've got to please the government and it's not just... know, it'd be one thing, for example, if it was the National Institutes of Health or the Centers for Disease Control or something like that. But the situation we find ourselves in is where big pharma is trying to police the military and the CIA. And they're doing it all under, you know, layers of classification so that there's no accountability, no transparency, and no meaningful oversight. I doubt Congress has, you know, there might be a half a dozen members of Congress that have an idea about how deep this iceberg goes. So, I don't know, that's the 30,000 foot level. Tell me what you want to focus on. Alex Newman 2 (07:09.757) Yeah, you're right, Jeff. This is such a huge topic. And I don't think even well-informed people have a sense of how deep this goes. Once you start digging into DARPA, which you mentioned, once you start looking at Inqutel, the investment arm of the intelligence community, some of this just becomes really, really dark. So I want to ask you, what do you think they're trying to do? mean, on the surface level, yeah, the big pharmaceutical companies want a lot of money. Bureaucrats like to run other people's lives. But what's the real agenda here? How does it all tie together? Jeff Childers (07:46.565) So at the risk of offending people with pet conspiracy theories, I'm going to give you a cohesive answer that explains everything. I call it my working hypothesis. That means it's based on evidence. So I'm either making a single layer inference based on real evidence, or I'm ignoring it. So for example, know, you might, some people are convinced that there's a depopulation agenda. You know, you could certainly intuit some reasons why the government might want to do that with the financial problems related to say social security and welfare benefits and things like that. but I don't have evidence for that. But what I do have evidence for For example, starting in 1992, and I'm not recalling the name of this memo, but it was written by a top military general and it outlined a plan for American hegemony post-Cold War. And the idea was that America should be active in preventing any near-peer superpowers from reaching equivalent status to us. And therefore, America could remain the sole dominant superpower in And so my working hypothesis is everything went off the rails from there. I believe that that policy was adopted by the United States government. And in particular by the security services who were repurposing themselves after the Soviet Union fell. And suddenly there was a lot less work for them to do. Right? They weren't opposing the Soviets everywhere in the world anymore. So what did they turn their attention to? I believe they turned their attention to preserving American hegemony. A catchphrase that people are hearing a lot about these days that they probably never heard before is the phrase soft power. And it's an Orwellian concept, or maybe let's call it a euphemism. Jeff Childers (10:04.991) for making war on other countries without using conventional military. So for example, let's say you've got an African country that is leaning toward aligning with Russia. And the Russians were identified as the new evil post-Soviet period. That's a whole different discussion. whether it's justified or not, but let's say you've got that African country that's tilting toward line or China, Russia or China, America's competitors for global power status. So instead of sending the military into this South African country and making sure that they didn't make... economic or military agreements with our competitors, we would send in the Dirty Trick Squad. And so this would be media, social media, conventional media, undermining the existing government, fomenting... people who live there to be unhappy with the status quo, paying protesters, funding anti-government NGOs in that country and so on. And eventually what happens is the government gets overthrown and you're right there where you need to be to make sure that the new government that comes in is pro-US. You with me so far? And so I believe that what happened is that Alex Newman 2 (11:37.758) Mm-hmm. Jeff Childers (11:44.989) the state department and the CIA and all these other, you know, there's myriad agencies, sub-agencies, black ops groups, whatever, off books things, on books things. They realized that this, the banner of public health was an excuse that almost everybody accepts. Right? It's, it's, I'm only here to help you. Right? What did Reagan say about that? The, is it the seven most, terrifying words in the English language? I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Right. Alex Newman 2 (12:24.511) Yep. Jeff Childers (12:26.773) And so I think the WHO has been involved. think, you know, basically all of these, the NIH, the CDC, the FDA, they've all been co-opted by the security services in the name of national security, right? And whenever that... term is invoked, whenever the rubric of national security is put on the table, then everything becomes classified, right? So the public can't, you can't get it through a FOIA request. And they have access to tools and funding that can't be easily traced. And so what we saw is, you know, the part that just fell into place recently is the doge disclosures of whereas the British like to call it dodge. The dodge disclosures of this network of NGOs that are all being massively financed by by state and that then transfer money to each other and to, you know, other smaller groups and everything like that deploying what they call soft power. And much of that, much of that is done in the name of health. And that brings us to your Ukrainian bio labs question. Right? So I'm going to, I want to talk about that in the context of this, because I think that what was going on in Ukraine is, you know, one of the clinical manifestations of this same metastasizing, you know, political implosion. When the Russians went in to Ukraine, there were claims that the first seven cities they bombed all had US affiliated biological laboratories there, the first seven cities. And so that became a bit of a cause celebre on social media. And I was following that at the time and it... Jeff Childers (14:36.031) Congress got a hold of it and they started asking questions of State Department officials and you sworn testimony. And initially the State Department denied that the US had any interest in bio labs in Ukraine. But eventually they forced this deep state animal named Victoria Newland. who is a total swamp creature to admit under oath that yes, not only did the U S have interest in a string of bio labs in Ukraine, but also they were concerned that these bio labs would fall into Russian hands because the Russians might get hold of deadly pathogens and biological weapons. Alex Newman 2 (15:02.697) Yes. Jeff Childers (15:26.293) Of course, she didn't say it quite that explicitly. said, uh, and you know, these, uh, viruses and bacteria that could be engineered into weapons. Well, what does that tell you? So, uh, that was a bit of a shock and I think, you know, many people harken back to that admission as a kind of turning point in our understanding of. Alex Newman 2 (15:38.249) Right. Jeff Childers (15:53.075) why the government is so interested in this Eastern European country on Russia's border. And then in June of last year, there was a remarkable magazine style article in the New York Times. And I call it a limited hangout. And I think... You know, I've done a lot of scholarship on this as well, but I've in analyzing Media for five years like I have I can identify this type of article and what it is is this massive disclosure about something that happened a long time ago that we're just finding out about now Most of the sources are anonymous government Officials that aren't named and then there's never any follow-up to it at all It's just like it drops down the media well and you can hear the splash at the bottom and that's it. It's gone. And so, and I think it was June, it might've been May or it was in the summertime, but the article I think was headlined, how the CIA helps Ukraine in the war or something like that. And I think, I bet if you printed it out, it'd be over 20 pages long. And what it described is a whole, gulag of secret CIA bases, many of them underground in Ukraine, where number one, we've been spying on the Russians. And number two, and maybe most damning, the CIA was training an army. I call it the CIA's private army in Ukraine. They were training soldiers in espionage, in sabotage, and in... assassinations and other dirty tricks. One of the soldiers that was trained in those CIA facilities was named Kirill Budanov. And Kirill Budanov is now Ukraine's, the director of Ukraine's military intelligence unit. And Budanov's specialty is assassinations. Jeff Childers (18:09.713) So just a few weeks ago, Ukrainians and presumably it would have been Budhanov supervising or signing off on the operation, they assassinated a Russian general who had been studying the Ukraine bio labs from the beginning. Everybody can see we're getting close to the end of this proxy war. The Ukrainians can see it too. Was that a loose end that they just wrapped up? Alex Newman 2 (18:26.313) Mm-hmm. Jeff Childers (18:39.731) If there's nothing to this bio lab thing, and of course, I don't know if anybody believes that, but that's the official position of the US State Department. If there's nothing to it, then why would they kill off the Russian general who'd been studying it the whole time? Budanov, by the way, he's not a real finicky. He also assassinated one of Putin's best friends' daughter, who's a... 27 year old journalist or something. Alex Newman 2 (19:12.084) yeah, that was Alexander Dugan's daughter, Yep. Jeff Childers (19:15.093) Correct. And that's just because they couldn't get to Dugin, so they killed his daughter instead. I mean, these are the kind of people that the CIA trained in these secret bases. And by the way, I mean, these articles are so hilarious. The reporter described being taken on a tour of the CIA facilities, the underground bases in Ukraine. Like, when does the CIA do that? Drag a report. Alex Newman 2 (19:41.727) Ha Jeff Childers (19:42.709) and see a secret underground base, give me a break. So. Alex Newman 2 (19:47.368) Now we know the New York Times got some nice sums of money from the government as well. Thank you, Doge. We're down to just less than 10 minutes, Jeff. There's so much more I want to ask you about, but I want to turn to the legal component of all this. you as an attorney who's been focusing on the legal elements of the medical tyranny. What do you make of the lawfare being waged against Donald Trump right now? You had a really interesting post where you talked about Elon Musk as a decoy, where the Democrat, the deep state machine built all these legal arguments around Elon not being confirmed by the Senate. But of course, on paper, he's just an advisor. And he's not actually wielding authority, he's just advising the president. But what do you make of the lawfare against Trump? Are these judges that have paused a bunch of the different things that he's trying to do, fire people and stuff, is this lawfare going to succeed? And what do you make of the Trump administration's response in the courts? Jeff Childers (20:41.137) So I think that nobody should be surprised because ever since Trump won the election in November, the Democrats have been bragging about how many lawyers they were hiring. to file lawsuits against Trump, right? So everybody saw that coming a mile away. And I think that Trump administration did too. And if you've been reading me, then you know that my working hypothesis on that is that I think that the Trump people are well-prepared for this lawfare. So what's happening to, so that your listeners can understand. Jeff Childers (21:20.585) The lawyers for the Democrats are filing these, I would call them throw it up against the wall types of lawsuits in a handful of jurisdictions where it's all blue. So for example, you see most of them getting filed in the DC circuit. And there's, I mean, there might be one. conservative and even that is like the kind of conservative that knows how to live with a bunch of liberals, know, so he's not like a MAGA conservative at all, more of a Bush conservative, let's say. And so unsurprisingly, these judges are granting a lot of these TROs and... what I detect in, you know, trying to keep up with a fire hose of litigation that's coming. I don't know how the Trump team is doing an awesome job, by the way. I just, I just read like a 25 page, appellate brief that they filed in 24 hours. and it's, you know, it's solid, right? It's legit. So those guys are crushing it over there and. The TRO, we're seeing all these TROs are temporary restraining orders. It's a very short term, usually about two weeks stay, the courts can issue to preserve the status quo until they can have a full hearing. And so, you know, there's these things called duty judges that carry the pager around and they can hear a TRO case in the middle of the night and they can issue the TRO before anybody even knows it happened. Those are relatively easy to get. I'm not saying, you know, in the grand scheme of litigation, they're easy. They should be hard to get, but relative to other types of injunctions, they're very easy. The harder one is the one that you have to get at that two-week point. But I think that the Trump team has very cleverly and very deliberately set up some key issues. Jeff Childers (23:26.931) that are going to go to the Supreme Court very quickly because of these injunctions. If the Democrats had just filed normal lawsuits, you know, let it play out, then it would take forever to get to the Supreme Court. But when a court enjoins the executive branch of government from doing something significant, then the executive has rapid access to the Supreme Court. So what we're seeing are issues like what the papers refer to, and I think what most legal commentators refer to as the unitary executive theory, which holds that the president should have total control under the constitution of the executive branch of government. And that seems like an uncontroversial statement, except that Congress has over the years meddled more and more into the executive because they've been... delegating so much of their authority to the executive, they want to have a say. And so, you know, they set up boards like the EEOC, right, the Employment Commission, and there's a five-member board, and Congress wants to make sure that... the board members can be preserved from one administration to the other. So Congress passed a law that says that they can only be fired for cause by the president. Now, Trump's team and Reagan before him and anybody who subscribes to the unitary theory of the executive believes that Congress can't pass laws that restrict the president's ability to hire and fire his own employees. And so that's one of the issues he right away on day one, he fired almost all of the Democrats still on those types of boards where Congress had made these rules, which tees up them to sue, which they have. And at least one court has ordered, there's a special counsel at Trump terminated. Jeff Childers (25:30.929) and that Biden had appointed and the court ordered him to be restored to his office and have access to all of his email and digital assets and everything, which you would never do with a terminated employee. mean, the possibilities for mischief are virtually infinite. So that's at the Supreme Court right now. Alex Newman 2 (25:51.07) Mm-hmm. Jeff Childers (25:57.051) So what we're expecting is that the Supreme Court's going to hopefully, that the unitary theory of executive power is the law of the land. And that's just going to wipe out all of these other lawsuits. They're all going to fall like dominoes because they're all predicated on the same theories that Congress can interfere. Alex Newman 2 (26:17.897) Jeff, we've got less than two minutes left. Could that then be a tool for the next administration? Let's just say hypothetically, another deep state Democrat puppet ends up in the White House in four years. Could that then be used to clear out everybody that Trump hired and bring in all the people that just got fired? Jeff Childers (26:38.126) What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Right, but our problem right now, Alex, is we need to clear out the deep state. That's our biggest problem. Alex Newman 2 (26:40.735) Yep. Alex Newman 2 (26:47.965) Yep. Yep. Well, Jeff, your blog is really, really helpful for trying to understand some of these very complex issues. Tell the folks how they can follow your work, how they can support you, and what's the easiest way to do that, what social media you're on. Jeff Childers (27:03.529) Sure. So the main place to find me is on our website, www.coffeeandcovid.com. All one word. That's a sub stack, but we have our own URL. You can also find me on Twitter at jchilders98. And every day I put my post up there. So if you don't want to subscribe, you can find it there. There is a free subscription option for people. make sure, apparently Substack puts that last on the list, but it's down there. It's right there at the end. You can find it and everybody's welcome. Alex Newman 2 (27:43.347) Well, Jeff, I want to thank you for the great work you've been doing for so many years, not just in litigation, but also shining a light on these things that so many people would like to keep hidden. We appreciate it. Thank you for making time to join us today, and I hope we can talk to you again very soon. Jeff Childers (27:57.033) You bet. Great to be here, Alex. Thanks. Alex Newman 2 (27:58.879) Thanks so much, Jeff. All right, ladies and gentlemen, we are almost out of time, but I do want to encourage you to get over to coffeeandcovid.com, sign up. Jeff's analysis of these legal issues are very complex, way beyond what you're going to get from the fake media. So it's a really good resource to try to stay on top of these complicated topics, things where the media is deliberately trying to confuse people, things where the media doesn't even understand itself what's going on. So go check it out. coffeeandcovid.com. get over to thenewamerican.com. I'm Alex Newman, Senior Editor there. This is Behind the Deep State. We really appreciate you tuning in wherever you're watching us or hearing us. And until next time, God bless you all. Alright, hey thanks again Jeff, that was fantastic. We'll get this out on Monday and my staff will send you a link. Jeff Childers (28:45.749) Terrific, we'll put it up on.