The Pfizer exec who confessed to Project Veritas now tells me the whole truth

And nothing but the truth about the virus and the vaccine---in the back room of an Irish bar after a few Bushmills

Jon Rappoport

3 hr ago

Last Saturday, I woke up to the sounds of my pigs squealing out on the land. My wolves were herding them back into their pens.

I struggled out of bed and plowed through the 16 messages on my cell. FOX, CBS, NBC, CNN, etc. They somehow knew I was on to The One, and they were clamoring and pleading for an exclusive.

No dice.

My agent and lawyer, Gloria Torquemada, showed up as I as was downing my 4th cup of coffee. Her CIA contacts had located Jordan Walker, the suddenly infamous Pfizer exec. He was now waiting in Mick Flaherty’s bar 16 miles away from my farm. I called Tucker and told him to hold on, I’d get back to him by nightfall.

I donned my white coat, hung a stethoscope around my neck, pinned an old Blockbuster member card to my chest pocket (“Jon Rappoport, MD”), and we were off in the Bentley.

An hour later, Jordan and I were sitting in Mick’s back room. We had a few drinks and chatted. Maybe more than a few.

Then this is what followed:

What about the virus, Jordan?

What about it?

The isolation problem.



You get right down to it, Jon.

Time is money.

Of course. Well, you have to promise, first, that none of what I tell you in this conversation will go public. This is on background only.

Of course. I would never reveal your comments.

OK, good. So, the virus. Well, scientists never actually FIND a new virus. They INFER its existence.

Infer it from what?

A bunch of presumptions about their own lab procedures.

What they’re doing in the lab—

Is really just a hodge-podge of mumbo-jumbo. They don’t isolate anything. And then, using computer programs, they stitch together genetic sequences for “the virus.” These sequences are metaphors.


Mythical science.

So there is no proof SARS-CoV-2 exists.

No more proof than, say, “demonstrating” there is a bath house on Mars. Or a gay caballero is roaming the galaxy singing Country and Western.


But we need these metaphors. They satisfy so many interests.

Not least of all, vaccine manufacturers.

Right. If there are no viruses, why would we produce and sell vaccines?

Then all this talk about Pfizer intentionally mutating the virus and giving it more power…which is what you told Project Veritas…is sheer nonsense?

No, not nonsense. High level bullshit.


It’s simple. 99.999 percent of virologists in the world believe their own bullshit. They really think they’re discovering new viruses. They really think they can increase the power of those viruses. They’re actually doing METAPHOR, but they think they’re doing LITERAL.

My, my.

Yes. It’s a WOW. And it works brilliantly. No one wants to rock that boat. Too many people are making too much money and exerting too much political power.

So there is no need for a COVID vaccine.

No. And it’s not actually a vaccine. It’s a shot of nanoparticles. They supposedly instructs cells of the body to produce a spike protein. The nanos contain RNA, which does the instructing. So I’m told.

A lot of rigmarole.


So why is the injection injuring and killing so many people all over the world?

I don’t know. There are all kinds of theories. The point is, when you screw around with the human body, forcing unnatural processes on it, with genetic material [RNA], there is a ripple effect down the line. Things happen.

Unpredictable things.

Yes. The processes of the body are interlocking. Disturb one process, and you get bad reverberations.

Does Pfizer understand this?

All legitimate researchers realize it. It’s not a secret. The COVID injection is experimental. The open medical literature is very frank about the dangers of putting nanoparticles in humans.

In a sense, Pfizer is a marketing firm.

I would call it a PR firm that is also injuring and killing huge numbers of people. We front for an operation that aims at political control of populations. Hence the lockdowns. The lockdowns were a prime political objective. The fake science—which Pfizer peddles—was the cover story.

So you’re personally corrupt.

Of course.

You don’t care?

I’m just trying to make a good living.

With no conscience.

Having no conscience helps.

It occurs to me that this claim Pfizer is doing gain of function research on the virus could send people up a blind alley.

Well, sure. Because legally, Pfizer can quite probably get off the hook. They can say they’re protecting the public by mutating the virus and developing new vaccines that prevent these more dangerous variants from harming everybody. Whereas, a real court case that attacks the VACCINE for the harm it’s causing…that would be a jackpot. A verdict against Pfizer THERE would be devastating. If you could ever get the case into court…

Then why did you tell Project Veritas about Pfizer mutating the virus?

I was speaking metaphorically.

In what sense?

I was telling Veritas what Pfizer is doing with an imaginary virus. Think of it this way. This is a rough analogy: At the end of World War Two, an exec at a major American corporation tells the New York Times his corporation supplied badly built weapons to US troops in Europe. There is no truth to that, because his company didn’t make weapons—but the real story is, his corporation was supplying vital parts to the US AND Germany. Parts used in factories that manufactured planes. Making money from both sides. But the exec says nothing about THAT.

He pointed the finger at his own company. But for the wrong reason.


And that’s what you did when you talked to Project Veritas.

Sort of. Yes.


I was pissed off about a few things at work I don’t want to go into. And I might have been a little high.

On drugs?

Absolutely not. On one drug. Maybe.

You fucked up.


So what are you going to do now?

I think the question is, what are they going to do to me?

Will you testify in front of Congress?

I doubt they’ll invite me. Pfizer has a lot of clout. And several hundred Congressional legislators and other federal officials don’t want me in public under oath. But if I had to appear, I’d lie. I’d say my comments to Project Veritas were misinterpreted, with no context.

You’d try to bullshit your way out of trouble.

Yes. It’s a time-honored tradition. And think of how many journalists would come to my aid.

Pfizer is evil.

I thought we’d already established that.

Why do so many people work there? Some of them must know it’s a nest of evil.

They have bills to pay. They want to live a comfortable life.

It’s that simple?

For most people, it always is. Look, there’s a guy at Pfizer. He knows everything I’ve been telling you here today. He makes about 700K a year. He snitched to the head of security about a woman in his department who was about to go all whistleblower. He snitched because he wanted to protect Pfizer, the cash cow, who hands him his paycheck every month. That was the long and short of it for him. His paycheck. His standard of living.

The truth, the facts, the crimes meant nothing to him.

Less than nothing.

Were you always corrupt?

I’d say I went through three stages. As a child, I was pretty much like other children. After I went to work for Pfizer and gradually saw what was really happening there, I was troubled. But when I was promoted and got a substantial raise, I settled in. I experienced the perks of my new life.

“The banality of evil.”

Yes. Hannah Arendt’s phrase. To describe the Nazi bureaucrat, Adolph Eichmann.

Didn’t Arendt say Eichmann was unaware, detached? He was following orders in order to advance his career. You’re aware.

I am, but it doesn’t SINK IN. I’m like a researcher who’s designing a death ray shot from space, but focuses on the MATH problems in front of him. In a sense, he knows what he’s doing, but it doesn’t bite him.

The vaccine. It’s a killer.

Yes. But you have to remember, it’s the first vaccine given to so MANY people. I dare say if this was, say, the HPV [Human Papilloma Virus] vaccine, the results would be even worse.

If nobody from the company goes to prison—

We never do. We’re aliens.

Excuse me?

When you settle into one of the big pharmaceutical companies and work there for a decade or more, you’re not quite human anymore.

Is it cold in here? I just felt a chill.

You’re not the first person I’ve talked to who’s told me that.

-- Jon Rappoport

Episode 34 of Rappoport Podcasts—“We Are Living In the Era of Nanotechnology, Science Beyond Our Control; A Clear and Present Danger”—is now posted on my substack. It’s a blockbuster. To listen, click here. https://jonrappoport.substack.com/p/elon-musk-neuralink-we-are-living#details To learn more about This Episode of Rappoport Podcasts, click here. https://jonrappoport.substack.com/p/new-podcast-elon-musk-neuralink-we?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

Expand full comment


Expand full comment

Too bad. It's quite amusing.

Expand full comment

You raise some good questions, Peter. Linking as usual today @https://nothingnewunderthesun2016.com/

Expand full comment

I f I recall someone said the word gain of function is a code word for bio weapon.

Expand full comment

Most coverage of this extraordinary Project Veritas expose focuses on the statement that Pfizer is considering doing gain of function research. However, the more important aspects of this and the resulting Pfizer press release seem to me to be as follows - and I think I am agreeing with what Peter writes:

Firstly, Jordon Walker explicitly states that the pharmaceutical companies have systematically and successfully captured the regulatory agencies which are intended to regulate them. This confirms what we know or can reasonably conclude based on numerous other observations and revelations. From the government side, see Christopher Cole's masterclass in regulatory capture of the FDA: https://www.projectveritas.com/news/fda-executive-officer-on-hidden-camera-reveals-future-covid-policy-biden/, a partial transcript of which is at: https://nutritionmatters.substack.com/p/regulatory-capture-of-the-fda .

This is in the USA, but similar processes are at work in other countries and in academic journals in general. It seems to be common for other regulatory agencies to follow the lead of the FDA and NIH, especially in the COVID-19 crisis.

While other people in Jordon Walker's mRNA gene-therapy quasi-vaccine section of Pfizer are presumably more circumspect in their statements about their work, plans and entrenched corruption, they all are immersed in this corruption every work day of their lives. They benefit from it. They see it. They participate in it, such as by some of them hiring people who used to (supposedly) regulate their company's activities. They do not blow the whistle on it. So they - just like Jordon Walker - are 100% complicit in this corruption, which amongst other things has covered up the US government's role in the creation of SARS-CoV-2, forced quasi-vaccines on hundreds of millions of people (these are nowhere near as safe and effective as they are claimed to be). They have all systematically supported and participated in a process which has denied whole populations access to a variety of genuinely safe and effective early treatments.

This corruption kills millions of people, has been a major factor in, quite reasonably, destroying the trust we would ideally have in the medical profession. This corruption has blighted the lives of every person on Earth.

Jordon Walker's statements about corruption are surely honest and correct. The Pfizer press release did not try to disprove them - because they can't.

Secondly, the Pfizer admission that they create new viruses in the lab, based on genetic data downloaded from sequence repositories, shows that they do indeed create novel viruses. This may not be intended as "gain of function" research, but it is nonetheless the creation of novel viruses, known to infect humans. This means that through errors or any other unexpected developments they may create a virus which has greater or at least different infection capabilities than any previously in existence. This is perilous in the extreme, since we know that viruses do sometimes escape from the lab.

All the evidence is that SARS-CoV-2 is a lab escape of a virus deliberately adapted from a bat virus, to infect humans, as part of the US government funded Eco Health Alliance research program, which DARPA rejected (because it involved dangerous gain of function research) and which Fauci et al. approved. That was intended to be attenuated into a bat-infecting, non-lethal, self-replicating "vaccine" virus to be sprayed on wild bats so that they would spread it to other wild bats, according to the completely cockamamie hypothesis that this would immunise the bats against subsequently harbouring the development of viruses which could infect humans. All the documents are at: https://www.projectveritas.com/news/military-documents-about-gain-of-function-contradict-fauci-testimony-under/ . I have not read it yet, but as best I understand it, former Eco Health Alliance staff member Andrew Huff's new book "The Truth About Wuhan" tells much the same story. See also https://alexwasburne.substack.com/p/a-synthetic-origin-of-sars-cov-2 for a further angle on the SARS-CoV-2 genome having characteristics which can only arise from a common gene splicing technique.

Now, due to the resulting pandemic and its disastrous response (the impact of which is now now reaching the scale of either of the two previous World Wars) there is a lot more funding for virologists all over the world to do even more such research, such as that in Boston involving mice. Alex Washburne https://alexwasburne.substack.com/p/a-synthetic-origin-of-sars-cov-2 warned that this proliferation of gain of function research is likely to lead to further pandemics. I immediately thought of Mickey Mouse, in Sorcerer's Apprentice segment of Walt Disney's astonishing 1940 animation "Fantasia". I found a frame, which is at the start of my article https://nutritionmatters.substack.com/p/corrupted-groupthunk-ineptitude-in in which Mickey is flattened by the throng of new monomaniacal brooms he has just created, due to his mistaken attempt to destroy the single one which was causing him so much grief.

The current situation is no fantasy. We cannot escape it. Mickey, wide-eyed, afraid, run to the ground, represents all of humanity. Millions of us who should be alive have been killed already.

Virologists are perhaps the most dangerous profession on the planet. As far as I can tell, most of them deny that some in their profession created the progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 and likewise seek to deflect inquiries into its origins by promoting the zoonotic transfer theory. As Alex Washburne points out, SARS arose from zoonotic transfer, and there is large body of detailed evidence which show exactly how this occurred. Despite extraordinary pressure to find such evidence for zoonotic transfer as the origin of SARS-CoV-2, no such concrete, detailed, evidence to support this hypothesis has been found.

The etiology of this totally man-made series of disasters - SARs-CoV-2 existing and escaping to infect billions of people, and the disastrous pandemic response in most countries - must be explained by some mixture of ineptitude and corruption (or perhaps outright deliberate intent to harm and kill - but I see no evidence of this). Mere ineptitude can only be a fraction of the explanation. Corruption must explain the majority of the fetid environment in which these things occurred, and in which governments, virologists and all other such professions continue to resist proper investigation of the origins, and support the continuation of the vitamin D and early-treatment denying, disastrous, pandemic response.

Thanks to the efforts of Project Veritas, we have a clear statement of the existence and nature of the pervasive corruption which drives all the processes which have lead to the current disasters - and, for instance, the avoidance of improving everyone's 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels to at least the 50 ng/mL level required for proper immune system function: https://vitamindstopscovid.info/00-evi/ .

The press release this expose prompted confirms the accusations. So this Project Veritas episode is highly significant in the scheme of things. Just as telling about the pervasive nature of the corruption is the fact that apart from Tucker Carlson's video https://theconservativetreehouse.com/blog/2023/01/26/tucker-carlson-discusses-pfizer-effort-to-recreate-modified-covid-viruses-under-term-directed-evolution/ and an apparently dismissive mention he refers to, which I have not seen, in Newsweek, the mainstream media has not to my knowledge reported any of this.

So how can we avoid the conclusion that governments and most mainstream media are in lock-step, supporting the corruption which has killed millions?

Expand full comment

Regarding the possible gain of function techniques Pfizer mentions in its press release regarding the Jordon Walker allegations https://www.pfizer.com/news/announcements/pfizer-responds-research-claims , in which they claimed their techniques are not gain of function, and are safe, I wrote, in my previous comment: "Pfizer admission that they create new viruses in the lab, based on genetic data downloaded from sequence repositories".

I wrote that recalling a website item I don't know recall, in which a technique was described which is probably benign. I recall that spike proteins were made in one lab in the USA and sent to another where they were used to create viruses. As best I understand this technique - and I am not a virologist - they would create a virus whose RNA did not contain any instructions for making a spike protein. They would then mix these in a solution with spike proteins which would presumably install themselves on the outside of the virus particle. If so, this technique may involve creating viruses with particular spike protein characteristics which are quite suitable for antibody binding assays or some other research, but which would be safe because the virus's own RNA would not contain instructions for making the spike protein. If such a virus infected a human cell, it would cause the cell to produce only the spikeless viruses, which would not be able to enter and infect other cells. Maybe the document I am thinking of concerned Pfizer, but I can't find it now.

Returning to the press release, the first technique was: " the original SARS-CoV-2 virus has been used to express the spike protein from new variants of concern". In principle this may not be gain of function, since they think they are making viruses which are functional replicas, in some important respects at least, of the real viruses they are researching. However, what if there is an error on their processes, so they create even small quantities of viruses with erroneously copied mRNA, which produce a new variation on the spike protein, or any other aspect of the whole virus? This may not be intended as gain of function, but it could generate novel viruses with infectious potential.

Technique 2 alludes to the possibility of such errors: "a full virus does not contain any known gain of function mutations, such virus may be engineered to enable the assessment of antiviral activity in cells." They are creating novel viruses with full infectious potential and enabling them to infect and so multiply in cell cultures presumably containing human or human-like cells. This could easily lead to novel, infectious, viruses. The fact they do it in a BSL3 lab indicates the dangerous nature of this technique - yet we know that no such lab arrangements are absolutely guaranteed not to allow escape. ("Escape" may mean infecting one of the lab staff - as well as whole viruses somehow getting into the wild.)

The description of technique 3 overlaps somewhat with that of technique 2: "in vitro resistance selection experiments are undertaken in cells incubated with SARS-CoV-2 and nirmatrelvir in our secure Biosafety level 3 (BSL3) laboratory to assess whether the main protease can mutate to yield resistant strains of the virus." While this is not constructing a virus and its RNA by splicing existing segments of mRNA, or creating a genome partly or wholly from codon data in an electronic file, it is still intended to select positively for viral mutations which make the virus less susceptible to the RNA copy fidelity interference mechanism of nirmatrelvir. (These names are a form of torture . . . .) They claim that such trials are required by regulators. Maybe they are, but Pfizer is still deliberately running a process which is intended to prompt the evolution of infectious viruses, with their full RNA, which are resistant to this particular antiviral drug.

Expand full comment

We can't.

Because that was a proven reality even without COVID. Just the history of Nunn-Lugar and DTRA gets you there.

Expand full comment

I had not heard of these, but a web search takes me to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nunn%E2%80%93Lugar_Cooperative_Threat_Reduction and the Defense Threat Reduction Agency: https://www.dtra.mil. I know next to nothing about these, or why they provide evidence for the existence of government and press corruption which may kill millions of people.

Expand full comment

Was something I covered when the manufactured furor over biological laboratories in Ukraine was all the rage.


Expand full comment

No I don't think this particular Pfizer brouhaha is going anywhere. It presupposes viruses are pathogenic and Covid is real. Such presuppositions play into the hands of the medical mafia.

Let's stop believing in this modern day idolatry: germ theory as well as the dark bogus theory of contagion.

This Substack should be mandatory reading for everyone in the medical freedom movement: https://secularheretic.substack.com/p/the-tower-of-babel-must-be-destroyed

Expand full comment

Arguing against the existence of viruses is about as productive as ice skating up hill.

Expand full comment

I am not suggesting we take this tack with the brainwashed pod people.

This is strictly for the more enlightened.

Again if this Substack is like ice skating up hill, the pharmaceutical companies are our saviors!


Expand full comment
Jan 30, 2023·edited Jan 30, 2023Author

And where does Ignaz Semmelweis fit in this "enlightened" theory of disease and infection?

Or, for that matter, John Snow?

Expand full comment

Who are you referring to?

Expand full comment

You have some research to do if you're going to be throwing shade on germ theory.

Expand full comment

Sam and Mark Bailey have done a great deal of research on germ theory. Their proposal to settle the virus debate through a detailed study seems reasonable. But the powers that be who propagate it will never allow such a thing. No dissent from the mainstream view is permitted. That should be a clue to you that something is rotten in Denmark. https://drsambailey.com/resources/settling-the-virus-debate/

Expand full comment

He likely believes his own BS and was hired as a useful idiot. Which he is, and then some! Lets b careful not to be fixed into the GoF narrative of fear for the “next bug”. No such animal did ever nor will exist. We been fooled, folks. Twice.

Next bug will be on a plate, not sneezing out past a faucidiaper.

Expand full comment

There's been a lot of commentary on JW's glib affect, but medical people talk casually about things that outsiders would deem horrific. It's their day to day reality, and they speak of it as such.

And after a few drinks, if you're pursuing sex, you'll communicate differently than if you were being interviewed by a reporter.

So, the response to that aspect is overblown.

[One way to do this, would be to infect bivalent-vaccinated animal models with current virus lineages, and observe which escape mutations emerge.]

Whether it's mathematical models or in vivo experiments in a controlled laboratory environment, I can't see how either, or a combination of the two, could possibly hope to replicate what might happen in the REAL world, with its uncontrolled setting and endless variables, and unpredictability of both people, circumstances, and events.

From that perspective, "science" appears to be a pretend game, a fantasy: even if you can narrow variables to one, what bearing does that have on REAL life?

What real predictive value does it offer?

"We made this happen in a lab, we ran this simulation on a computer, we created a model, so now we know that despite her staggering anti-charisma, Hillary Clinton will beat Donald Trump, and a kajilion people will die from COVID, despite its infinitesimal death rate."

Back up a claim with the magical spells such as "laboratory experiment" or "funfair model," and somehow we disengage our intellect.

Humans are endlessly fascinated by those who predict the future. "Here are my Top 10 predictions for 2023," and most people lean in for a listen.

But whether it's soothsayers or psychics, astrologers or prophets, Fed watchers or stockpickers, economists or scientists, they all seem on equal footing:

Different methods, same track record.


What we do have irrefutable evidence of is that expert predictions are often less inaccurate than those from laypeople. That's been tested a number of times and is well-established.

People crave certainty in times of trouble, but confidence- and even expertise- is not correlated with accuracy.

Even if the prediction is "backed by science."

Expand full comment

In theory, theory and reality are the same. In reality, theory and reality are different. (Attributed to Albert Einstein).

Whether a model has predictive value or not depends entirely on how well the model predictions reconcile to observation. That much is certain. Some models do have predictive value, although the COVID models do not number among them.

This does not mean that all science is intrinsically fantasy. It means that all good science must be disciplined by real world data. Even Einstein's theories on relativity had to be confirmed by solar observations.

That is a standard much modern "science" has abandoned, and we are living the results of this folly.

Expand full comment
Jan 29, 2023Liked by Peter Nayland Kust

Love that quote.

Didn't mean to suggest that all science is a fantasy, but the exceptions prove the rule.

Expand full comment

You're right, listening to conversations behind the curtain in an ER or near a nurses station...my mother was a nurse for 30y and indeed there are arrogant flipoant unkind people in every profession..we tend to put medical professionals up on a pedestal, but intelligence does not equal kindness. Some Dr's can be quite nasty https://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/2021-all-over-again.1472844/#post-23672051

Expand full comment
Jan 29, 2023Liked by Peter Nayland Kust

I wouldn't label it one hundred percent nasty,for many it's just a coping mechanism. "Gallows humor."

Expand full comment

Having worked in a few hazardous situations (voice and data network engineering inside a petrochemical plant can put you uncomfortably close to a number of substances with a disturbing capacity to detonate), as well as having worked in hospital emergency rooms, I can well attest to the gallows humor.

JW's glibness is not troubling in and of itself. It's the topic in which he is being glib that is cause for alarm. It's one thing to joke about feeding people into a woodchipper, but it's something else entirely to joke about one's experiences washing the blood and guts out of the gears.

Expand full comment

Glibness is one thing. Glibness about bad behavior is sociopathy.

More than a few bioethicists have raised cogent arguments against GoF experiments. Making new pathogens to study old pathogens is just not a wise idea. Yet Pfizer confirmed what JW said: they are making new pathogens to study old pathogens.

Which makes the glibness a cause for more than a little concern.

Expand full comment

This guy is not a high level decision maker, and if he had ethical standards, he'd be collecting a check elsewhere.

I'm baffled that we would expect someone in his position not to be glib. "Should" vs reality.

Expand full comment

He's a part of Pfizer and therefore a reflection of their culture.

Maybe others expect them not to be glib, but my concern is the seeming unethical behavior about which they are being glib.

Expand full comment

"He's [Dr. Jordon Walker] a part of Pfizer"

Has this been established? To this day, I'm still unsure if a) he worked for Pfizer and b) if so, in what specific role(s) and job title(s):


Yes, if he didn't, one might expect Pfizer to note that in any statements. But again, if he did, it's not at all clear he had Director-level responsibilities for mRNA tech.

Expand full comment

Yes, it has been established that he was a mid level manager at Pfizer.

Expand full comment

jeff childers succinctly unpacks the pfizer response to the PV valley girl video https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/triple-play-saturday-january-28-2023

Expand full comment