White House Standoff

Statement on Current LitigationShow more

My name is Major Mike Webb. I am currently involved in litigation regarding what has been described as the vaccine mandates, and recent developments in that litigation have prompted a need for a public statement.

As reported by the Associated Press at the end of November, “Anthony Fauci, former chief White House medical adviser, is expected to testify before Congress early next year as part of Republicans’ yearslong investigation into the origins of COVID-19 and the U.S. response to the disease.” 

My most recent relation with the esteemed Dr. Fauci was that he had been named as the lead defendant in a federal case brought to the Eastern District of Virginia U.S. District Court on July 7, 2021, shortly after the celebration of Independence Day weekend, but litigation not covered by the press, even though it was the first litigation challenge against what have been described as the safe and effective vaccines that had been developed to address the COVID-19 pandemic as a part of what would become the American Rescue Plan that had been announced by the President on March 11, 2021, marking the first Anniversary of the WHO pandemic declaration, at which time, according to the President, American fatalities had exceeded 527,000, amounting to more American fatalities than both world wars, the conflict in Southeast Asia and the terror attacks on 9/11.

The reason why we had presented this request for information to the White House is because under Executive Order 12,958, the President is the ultimate original classification authority, a topic about which many may have become more familiar during debates about 15 boxes that had been retrieved from the former President’s residence in Mar-a-Lago, and the Office of Management & Budget, or OMB is the office that handles the FOIA requests for the White House to obtain that information.

On December 11, 2023, I was in receipt of an email from the attorneys representing the OMB, in a matter now before the Federal District Court in DC, presenting a deal to help to resolve some issues that have now drug on through three successive litigations, attempting, amongst other things, to obtain a response to a FOIA submitted to the White House about two weeks after the President’s announcement of a plan to put the nation on a war footing to end the pandemic and expressing a hope to return to normal by the celebration of Independence Day, a milestone that came and passed, in a month marked by reports of breakthrough infections occurring in Provincetown, affecting approximately a thousand fully vaccinated gay men, who had been apparently infected while attending indoor celebrations, and prompting a revision to masking guidance by officials at the CDC, just one month before the approval of the Pfizer product, on August 23, 2021.

On December 11th, attorneys for OMB had acknowledged for the first time in over two years that that office had been in receipt of a request for documents under the FOIA, which, under the law, requires production of responsive documents within just 20 days, or at least either a response to indicate that the agency requires more time, which never was issued, or a statement reciting the reasons, under one of nine exemptions, why the information that had been requested is exempted from disclosure, including if the information contains personal information, whether some statute specifically prohibits disclosure, whether the information is privileged because it reveals a deliberative process, whether the information pertains to law enforcement tactics, techniques and procedures, whether the information is classified, or whether the information is exempted for some other similar reason, which statement denying the request, in over two years never came, placing us in the rather tense standoff that we are now placed, just a month before the esteemed Dr. Fauci is scheduled to testify before the Republicans in Congress.

In this FOIA request, we had sought documents to determine whether certain standard epidemiological metrics, specifically infectious dose, or the amount of the SARS-CoV-2 virus would be required to cause an infection, and secondary attack rate, or the probability of being infected, based upon a raw data analysis derived from trace contacts, a process that the government admits had been quite lax in conducting. The reason why we had sought to determine whether or not these metrics were classified information, a determination that of itself is not considered classified information, is because if these metrics were, in fact classified, then, under Executive Order 12,958, the virus could only have originated in a laboratory and would have had to have been owned and or controlled by the government that had mandated the administering of what have been described as the safe and effective vaccines.

And, for as yet unarticulated reasons, this information has been delayed for over two years, while, as of December 9th, there have been a total of 6,568,418 hospitalizations and 1,159,864 deaths, while as of May 10th, 984,444,295 doses have been distributed and 676,728,782 doses have been administered, such that 81.4% of Americans have been administered at least one dose, including 95.0% of those age 65 or older, the age cohort who have the highest vaccine compliance status, and who represent the highest proportion of fatalities to the virus, making up over 90% of the deaths. So, based upon the reported numbers, there is a very good chance that you and or someone you know has been administered at least one dose, and, and, if these metrics are classified information, as now attorneys for OMB have only recently indicated, all of this had been caused not by a natural spillover of a virus, as many had believed, but rather by a virus that had been developed with the assistance of the government, and which had been used to promote the distribution of the reportedly safe and effective vaccines.

 The deal that had been presented was to drop all other claims in the complaint, in quid pro quo exchange for release of the information under the FOIA to which we had been entitled over two years ago, a deal that we have not accepted, but rather have used another litigation that had been commenced to subpoena the documents for review, in camera, by the Federal District Court in Alexandria, relieving that court from the burden imposed by deciding that unresolved matter, and we have requested that OMB simply release the information without waiting upon an order from the courts, a counteroffer that they have not been anxious to accept.

These recent developments may impact the work of the Republican investigation in Congress, and may affect whatever testimony that the esteemed Dr. Fauci may provide before that committee. But the goal of our action is simply an independent inquiry to determine the truth, for as the President had said on the first anniversary of the pandemic, we know how to defeat this virus: tell the truth.  

That concludes this statement, and we shall keep you apprised as further developments arise in this litigation. This briefing is unclassified.