Fauci & Friends Threw a 100% Hypocritical, 100% Vaccinated Superspreader Event on April 6th

630 Washington Insiders Spread COVID-19 Among Themselves - WashPo HIPAA Hypocrisy

ICYMI, on April 6, 2022, over six hundred Washington, DC insiders - all vaccinated - threw a celebrity-studded, “A-List” grid-iron dinner, holding hands while singing “Auld Lang Syne”, and spread the COVID-19 virus around, placing those with compromised immune systems at risk, revealing the abject hypocrisy of any measures imposed on children and others for slowing the spread of COVID-19.

The Washington Post, which described the dinner as being shared by the “elite”, broke the news while protecting the privacy of journalists, as if HIPAA protections have not been suspended re: COVID-19 status, perhaps to stem the public’s growing distrust of elite journalists who helped the elite brow-beat hundreds of millions of the US public into submission to demands to accept a vaccine that does not prevent transmission and does not prevent COVID-19.

“The Washington Post has learned of about a half-dozen journalists as well as members of the White House and National Security Council staffs who said they tested positive after the event. Their names are being withheld because they have not announced their status publicly.”

In fact, the US HHS suspended actions on violations of HIPAA to the point where employees can report individual workers’ COVID-19 status to other employees, to the police, and to the press.

From the National Law Review (I recommend a full read of this article for nuanced interpretations of what HHS did and did suspened):

“The Office for Civil Rights (OCR), U.S. Department of Health and Humans Services (HHS) released a bulletin entitled, HIPAA Privacy and Novel Coronavirus, released February of 2020 (hereinbelow, bulletin), which presented guidelines for how HIPAA will be affected as OCR reacts to the public health emergency.

First change is as follows:

Under the Privacy Rule, covered entities may disclose, without a patient’s authorization, protected health information about the patient as necessary to treat the patient or to treat a different patient (emphasis added)

Secondly,

A covered entity may share protected health information with a patient’s family members, relatives, friends, or other persons identified by the patient as involved in the patient’s care. A covered entity also may share information about a patient as necessary to identify, locate, and notify family members, guardians, or anyone else responsible for the patient’s care, of the patient’s location, general condition, or death. This may include, where necessary to notify family members and others, the police, the press, or the public at large (emphasis added by JLW).

Finally, HHS issued, “Notification of Enforcement Discretion under HIPAA to Allow Uses and Disclosures of Protected Health Information by Business Associates for Public Health and Health;”

To facilitate uses and disclosures for public health and health oversight activities during this nationwide public health emergency, effective immediately, OCR will exercise its enforcement discretion and will not impose penalties against a business associate or covered entity under the Privacy Rule. (emphasis added)25

These guidelines completely dilute the “The Privacy Rule” of HIPAA, which had mandated and unified privacy regulations for patients’ PHI. Now HIPAA has been disregarded through the latest provision of the United States Code released on March 27,2020 42 U.S.C.§ 1320b-5 entitled, “Authority to Waive Requirements During National Emergencies,” which stated “[T]he patient’s right to request privacy restrictions; and the patients’ right to confidential communications,’ has been waived.” (emphasis added by NLR)

Alas, this pandemic does presently exist, and the ultimate question is, ‘How much PHI should be publicly shared?’ The HIPAA Privacy Rule as it stood required, “when protected health information is used or disclosed, only the information that is needed for the immediate use or disclosure should be made available by the covered entity,” this is known as the minimum necessary standard. (emphasis added)26 The minimum necessary standard does not apply to; 1) disclosures or requests by a health care provider for treatment purposes; 2) disclosures to the patient when requested by the patient; and 3) uses and disclosures made with the patient’s authorization.27 Further, the minimum necessary standard required covered entities to evaluate their practices and enhance protections as needed to “limit unnecessary or inappropriate access to protected health information. It is intended to reflect and be consistent with, not override, professional judgment and standards.” Therefore, HIPAA intended medical professionals to decide what information was necessary to disclose. Medical professionals have always been encouraged to have open communication when discussing a patient’s treatment, but information requested by public health officials must always be “the minimum necessary for a public health purpose.” HHS released the following about PHI; “Information is essential fuel for the engine of health care.  Physicians, medical professionals, hospitals and other clinical institutions generate, use and share it to provide good care to individuals, to evaluate the quality of care they are providing, and to assure they receive proper payment from health plans.” The focus was on the individual professional and their relationship to the individualized care of a single patient.”

The National Law Review article clearly describes geographic variation in the interpretation of HHS’s suspension, but cited as an example of a violation of HIPAA during COVID-19 the NY Times’ report of the first death from COVID-19 in New Jersey. I smell a retreating rat: dead people do not have individual rights, so that’s rather odd, but the report was made prior to the HHS suspension. Thousands and thousands of individual rights have been trampled by the press naming names and giving COVID-19 and vaccination status - and the privacy rights of millions have been violated re: COVID-19 testing and vaccination status for work and school and to attend certain public events, including Fauci & Friends’ gridiron dinner.

For the common person, the loss of privacy rights has meant job loss and the destruction of small businesses.

Yet the press is acting as though they need to protect the identity of their own.

Technically, masking is a medical procedure, and masking mandates also violate a patients’ right to informed consent. The systematic dismissal of clear evidence of harm of COVID-19 vaccines has prevented hundreds of millions from exercising their rights to free, prior and informed consent.

This summer, we’re running a workshop on Medical Rights and Informed Consent with a number of important guests contributing. It’s going to be powerfully informative. You can listen to Mary Holland of Children Health Defense and I discuss recent egregious violations of medical rights and informed consent this coming Friday at 5pm on The Pulse, including plans by the WHO to change the age of medical consent to 11 years of age, restricting parents’ rights to have say any over their childrens’ welfare and medical care.

Read the WashPo article as they cite Fauci’s lame referencing to COVID-19 protocols as an excuse as to why he attended the superspreader event. The Guardian reported that Fauci said:

“It’s going to be a person’s decision about the individual risk they’re going to take.

“I think the people who run functions, who run big dinners … like the White House Correspondents’ [Dinner] or, thinking back, the Gridiron Dinner, are going to have to make a determination looking at the CDC guidelines and seeing where the trends are.

“I mean, there are some places you go, not only is it required that you show proof of vaccination, but you have to have a negative test the day you go to a particular place.”

The gridiron dinner required proof of vaccination for attendance. About 10% of the attendees of the dinner so far have COVID-19 under CDC’s definition.

Some of the most prominent pro-vaccine mandate politicians were in attendance, including CDC’s Rochelle Walensky, who supports masking toddlers, NYC Mayor Adams, who has a policy, as Vinay Prasad reminds us, of masking only 2- to 4-year olds, and CA Rep. Adam Schiff, who, before COVID-19, in Feb 2019 called upon Facebook to stifle free speech in a letter. Schiff’s letter prompted me to write my own letter in the same month challenging Mark Zuckerberg to provide a forum that protects and honor first amendment rights and principles and to run two conferences on Freedom of Speech.

James Lyons-Weiler @lifebiomedguru

IPAK Letter to Mark Zuckerberg #care2 Let's get to 3,000

thepetitionsite.comSign Petition: IPAK Letter to Mark ZuckerbergFebruary 18, 2019 Mark Zuckerberg Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Facebook, Inc. 1 Hacker Way Menlo Park, CA 94025 (3346 signatures on petition)

I think history is going to utterly skewer these people; their legacy is now established: anyone with a brain can see their abject hypocrisy. The elite who forget they are public servants and believe they are “leaders” now have a stigma that will stick with them for a long, long time.