Featured Image


(LifeSiteNews) – A law enacted months before the first reported outbreak of COVID-19 may allow U.S. government agencies to publish falsified data and statistics, including for national security and “law enforcement” purposes.

Previous articles discussed information which suggests that the COVID-19 pandemic may be a falsified pandemic national security “exercise,” “operational exercise,” law enforcement hoax, ruse, ploy, or something similar enacted by the federal government in coordination with international governments.

A method used to determine if the COVID-19 pandemic may possibly be a hoax or something similar was to look at U.S. federal law changes leading up to the reported outbreak of COVID-19 which the reasonable person may see as tip-offs for the government’s plans to falsify a pandemic or, more generally speaking, tip-offs that the government planned to falsify data, statistics, or other public information during a major national operation.

This method of looking at U.S. federal law changes leading up to COVID-19 to determine whether COVID-19 is some sort of a hoax is based on a 2004 U.S. federal law governing false information and hoaxes.

The federal law is partially provided as follows:

§ 1038. False information and hoaxes


(1) IN GENERAL.—Whoever engages in any conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information under circumstances where such information may reasonably be believed and where such information indicates that an activity has taken, is taking, or will take place that would constitute a violation of chapter 2, 10, 11B, 39, 40, 44, 111, or 113B of this title, section 236 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (42 U.S.C. 2284), or section 46502, the second sentence of section 46504, section 46505(b)(3) or (c), section 46506 if homicide or attempted homicide is involved, or section 60123(b) of title 49, shall— [be punished, etc.; punishments are omitted for ease of reading] …

(d) ACTIVITIES OF LAW ENFORCEMENT.—This section does not prohibit any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States, a State, or political subdivision of a State, or of an intelligence agency of the United States.’’. (118 STAT. 3765, 3766; 18 U.S. Code § 1038)

The law permits “any lawfully authorized investigative, protective, or intelligence activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States,” which, the law apparently implies, may include law enforcement agencies in the U.S. engaging in “conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information under circumstances where such information may reasonably be believed and where such information indicates that an activity has taken, is taking, or will take place.”

“Investigative, protective, or intelligence activity of a law enforcement agency” is broad language. Although most law enforcement entities attempt to keep their methods and advanced technologies secret, some types of hoaxes which might be used might be predictable based off of previous methods used by entities like the FBI, which were at one time reportedly used against America’s enemies but could conceivably be used again.

Perhaps government bureaus or departments might deliberately create conflict between groups by falsifying an event or falsifying an activity of a person or group of people and make sure the falsified information gets into local or national news. Then, they may surveil the falsely accused or other targeted persons or groups, try to provoke them to utter words that could be used against them, or try to lure impressionable targets into protests or other encounters in attempt to provoke the targeted persons to anger and violence, or verbal threats of violence.

Potential targets, which could be anyone who loses their temper in the wrong place at the wrong time after extended amounts of harassment, provocations, and the use of advanced technologies which would be illegal if they were publicly known, are then removed from society for many years. Such methods might be described as “protective” or “preventive prosecutions.” (Not all of the information in the previously cited source is endorsed). 

A falsified pandemic, though, would be a much different type of activity. For “a law enforcement agency of the United States” to “convey false or misleading information” specifically about a falsified pandemic (as opposed to falsifying different types of activities of a person or groups of persons), it may have been necessary for U.S. federal laws to be changed so that such a hoax pandemic might be “a lawfully authorized… activity,” as the aforementioned U.S. federal law specifies.

In other words, some law changes leading up to COVID-19 may suggest that the specific “lawfully authorized” false and misleading activity which “a law enforcement agency of the United States” was preparing for was a falsified pandemic (if COVID-19 is a falsified pandemic, of course).

Federal laws approved covert pandemic ‘exercises’ before COVID

Past articles already discussed many, but not all, of potentially significant federal law changes prior to COVID-19. The following summary may provide a clearer explanation of the significance of the previously discussed law changes.

One of the most significant was the U.S. government legalizing national security “exercises” for “emerging” threats in October of 2019. (133 STAT. 1123)

The National Exercise Program (NEP) is in part intended to “protect against, mitigate the effects of, respond to, and recover from threats and hazards that pose the greatest risk to the security of the Nation.” (Page 1, emphasis added) It is also used in part to “test and evaluate” U.S. government “plans and strategies.” (Page 2)

The NEP includes some exercises which may be classified (page 11), suggesting that there may be occurrences throughout the U.S. which may appear to be real but are actually covert or secret national security “exercises.” The NEP may be conducted by the Department of Homeland Security and other “appropriate Federal agencies” (page 2) which may be law enforcement agencies of the United States.

The FBI may be involved in carrying out the NEP, since U.S. federal law “legally charges” the FEMA Administrator “in coordination with the heads of departments and agencies [through the NSPM-4 process]” to carry out the National Exercise Program. (Page 5 and NSPM-4, 16882)

Thus, the October 2019 law change legalizing national security exercises for “emerging threats” apparently attempts to “lawfully authorize” presumably “protective…activity of a law enforcement agency of the United States” for specifically what the law refers to as “emerging threats” as opposed to other types of threats which the law already specified prior to the change.

Even more, though the COVID-19 pandemic is reportedly a coronavirus pandemic; coronaviruses are often referred to in U.S. federal government documents as “emerging threats” or “emerging infectious disease threats.”

So, the October 2019 change suggests the possibility, or even the high probability, that the U.S. government was preparing for a national security exercise for such an “emerging threat.” Soon after the law change, the COVID-19 pandemic, a pandemic of an “emerging threat,” reportedly began. The timing of the federal law followed by the reported beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic could merely be a coincidence, but the reasonable person could also say coincidence is unlikely.

Other significant changes to U.S. federal law which may provide support for the claim that COVID-19 may be a falsified pandemic was the changing of the definition of “biological product” to seemingly allow for mRNA COVID-19 products to be licensed as “vaccines,” and changing the definition of “covert agent” to include persons who reside and act in the United States to provide operational support for the intelligence community.

There was also the Obama-Biden administration’s executive order in 2016, only a few days before Democrats lost the Presidential Office to the Trump administration, which ordered the FBI and the Department of Justice to be leaders in “linking public health with law enforcement” and to “facilitate implementation and coordination of FBI programs to further the GHSA [Global Health Security Agenda], as well as provide technical expertise to measure and evaluate progress in countries the United States has made a commitment to assist.” The U.S. government linking public health with law enforcement is significant.

The same Obama-Biden executive order was then cited in the 2019 “United States Government Global Health Security Strategy” as one of the main documents which “guides the Federal Government in protecting the United States and its partners abroad from infectious disease threats by working with other nations, international organizations, and nongovernmental stakeholders.” (Page 5) This significant information suggests that the Obama-Biden administration’s executive order, with the directive for the FBI to link public health with law enforcement, was still being used as a major U.S. government public health guide only a few months before the reported outbreak of COVID-19.

Finally, U.S. federal government public health, national security, biodefense, and global health security strategies and plans make statements and suggestions which may imply that the government was preparing for a falsified pandemic as part of the U.S. national security’s National Exercise Program or something similar.

2019 law green-lit fake COVID statistics?

But the above-mentioned U.S. federal law on “false information and hoaxes” apparently implies lawfully authorized use of false or misleading information by law enforcement agencies.

Were any federal laws changed before COVID-19 which appear to attempt to “lawfully authorize” such false representations of information, data, or statistics for “law enforcement” purposes?  The answer may be found in a federal law on statistics, data, and information that was enacted on January 14, 2019, entitled the “Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018.”

Obviously, a falsified pandemic would require falsified statistics, data, and information to be propagated by the U.S. federal government; if the COVID-19 pandemic is a hoax or national security exercise, the government would probably have to falsify COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths.

Most know the significance of the statistics of COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, as well as the statistics of “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated,” and how the U.S. government and others have used those statistics in attempt to cause fear and intimidate or coerce Americans into responding the way the government and public health officials want. Thus, one might look at changes to U.S. laws governing statistics, data, and information.

Sure enough, the federal government made what appear to be major changes or additions to the laws governing statistics, which could be seen as an attempt to “lawfully authorize” the use of falsified statistics for a “law enforcement” or national security purpose.

The introductory description of the “Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018” provides significant information; the intention of the act is to “require Federal evaluation activities, improve Federal data management, and for other purposes.”

The new law made sure it was stated in federal law that U.S. government statistical agencies and other government data and information entities and their strategic plans are required to be “evaluated” by specifically federal activities. (132 STAT. 5530)

That might be a tip-off. Why codify in U.S. federal law, in 2019, that federal government statistical, data, and information entities’ plans and strategies are required to be evaluated by federal activities? This may be important because, as stated in other federal laws, the above-mentioned National Exercise Program includes “Federal activities” used to test and evaluate U.S. government plans and strategies. (Page 2

Changes to CDC ‘data policies’?

Again, a falsified pandemic would specifically require falsification of health statistics. The U.S. federal government’s “National Center for Health Statistics,” a part of the U.S. CDC, has within it the National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS). The NCVHS publishes the CDC’s COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, as well as many other statistics.

Prior to the reported outbreak of COVID-19, the most recent National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics Strategic Plan was published in September of 2017. One of the objectives of the Strategic Plan is the following:

Identify and define opportunities and threats from emerging trends that will enable or require change to health information and data policies, standards, or regulatory frameworks. (Emphasis added)

It is not immediately clear which “threats from emerging trends” will “require change to health information and data policies.” It is clear, though, that in 2019, only a few months before the reported outbreak of COVID-19, the U.S. federal government attempted to lawfully authorize that the U.S. national security National Exercise Program could be used for “emerging” threats.

Again, the National Exercise Program tests and evaluates the plans and strategies of U.S. government entities (page 2), which would presumably include the CDC’s U.S. National Center for Health Statistics.

Law change potentially allows false data for ‘law enforcement’

The same January 14, 2019 U.S. federal law on statistics, data, and information made a significant legal distinction in terminology. The law distinguishes between data and information that the federal government uses for “statistical purposes” and for “nonstatistical purposes.”

Simply look at the way the government defines “nonstatistical purpose” in the 2019 law:

NONSTATISTICAL PURPOSE.—The term ‘nonstatistical purpose’(A) means the use of data in identifiable form for any purpose that is not a statistical purpose, including any administrative, regulatory, law enforcement, adjudicatory, or other purpose that affects the rights, privileges, or benefits of a particular identifiable respondent; and (B) includes the disclosure under section 552 of title 5 of data that are acquired for exclusively statistical purposes under a pledge of confidentiality (132 STAT. 5545, emphasis added)

First, pay attention to the law allowing the use of data for “any purpose…includingany…law enforcement…purpose.” The National Exercise Program mentioned above may be one such law enforcement purpose. And the same January 14, 2019 law also defined “identifiable form” as follows:

IDENTIFIABLE FORM.—The term ‘identifiable form’ means any representation of information that permits the identity of the respondent to whom the information applies to be reasonably inferred by either direct or indirect means.

It is important to note that the law does not say “any true representation of information” or any “non-falsified representation” or something similar. Thus, when combined, the definition of “nonstatistical purpose” would apparently include “the use of data” and “any representation of information” “for any purpose” including “any…law enforcement…purpose.”

And, it is important to mention that other U.S. federal laws on false statements specifically mention the distinct “false representation” of information. So it is not as if lawmakers were unaware of the necessity of excluding false representing of information when lawfully authorizing “any representation of information” for nonstatistical, and law enforcement, purposes.

Now, again refer to the introduction of this article which discusses “false information and hoaxes” and “any lawfully authorized” “conduct with intent to convey false or misleading information [etc.].”

The 2019 law attempted to lawfully require statistical agencies’ strategies to be “evaluated.” Federal government entities’ plans and strategies may be evaluated by the National Exercise Program, which may be enacted or performed by law enforcement agencies of the United States.

The law on statistics also apparently lawfully authorizes the use of “any representation” (which would apparently include false representation) of information and/or the use of data for “any purpose that is not a statistical purpose, including any…law enforcement…purpose.”

Thus, the “Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018”, enacted in 2019, is yet another major change to U.S. law which may be an attempt by persons within the federal government to legally protect themselves and “lawfully authorize” the use of potentially false representations of information, including health data and/or statistics, for law enforcement purposes.

And it may serve as another possible tip-off that government officials may have been preparing for a major “hoax” or a national exercise, operational exercise, or some similar activity of law enforcement agencies of the United States which would require the false representation of information and/or data.

It may or may not be coincidence that such a significant law change was made a year before the COVID-19 pandemic reportedly began. And there is still more information suggesting that COVID-19 may be a falsified pandemic hoax, national (and international) exercise, or something similar, but it will not be discussed here.


Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.