Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Eric Lander, who just resigned from his position as Director of Biden’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, reported holding between half a million ($500,000) and a million dollars ($1,000,000) of BioNTech stock.

– Biden’s FDA licensed German BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine (Comirnaty) on August 23, 2021.
– On the morning of August 24, 2021, it was reported that shares of BioNTech had increased in value by 9.6% subsequent to the FDA’s announcement.
– On August 25, 2021, Eric Lander filed the papers saying that he had divested his stock: “I have completed all of the divestitures indicated in the ethics agreement.” He had until September 2, 2021 to do so.

This certainly looks like a pump and dump stock scam, based upon this evidence.

As may be recalled, Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine was not approved-licensed by the FDA, apart from Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Rather, Germany’s BioNTech mRNA vaccine (Comirnaty), which is “legally distinct with certain differences” from the Pfizer vaccine, was approved, but with conditions. https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2021/08/25/fda-only-renewed-emergency-use-authorization-for-pfizer-approval-was-for-biontechs-comirnaty-with-years-of-additional-safety-studies-required-thru-2027

As the US NIH explained on September 13, 2021, the BioNTech mRNA vaccine, Comirnaty, was licensed on 8/23/2021 for use in individuals 16 and older, but none was to be produced for the US market for months, while they are/were getting rid of the Pfizer-BioNTech EUA stock (vials). The expiration dates for the Pfizer-BioNTech EUA stock (vials) were actually extended for several months in both the US and Canada.

The only plausible reasons for approval of Comirnaty (BioNTech) were
a) to pump up the stock market price of BioNTech, and
b) to lead people to falsely believe that the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine had been approved, while
c) still protecting Pfizer-BioNTech from legal action under the EUA, since the available Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine wasn’t approved
.

Eric Lander denies taking money from Jeffrey Epstein, but was mentioned in a 2003 article on Epstein, and was photographed meeting with him in 2012.

Eric Lander, PhD
DIRECTOR OF THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY AND SCIENCE ADVISOR TO THE PRESIDENT
Eric Lander, PhD, is a geneticist, molecular biologist, and mathematician who was a principal leader of the international Human Genome Project and currently serves as the first Science Advisor to be a member of the President’s Cabinet.
* Former President and Founding Director of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, one of the nation’s leading research institutes.
* Co-Chair of PCAST (2009-2017) during the Obama-Biden administration.
* Awarded numerous international prizes, including the MacArthur “Genius” Fellowship, the Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences, and the Albany Medical Center Prize in Medicine and Biological Research.
* Member of U.S. National Academies of Sciences and Medicine.
https://web.archive.org/web/20211027173630/https://www.whitehouse.gov/pcast/members/dr-eric-lander/

During Eric Lander’s nomination hearing, both Republican and Dem Senators said that “they were troubled and concerned about the allegations surrounding him”. US Senator Marsha Blackburn stated “that his connection to Epstein was ‘of tremendous concern.’ The other Republicans who votes against the nomination were Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas, Mike Lee of Utah, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, and Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming. Lander told lawmakers at the hearing that he was not aware of Epstein’s ‘sordid history’ when they met in 2012 (“Biden’s top scientist gets OK from Senate committee” May 20, 2021, Politico https://web.archive.org/web/20220206014600/https://www.politico.com/news/2021/05/20/biden-scientist-eric-lander-nomination-489798 )

By 2003, Epstein already had a substantial track record in science philanthropy. He had supported the research of many prominent scientists, including Stephen Hawking, Marvin Minsky, Eric Lander, George Church, and Nobel laureate physicists Gerard ’t Hooft, David Gross, and Frank Wilczek.” See: “Jeffrey Epstein Science News: Evolution at Harvard–How financier Jeffrey Epstein Accelerated the Course of Evolution at Harvard”, National Review Onlinehttps://web.archive.org/web/20130914153350/http://www.jeffreyepsteinscience.com/

Epstein’s Financial Support for Harvard and Harvard Faculty Harvard Office of Alumni Affairs and Development records reveal that Harvard courted Epstein as a potential donor as early as 1992….
Epstein first provided support for Harvard faculty members in 1998. Between 1998 and 2006, before there was any public notice of criminal charges against Epstein, Epstein provided 22 gifts to Harvard totaling $8,443,000…
the gifts ranged from $10,000 to $200,000, with the exception of a $6.5 million gift made in 2003 to help create Harvard’s Program in Evolutionary Dynamics
, led by Professor Martin Nowak, whom Harvard recruited from the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey. Epstein had previously provided support for Nowak’s work at the Institute….
Epstein typically used the visits to meet with professors from Harvard and other institutions to hear about their work. He generally gave Professor Nowak the names of the academics he wished to meet, and either he or Professor Nowak invited them to meet with Epstein at PED’s offices. These meeting most often took place on weekends, although some occurred during the week…
“ (Excerpts from: “REPORT CONCERNING JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN’S CONNECTIONS TO HARVARD UNIVERSITY”, Diane E. Lopez, Harvard University Vice President and General Counsel Ara B. Gershengorn, Harvard University Attorney Martin F. Murphy, Foley Hoag LLP May 2020 https://ogc.harvard.edu/files/ogc/files/report_concerning_jeffrey_e._epsteins_connections_to_harvard_university.pdf

According to a Reuters article, apparently based on his own Press Release: “Jeffrey Epstein  is a former member of the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations and the New York Academy of Science. He is actively involved in the Santa Fe Institute, the Theoretical Biology Initiative at the Institute for Advanced Study in  Princeton  and sits on the Mind, Brain and Behavior Advisory Committee at  Harvard University.” See: “Jeffrey Epstein, New York Science Philanthropist, Funds Pioneering Cancer Research at Mount Sinai, Reuters https://web.archive.org/web/20130914153350/http://www.jeffreyepsteinscience.com https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/jeffrey-epstein-new-york-philanthropist-funds-pioneering-cancer-metastasis-research-at-mount-sinai-202850511.html
https://web.archive.org/web/20130919204116/http://www.jeffreyepsteinscience.com/Press.html

Nowak thanked Epstein for financial support in his 2011 book, Supercooperators, on the evolution of altruism, and in at least six scientific papers published between 2009 and 2012 on topics including the spread of cancer through the body and the evolution of HIV…
Nowak also continued to facilitate meetings between Epstein and leading academics at Harvard and MIT. Pictures from one meeting in 2012, on an archived version of one of Epstein’s foundation websites, show him at Nowak’s office with a group including mathematician and geneticist Eric Lander, director of the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard
, and David Gergen of the Harvard Kennedy School, a CNN political analyst and former adviser to presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Clinton
.” See: “Jeffrey Epstein’s Links To Scientists Are Even More Extensive Than We Thought: Scientists took Epstein’s money or associated with the financier after he was jailed for soliciting an underage girl for prostitution. Some say they are sorry. Others didn’t comment.” By Peter Aldhous Last updated on August 27, 2019, at 10:02 a.m. ET Posted on August 26, 2019, at 11:05 p.m. ET, BuzzFeed News: https://web.archive.org/web/20190827045757/https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/peteraldhous/jeffrey-epstein-science-donations-apologies-statements
https://archive.ph/zIIjL

According to this document of archived photos, Lander denied taking money from Epstein in an email to The Tech (2019): https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6346698-2012-Meeting-Martin-Nowak-s-Office.html

Jeffrey Epstein had private office at Harvard after 2008 conviction” By Mary Kay Linge May 2, 2020 1:42pm Updated https://nypost.com/2020/05/02/jeffrey-epstein-had-office-at-harvard-after-2008-conviction/

A smaller percentage (6%) were allgedly yelled at by Lander, than the percentage that the BioNTech stock was pumped (9%) by BioNTech Comirnaty approval: “President Biden’s top science adviser Dr. Eric Lander resigns over treatment of staff“ By Kenneth Garger February 7, 2022 9:59pm Updated “Of the roughly 140 staffers in the office, 14 current and former employees said they had experienced a toxic environment working under Lander. Nine of those staffers claimed Lander would yell at and humiliate employees in front of their peers.”https://nypost.com/2022/02/07/white-house-top-scientist-resigns-over-treatment-of-staff/
Biden’s top science adviser to keep job despite bullying staffers
By Emily Crane and Samuel Chamberlain February 7, 2022 2:56pm Updated
https://nypost.com/2022/02/07/bidens-top-science-advisor-to-keep-job-despite-bullying-staffers

As the US NIH explained on September 13, 2021, the BioNTech vaccine, Comirnaty, was licensed on 8/23/2021 for use in individuals 16 and older, but none will be produced for the US market for months, while they get rid of the EUA stock: “At that time, the FDA published a BLA package insert that included the approved new COVID-19 vaccine tradename COMIRNATY and listed 2 new NDCs (0069-1000-03, 0069-1000-02) and images of labels with the new tradename. At present, Pfizer does not plan to produce any product with these new NDCs and labels over the next few months while EUA authorized product is still available and being made available for U.S. distribution. As such, the CDC, AMA, and drug compendia may not publish these new codes until Pfizer has determined when the product will be produced with the BLA labels”. https://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/dailymed-announcements-details.cfm?date=2021-09-13 http://web.archive.org/web/20210928041940/https://dailymed.nlm.nih.gov/dailymed/dailymed-announcements-details.cfm?date=2021-09-13

They have so much old EUA Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine stock (vials), that they extended the expiration date by three months in both the US and Canada. Thus, they could be distributing the unlicensed EUA product as late as May of 2022, since expiration dates range from August to February 2022.

NB: The reader may need to look at context to distinguish between stock, as in stock market stock, and stock, as in vials of vaccine. Both are involved in this story.

Excerpt from
Stock Market News for Aug 24, 2021
Zacks Equity Research Zacks
PUBLISHED
AUG 24, 2021 9:41AM: “
On Aug 23, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted first approval to the COVID-19 vaccine developed by Pfizer Inc. PFE and BioNTech SE BNTX for people age 16 and above. The regulator also granted emergency-use authorization for those between 12 and 15 and for immunocompromised individuals who qualify for a third shot. Consequently, shares of Pfizer and BioNtech climbed 2.5% and 9.6%, respectively”. http://web.archive.org/web/20210825180222/https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/stock-market-news-for-aug-24-2021-2021-08-24

August 25 2021 divestiture:

Link: https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presiden.nsf/0F5804D5602396ED8525873F002C2356/$FILE/Lander%20EA%20Certification%201%20of%201.pdf

Replace Montz with Lander to find the documents: https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presiden.nsf/201%20Request?OpenForm&Filer=Montz

Links are here:
Lander, Eric S Office of Science and Technology Policy, Director * https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/presiden.nsf/CEA15B79E467B470852586830032D92A/$FILE/Lander,%20Eric%20%20AMENDED%20finalEA.pdf
* https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/presiden.nsf/CEA15B79E467B470852586830032D92A/$FILE/ATTEEM20.pdf
* https://extapps2.oge.gov/201/Presiden.nsf/0F5804D5602396ED8525873F002C2356/$FILE/Lander%20EA%20Certification%201%20of%201.pdf

BioNTech Stock Jumped 9.6% in Value After its Covid Vaccine (Comirnaty) was Licensed by the US FDA; Biden Science Advisor, Eric Lander, Divested His BioNTech Stock Right After Approval; Pump and Dump?

So, are the illegal migrants crossing the southern border being used as medical guinea pigs?

Carlos Slim https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broad_Institute

Eric Lander (right) at a news conference in Mexico City, next to Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim”, on Jan. 19, 2010. Photo by Henry Romero/REUTERS
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/senate-confirms-geneticist-eric-lander-as-biden-science-adviser

Shady “Business” Practices of the NIH and the Human Genome Projects May Have Ties to Jeffrey Epstein | With Francis Collins, Anthony Fauci, Eric Lander, Bill Gates
Multiple health/science organizations have ties with Jeffrey Epstein. The same organizations trying to enforce mandatory vaccines
”. https://www.expandingawarenessrelations.com/shady-business-practices-of-the-nih-and-the-human-genome-projects-may-have-ties-to-jeffrey-epstein-with-francis-collins-anthony-fauci-eric-lander-bill-gates/

On-the-Record Press Call by Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Dr. Eric Lander and NSC Director for Global Health Security and Biodefense Dr. Beth Cameron on American Pandemic Preparedness | The White House
SEPTEMBER 03, 2021
PRESS BRIEFINGS
Via Teleconference
11:31 A.M. EDT
Excerpts: MS. RAYMOND:  Good morning, everyone.  And thank you so much, Brad.  To all our participants, thank you for joining us for this embargoed briefing today.

We will be providing an overview of the American Pandemic Preparedness Plan, also entitled “Transforming our Capabilities,” which will advance the President’s commitment to building back better for the next biological threat.

We’ll start with some comments from our speakers.  Today, we have the President’s Science Advisor and Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, as well as a member of the President’s Cabinet, Dr. Eric Lander; as well as the Special Assistant to the President and National Security Council Senior Director for Global Health Security and Biodefense, Dr. Beth Cameron.

After they both give initial remarks, we’ll open it up for question-and-answer.

As a reminder, this briefing is on the record, but the call contents and the materials that we shared prior to the call are embargoed until 3:00 p.m. this afternoon.  

And with that, I’ll turn it over to our speakers, starting with Dr. Lander.

DR. LANDER:  Well, thank you very much, and good morning to everybody and thank you for joining the call.  So, my name is Eric Lander.  I’m the President’s Science Advisor and I’m the Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

And today, we’re releasing a plan for transforming U.S. capabilities to prepare for and respond rapidly and effectively to future pandemics and other high-consequence biological threats.

The COVID-19 pandemic arrived at a time when science and technology capabilities were changing very rapidly.  Recent scientific advances made it possible to respond much more rapidly than ever before.  Had COVID-19 emerged five years ago, we would have had far fewer tools to do this.

But, five years from now, we need to have much better capabilities.  We need to have better capabilities because, well, even with the knowledge and the tools that dramatically improved our ability to respond, COVID-19 has still been devastating for the nation and the world.

As of today, COVID-19 has killed at least 642,000 Americans and many, many millions of people around the world, and many recovered patients are living with long-term effects of the disease.

It’s also caused economic damage to the United States that’s been estimated in the range of $16 trillion in lost economic output, direct spending, mortality, and morbidity.  And the societal impact has been borne disproportionately by frontline and vulnerable populations, especially people of color.

We need better capabilities also because there is a reasonable likelihood that another serious pandemic that could be worse than COVID-19 will occur soon, possibly even within the next decade.  And the next pandemic will very likely be substantially different than COVID-19.  So, we must be prepared to deal with any type of viral threat.

Now, because of ongoing progress in science and technology and innovation, we can have better capabilities for medicine, for situational awareness, for public health, and for lots more.  For the first time in the nation’s history, we have the opportunity, due to these kinds of advances in science and technology, not just to refill stockpiles, but transform our capabilities.  But we really need to start preparing now.

We’ve got to seize the unique opportunity to transform our scientific capabilities so we’re prepared for the increasing frequency of biological threats on the horizon.  Investing to avert or mitigate the huge toll of future pandemics or other biological threats is both an economic and moral imperative.

So, five years from now, we need to be in a far stronger position to stop infectious diseases before they become global pandemics like COVID-19.

Now, there’s a lot we can do to transform our scientific capabilities for vaccine, therapeutic, diagnostic development; for early warning; for public health systems.

Importantly, these kinds of advances will not only strengthen our systems for dealing with future biological threats, they will be valuable for everyday public health and medical care for all Americans and for the world.  This will help everyday public health for everyone.

Now, all these efforts, I’ve got to say, must, from the very outset, include a strong emphasis on reducing inequities and increasing access for all Americans to the resulting advances, because as we’ve seen from this pandemic, having the burden largely borne by vulnerable populations is unacceptable.

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed fundamental issues with America’s public heath that go far beyond pandemic preparedness.

The issues include the need to increase overall public health funding, strengthen the public health workforce, eliminate barriers to access, improve data systems, address disparities, improve communications, and improve coordination across federal, state, local, and Tribal authorities

The plan that’s being released today addresses needs directly related to pandemic preparedness, but I just want to emphasize there are broader public health issues that’ll need to be addressed separately and in a coordinated fashion.

 So, today, the White House is releasing a document entitled “American Pandemic Preparedness: Transforming our Capabilities,” and the document describes goals under five pillars to protect the U.S. against biological threats.

Pillar number one is: transforming our medical defenses, including improving vaccine, therapeutics, and diagnostics.

Pillar number two: ensuring situational awareness about infectious disease threats, for both early warning and real-time monitoring.

Pillar three: strengthening public health systems, both in the U.S. and internationally, to be able to respond to emergencies, with a particular focus on protecting the most vulnerable communities.

Pillar four: building core capabilities, including personal protective equipment, stockpiles and supply chains, biosafety and biosecurity, and regulatory improvement.

And pillar five: managing the mission, with the seriousness of purpose, commitment, and accountability of an Apollo Program.

So, while the government — the U.S. government has made and must continue to make investments in basic science research, this plan includes the full set of capabilities needed to transform our ability to be prepared for any family of virus.  The cost is $65.3 billion over 7 to 10 years.  

And it’s vital that we start with an initial outlay of $15- to $20 billion to jumpstart these efforts.  And, accordingly, we’re proposing that the current budget reconciliation provides at least $15 billion towards this goal.

The administration will work through other appropriations to support the remainder of that $65.3 billion budget, above baseline, needed to execute the plan in full.

And over the coming months, the White House will be developing the President’s budget, which will provide resources to ensure that the United States is prepared for the next pandemic.

So, let me just say, these critical investments will build on and complement the broader U.S. government biomedical and health research portfolio. 

We strongly believe that this mission is so important that it needs to be managed with the seriousness of purpose, commitment, and accountability of, well, President Kennedy’s Apollo Program, overseen by a dedicated program office.

So we’re proposing there be a centralized “Mission Control” acting as a single, unified program management unit that draws on expertise from multiple agencies at HHS, including NIH, CDC, BARDA, FDA, and CMS, as well as other agencies and departments such as DOD, DOE, VA.  You know, for example, the Countermeasures Acceleration Group — formerly “Operation Warp Speed” — is led by a single joint program management unit.

And Mission Control should have the responsibility and the authority to develop and update plans with objective and transparent milestones; regularly assess and publicly report on mission progress; shift funding to ensure that goals are achieved; coordinate linkages across performers in government — academia, philanthropy, and industry; and conduct periodic exercises to evaluate our actual national pandemic preparedness by deploying these capabilities, including through testing rapid product development.  And it should seek input of outside experts and have working groups that allow it to get the best possible advice.

So, like any ambitious endeavor — whether it’s going to the Moon with the Apollo mission or cracking the human DNA with the Human Genome Project — an effort like this will take serious, sustained commitment and accountability.

And like those kinds of efforts, it is likely to yield benefits far beyond the initial mission — in this case, advances in human health and providing tools that can help overcome health inequities and ensure equitable access to innovative products for all Americans. 

So, we at the Office of Science and Technology have been working hard on the plan in very close partnership with the National Security Council, and particularly the National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan. 

 And so I’m now pleased to pass this over to my colleague from the NSC, Dr. Beth Cameron.  And thanks for all you have been doing on this, Beth.  Over to you…
https://archive.ph/ORZSz

US Senator Lee opposition to Lander, June 7, 2021:
CONFIRMATION OF ERIC S. LANDER

Mr. LEE. Madam President, per an agreement that was reached with my colleagues, Dr. Eric Lander, the President’s nominee for the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy was not subject to a rollcall vote on the Senate floor, but was instead considered under a voice vote.

I would like to be on the record that I am opposed to the nomination of Dr. Lander. As OSTP Director, Dr. Lander will advise the President and the administration on all the scientific, technological, and engineering aspects of Federal policy, including Federal research. Dr. Lander should receive even further scrutiny for this position after President Biden has chosen to elevate the Director of the OSTP to a Cabinet-level position. This nomination comes at a critical time as the Senate seeks to pass the Endless Frontier Act, which would increase Federal scientific research and development funding—imprudently in my opinion—by over $100 billion. As I have weighed the nomination of Dr. Lander both in the Senate Commerce Committee and in the weeks leading up to his consideration by the full Senate, Dr. Lander has failed to provide the guarantees that he supports appropriate guardrails around federally funded research, including protections for unborn life through the prohibition of experimenting with aborted fetal tissue, embryonic stem cells, or live embryos. With the consideration of the Endless Frontier Act and the greater role that OSTP will take in directing the direction of our Federal research and development, I am very concerned that Dr. Lander has not assured me that he will put in place protections for the unborn or institute appropriate ethical guard-rails to protect such life. For these reasons, I opposed the nomination of Dr. Lander”. https://www.congress.gov/117/crec/2021/06/07/167/98/CREC-2021-06-07-pt1-PgS3956-2.pdf

Epstein’s Financial Support for Harvard and Harvard Faculty Harvard Office of Alumni Affairs and Development records reveal that Harvard courted Epstein as a potential donor as early as 1992. Beginning in 1992, some of the University’s most senior leaders met with Epstein to seek his support. Epstein first provided support for Harvard faculty members in 1998. Between 1998 and 2006, before there was any public notice of criminal charges against Epstein, Epstein provided 22 gifts to Harvard totaling $8,443,000, nearly all to support the research aims of Harvard faculty, including faculty in the FAS Departments of Psychology, Eco-nomics, Art and Art History, and the Harvard Graduate School of Education. The gifts ranged from $10,000 to $200,000, with the exception of a $6.5 million gift made in 2003 to help create Harvard’s Program in Evolutionary Dynamics, led by Professor Martin Nowak, whom Harvard recruited from the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey. Epstein had previously provided support for Nowak’s work at the Institute. The Harvard Crimson and other sources re-ported at the time that Epstein’s $6.5 million gift was part of a $30M pledge from Epstein. We found no Harvard record of such a pledge. Epstein’s Admission as a Visiting Fellow Visiting Fellow Status at Harvard On September 1, 2005, before his arrest on charges related to soliciting minors for prostitution, Epstein submitted an application to be admitted as a Visiting Fellow to Harvard’s Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Epstein typically used the visits to meet with professors from Harvard and other institutions to hear about their work. He generally gave Professor Nowak the names of the academics he wished to meet, and either he or Professor Nowak invited them to meet with Epstein at PED’s offices. These meeting most often took place on weekends, although some occurred during the week. “REPORT CONCERNING JEFFREY E. EPSTEIN’S CONNECTIONS TO HARVARD UNIVERSITY”: Diane E. Lopez, Harvard University Vice President and General Counsel Ara B. Gershengorn, Harvard University Attorney Martin F. Murphy, Foley Hoag LLP May 2020 https://ogc.harvard.edu/files/ogc/files/report_concerning_jeffrey_e._epsteins_connections_to_harvard_university.pdf

An intriguing thought (bioweapons are “arms”):
Jun 24 – Evidence JEFFREY EPSTEIN was a GUN RUNNER/ARMS DEALER
JoJoVelli420, Following the money leads to some dark places.
A primary source of information on Epstein’s shadowy finances, one who participates in both the Netflix doc and the “Merchant of death” broadcast, is Steven Hoffenberg. I’d never heard of him before, but his name is important to know. Hoffenberg was the CEO of Towers Financial, and as such presided over one of the largest Ponzi schemes in recent history….

https://web.archive.org/web/20210626011721/https://boxden.com/showthread.php?t=2891151 The above is not completely accurate, but provides leads-ideas. For instance, Khashoggi’s yacht was sold first to the Sultan of Brunei, who later sold it to Trump. It wasn’t sold directly to Trump, as the article alleges: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_5KR And, we recall no evidence re Trump and underage girls, only accusation(s).