A top Fed lawyer who oversaw my prosecution snaked his way to become the top pick for US Attorney in SDTX.
John Pearson presents as a "Republican" but under Biden, he transitioned to Leticia James.
His nomination to Cruz and Cornyn is imminent unless we do something about it.
I've spoken with people on the nomination committee as well as SDTX prosecutors who personally witnessed Pearsons's transition to radical left-wing sock puppet under Biden.
Now that he wants an appointment from President Trump, he pretends to be a staunch, conservative.
Pearson gloated to nomination committee that he signed my dismissal.
They were told Pearson had “nothing to do with” my case.
Impossible. He was involved, likely every step of the way. And he did nothing to stop it.
I outlined this in a letter I sent to Cruz/Cornyn’s staff.
Pearson is a long-time DOJ prosecutor. He got a major promotion by the Biden US Atty in Houston to become Executive AUSA (EUSA).
This alone is a red flag because the only "Republican" prosecutors promoted by radical Dems are apex stooges.
Among other things, the EUSA maintains legal/ethical standards for prosecutors and oversees high-profile, controversial prosecutions (like mine).
For DOJ to be weaponized, the EUSA position must be stooge-occupied.
Lead prosecutor, Tina Ansari, started investigating me in June 2023. Protocol is the EUSA signs off on investigations into doctors.
While Ansari voraciously indulged in prosecutorial corruption, Pearson did nothing.
From the start this was 1) a high-profile case 2) fraught with ethical violations (as outlined in my lawyers’ letter to Congress).
Pearson assiduously avoided the two things his position was meant to oversee. He operated in full stooge-mode while Ansari brought third-world corruption to Texas.
Ansari and her DEI dream team doubled down with each failure, but there was a palpable shift in the attitude of the "Republicans" in SDTX leadership.
Guess when? November 6th, 2024. Trump’s election.
Suddenly Pearson and the other “Republicans” started talking to my lawyers.
Over and over, they said it was Ansari and the Dems running the show!
Even as the prosecution spiraled out of control, they continued to do nothing.
Pearson even sat 20 ft away as Judge Hittner issued his infamous de facto gag order.
Probably because he signed off on it.
DOJ wanted me gagged because of "online bullying."
SDTX "Republicans" wanted me gagged because their complicity would hinder their political aspirations.
Judge was too much of a coward to sign the order.
Instead, he threatened to send me to jail if I continued to speak out.
After the Judge took away my ability to criticize the government or speak out in my own defense, I saw Pearson in the hallway by the elevators.
He and his buddies were laughing and smirking. That's when the thought first entered my mind - were these guys playing both sides?
In the weeks leading up to inauguration, the chatter from the SDTX "Republicans" was getting louder.
Seemed like they wanted it resolved. I thought a dismissal might finally be happening.
Then, I got an email on January 3rd. I thought, could this be it?!
Nope.
It was dirty, rotten plea deal!! I didn't even look at it before telling my lawyers to burn it.
An answer to that question outside those elevators started to materialize - Maybe I am getting played.
Leading up to the Trumps inauguration, outgoing Biden US Atty, Hamdani, makes Pearson Criminal Chief - big lateral move.
He goes from SDTX top advisor to operational manager of all prosecutors.
Including Tina Ansari.
Likely why she hasn't been fired yet.
In another thread I will detail how Pearson came to sign my dismissal.
If he had his way, I would have been forced to sign an agreement (see image) that barred me (and my family!) from criticizing TCH, Baylor, the FBI agents, and the DOJ attorneys (i.e. Pearson)!
It was the perfect deal for someone trying to look really good by signing my dismissal while also shutting me up forever to ensure I can never expose what really happened.
Good try buddy.
The only way for us to do anything is to make our voices known. All you have to do is spend five minutes and send an email to Cruz/Cornyn’s staff.
If you want to understand the DOJ's investigation into gender clinics' fraudulent billing practices, best place to start is this Kaiser Health News article.
It tells the story of Tim Chevalier - a lady who believes she's a man who needs laser hair removal for a "phalloplasty."
Article starts by explaining Chevalier's insurance, Anthem, denied coverage for laser hair removal because it was "cosmetic."
It goes on to explain that "insurance companies, sometimes question mental health claims more rigorously than those for physical illnesses."
The article includes Johanna Olson-Kennedy, one of the trans industry's apex predators.
She endorses the move from ICD-10 (currently in use) to ICD-11.
Her reason is that gender diagnoses would "no longer be a mental health condition, but sexual health one."
Since "sexual health" diagnosis codes are considered physical condition as opposed to a mental health condition, the idea is that insurance would more easily cover the hormones and surgery that are part of "gender affirming care."
In a 2023 podcast, AMA and Harvard "experts" lay out the medical billing scam used for abortion.
This is same exact scam used in gender clinics.
They were warning activists of the massive criminal consequences of False Claims Act.
This reveals their greatest vulnerability 🧵
Notice the intro how they make very specific claims - so specific you could say they are suspiciously specific.
Like they know exactly what is going on and running cover.
Especially once you realize both are leaders in elite left wing activist networks.
Things get even more suspicious when they describe the exact diagnosis codes used to submit fraudulent abortion claims.
And now we know this likely reflects systematic criminality since gender clinics relied on false codes like "endocrine abnormality" and "precocious puberty."
Dr. Guyatt is a Canadian physician who was inducted into the Canadian Medical Hall of Fame in 2016 and is the founder of evidenced based medicine (EBM).
He actually coined the term "evidenced based medicine" in 1991 (original article - image #2).
I did a deep dive into Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson's dissenting opinion.
It's even worse than I expected.
Follow this thread to see for yourself. 🧵
Their main argument is that the law discriminates on the basis of sex since there are certain medications that make boys look like boys, vice versa for girls.
But that's insane.
These treatments are meant for diagnosable pathologies in order to restore normal physiology.
It would be like saying a patient without cancer but "identifies as having cancer" is being discriminated against because a doctor is refusing to give them chemotherapy.
They have the audacity to claim the majority opinion "contorts logic" while they rely on anti-logic.