Are the FDA and Pfizer-BioNTech scamming us with a license-in-name-only? And WHY do they want us to be vaccinated so badly???

This is a convoluted legal argument, but since it hinges on the potential loss of huge amounts of money, I think there is a good chance my guess is correct.

EUA or “authorized” vaccines and drugs are defined as experimental.  Experimental products require informed consent, and there are other restrictions on their use.  Most lawyers believe, as I do, that they cannot be legally mandated, because they require you to have the right to refuse.  It is written into the EUA statute.  The statute requires that there be no other approved, available alternative products, or else the EUA cannot be issued. However, in this case (Covid prevention)  both HCQ and IVM can prevent as well as treat Covid.  Had FDA acknowledged this fact, no EUAs could have been issued for Covid vaccines.

This has troubled the federal government.  And so it had the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel manufacture a legal opinion in late July that you could be forced to be vaccinated even while the vaccines were only authorized.  However, the OLC arguments were ridiculous and therefore ignored.

When that didn’t work, federal threats got heavy.  First it was going to be mandates “if you wanted to do business with the government.”  Then mandates for the military.  Then mandates for healthcare workers, schools, colleges, you name it. And federal workers.

But legally, all these mandate threats hinged on licensure, aka “approval.”  No one wanted to go to court defending a mandate under EUA.  And the feds probably promised all the employers, schools, states, etc. that a license would be issued before colleges and schools started.  

But there is a huge elephant in the room.  Under EUAs, the government pays for the product and the manufacturer has NO liability, unless you can prove willful misconduct AND the DHHS Secretary allows you to sue.  That has never happened.

But once the product (Pfizer’s vaccine, today) is licensed, the liability shield under EUA disappears.  Unless there has a been a secret agreement regarding liability after approval, which is probably not legal, Pfizer will be liable for all injuries sustained by the licensed vacine.  And Pfizer’s vaccine seems to be causing a record number of injuries and deaths, based on the VAERS data.

The FDA approval letter, issued today, was unusual.  It stated that current bottles of vaccine, which are not branded with the “Comirnaty” brand name, are still authorized, not approved.  Only newer bottles with “Comirnaty” labels will be approved, licensed product.

What that means is that people cannot be mandated to receive vaccine from the old bottles.  But if they do accept the non-brand vaccine, they cannot sue if injured.

If they receive the branded vaccine and are injured, they can be mandated to take it, but they can also sue the company for damages.

Here is what might be happening.  FDA issued a license, so everyone thinks the mandate is now in effect.  But if no “Comirnaty” labelled vaccine is being administered, just the old authorized vaccine, there is no licensed product being used, and there is no actual mandate.  And no ability to sue if injured.

If you have looked at any of the leaked contract documents between Pfizer and Israel or Albania, or heard about the contract signed in Brazil, you will probably agree with me that Pfizer would not be willing to accept liability for this product.

So:  if it does not say “Comirnaty” it cannot be mandated.  If it does say “Comirnaty,” it can be mandated.  

If it doesn’t say “Comirnaty” it is still experimental and you cannot be forced to take it, and if you do accept it and get injured, you are out of luck.  

Don’t sign a liability waiver for this product!  Don’t sign away your rights if you take it.

I am guessing Pfizer will continue to supply the old “authorized” vaccine to avoid liability… and that explains the convolution in FDA’s letter this morning. If I am correct, you won’t have to take it… Anyway, not till Pfizer gets rid of the liability problem…which could happen, as a bill has been introduced in Congress to solve Pfizer’s problem.  It’s the Vaccine Injury Modernization Compensation Act of 2021. Will our legislators throw us under the bus again and remove manufacturer liability for the few vaccines that still have it?  Be forewarned.

You can track the bill here.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
12 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Anonymous
Anonymous
1 year ago

"Unless there has a been a secret agreement regarding liability after approval, which is probably not legal, Pfizer will be liable for all injuries sustained by the licensed vacine."

No they will not. They are now protected under the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act (NCVIA), sames as the flu shot.

The only difference between this and the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program is that now law firms with practice litigating in the NCVIA program can file claims against the U.S. Government in "Vaccine Court."

But Pfizer still has immunity. The "approved" shots will now have a tax added that goes in the National Vaccine Injury Compensation program which funds the "Vaccine Court."

Meryl Nass, M.D.
Meryl Nass, M.D.
1 year ago

You are dead wrong. Only if the vaccine is on the pedi schedule or CDC-directed for pregnant women does the vaccine come under the NVICP. A bill was introduced in Congress to change this but has not passed, my friend.

Nina McDonald
Nina McDonald
1 year ago

How does this apply?(Not to US obviously–but is there anything in this that would pertain to us?)

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2021-002296_EN.html

The contracts which the Commission signed with Pfizer and Moderna have been leaked.

According to the De Brandt CV / SC law office, they are unlawful and therefore invalid. In particular, the producers are not obliged to guarantee the effectiveness of their vaccines. They do not have to assume liability for damage caused by vaccinations. The liability falls entirely to the Member States(1).

1. What legal opinions did the Commission obtain for the analysis of the contracts prior to their signature, and from whom did it obtain them?

2. How will the Commission ensure that the vaccines are effective and safe, given that the producers refuse to do so?

3. What legal measures will the Commission take in the light of this new legal opinion?

(1) Peter F. Mayer: ‘EU Commission contracts with Pfizer and Moderna leaked’, 20 April 2021

Anonymous
Anonymous
1 year ago

There also cannot be approved, licensed drugs that do the same thing as the EUA drug or vaccine, and of course, in this case both HCQ and IVM can prevent as well as treat Covid.
-this sentence in the first paragraph is incomplete / does not make sense.

Anonymous
Anonymous
1 year ago

Would you please clarify the brand name of this Pfizer-BNT product. It's spelled a couple of different ways in this one blog entry (Cominarty, Comirnaty), and yet another way further down the page (Cominaty). This might seem like nit-picking, but if the battle will be won or lost with the fine print, then it's important we at least get the name right.

Thanks.

rwe2156
rwe2156
1 year ago

Thank you for a very clear explanation of the deception perpetrated on the American people.

It is so disheartening to distrust our government and medical community.

Anonymous
Anonymous
1 year ago

Page two, Paragraph 2 of the FDA letter states that Comirnaty is approved under the EUA.

Matt T.
Matt T.
1 year ago

An awful lot of medics would query your in-passing claim that HCQ & IVM can "prevent as well as treat" covid!!

Matt T.
Matt T.
1 year ago

An awful lot of medics would query your in-passing claim that HCQ & IVM can "prevent as well as treat" covid!!

rodeo rosary on twitter
rodeo rosary on twitter
1 year ago

Talk about government overreach, conflicts of interests, malfeasance and torts far beyond my limited knowledge of Congressional ethics, protocols, powers and both medical, legislative an the United States criminal code feels abutreatlly illegal in and of it's self. Under the malevolent and malicious regeme of one treasonous speaker of the house ofnafarious Nancy should not be the least bit surprised nor despondent. In addition to the seditious Democrat party,aka MARXIST, islamist and politburo aka deep state fellow travelers. What happened to the consent of the governed, bill of rights and oath of office all government employees, and hell yes both upper and lower chambers work for us we the people and are now nor should ever be coronated. Damn it is so far beyond the time for a convention of the states

rodeo rosary on twitter
rodeo rosary on twitter
1 year ago

Impeach this congress

Scroll to Top