176 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
el gato malo's avatar

this is very much the case and very much the grift.

the only questions is whether regulators will, once more, accede.

of course, much of this immunity would be invalidated in the event that fraud were proven.

that could be an interesting pivot if the time comes that someone needs to be thrown under the bus.

Expand full comment
The BarefootHealer's avatar

Agreed El Gato, they know it's their only option to deflect when the bodies pile up. I'll go you one better though....have you noticed that Pfizer (and the Chinese vaccine producers apparently) have begun voluntarily recalling some of their medications (hypertension, etc) already on the market? Particularly the medications that have ACCEPTABLE levels of carcinogenic materials or heart related myocardial triggering substances....

Now if I was a certain company lawyer, and I was worried about a clients certain products ability to produce cancer/heart damage that was currently under EUA....I would DEFINITELY recommend voluntarily pulling any currently licenced product from market that could be liable for cancer causing substances. Especially when there is about to be an explosion of new and reactivated cancer patients.....

But thank goodness I'm just a barefoot healer, not a company lawyer.🤨😉

Expand full comment
LJ's avatar

I see them tossing Walensky first and some minor players. . I think she has major culpability, don’t get me wrong, but if she gets thrown under and others escape justice? Not ok.

Expand full comment
John Baillie's avatar

Do you know how much fraud litigation activity is getting under way? This link to a video featuring Dr David Martin looks like a promising strategy.

https://dailyexpose.uk/2022/03/23/david-martin-files-lawsuit-against-joe-biden/

Expand full comment
redchief's avatar

I seem to remember hearing that once they have the immunity, it basically requires the US AG to approve even getting to ball rolling to get it invalidated.

Expand full comment