All this sounds really good Karl, but you are basing this on the premise that we live in a nation of laws, we live in a Nation of Men and the Law means what we want it to mean when we need it, got it?
Bingo.
The US is now every bit as corrupt as Afghanistan.
Karl has a real problem confusing what should be with what is....
“Let me point out a few other inconvenient facts. First, the companies and CDC likely knew this prior to the jabs going into widespread use, since their effectiveness is basically zero compared against unvaccinated controls within four to six months. The original EUA trials were about four months in duration, which means they, or the firms, had this data — and with a high degree of certainty either ignored indications of it or deliberately concealed it. That’s fraud and upon proof retroactively voids liability protection back to the first EUA-administered jab, including that provided by the PREP Act as willful misconduct is outside of PREP Act and other applicable legal liability protection.”
Now, given this excerpt from his blog, it seems to mean if a company knew its vaccine was ineffective after four months and hid this fact, they could be held financially responsible for any damages. Does anyone really think the government would allow Pfizer to be sued for damages caused by their vaccine?
And by the way, one of our local talk show hosts was hospitalized by the vaccine and had to pay for it out-of-pocket because it was an experimental treatment. Insurance was not required to cover his hospitalization.