Pfizer defence: It isn’t fraud if the government is in on it

Posted on by

I guess if they can change the definition of a safe & effective vaccine to include an experimental gene therapy that killed all the animals in the trials, then they can change the definition of fraud to mean anything that the government wants.

 

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

One Reply to “Pfizer defence: It isn’t fraud if the government is in on it”

  1. If the gov knew about the deaths and injuries (quite a few trial mammals died a few months post-vaxx), then the gov is liable for such.

    Pfizer had a warning on the label but the ‘injector’ staff was recruited and paid by the gov and they didn’t disclose the warning. I think the gov would be liable for a seasoned lawsuit.

    Will be fascinating to follow this case.