Yes. For a LOT of detail see this post (skim and skip to the end) about how laws have been passed so that under EUA the normal vaccine rules/laws don't apply. So, depressingly, it appears to me that Jackson/Barne's lawsuit might be dismissed at some point. :
And, here's some links to the Wash Post and Malone talking about how DARPA
"seeded the ground for a rapid coronavirus cure ... to find a way to produce antibodies for any virus in the world within 60 days of collecting a blood sample from a survivor";
the mRNAs are being pushed specifically to shave off the time needed to properly study a new vax or drug; time being money. I think there was an FDA consensus that allowed them to go ahead and approve the mouse-tested bivalent, and they intend this platform for the entire vax schedule. No more maintaining a warm production line. No more years long trials. I expect to never see an official study of the full years long outcomes of the current live experiment. The CDC aren't even studying the data collected up to this point.
If they can get away with it, Unissant will be able to do the same thing. Pretty sure the lack of standing thing applied to the Brook Jackson case because of DoD and the CHD case on bait and switch because of FDA. The courts are trying to use a catch-22 to play Pontius Pilate.
Yes, there is little doubt that a lawsuit wouldn't succeed, but that's essentially true for all the fundamentally important lawsuits that could unwind the whole vaccination program. What would be important would be the information discovered, the responses, and the optics.
Pfizer's claim is that they aren't responsible for anything because they were acting as an arm of the DoD, if I understand correctly.
Yes. For a LOT of detail see this post (skim and skip to the end) about how laws have been passed so that under EUA the normal vaccine rules/laws don't apply. So, depressingly, it appears to me that Jackson/Barne's lawsuit might be dismissed at some point. :
https://bailiwicknews.substack.com/p/american-domestic-bioterrorism-program?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android
And, here's some links to the Wash Post and Malone talking about how DARPA
"seeded the ground for a rapid coronavirus cure ... to find a way to produce antibodies for any virus in the world within 60 days of collecting a blood sample from a survivor";
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/how-a-secretive-pentagon-agency-seeded-the-ground-for-a-rapid-coronavirus-cure/2020/07/30/ad1853c4-c778-11ea-a9d3-74640f25b953_story.html
https://dhvi.duke.edu/news/darpa-names-researchers-working-halt-outbreaks-60-days-or-less and
mRNA Vaccines: The CIA and National Defense -- Why mRNA vaccines? Why is this being pushed?" https://rwmalonemd.substack.com/p/mrna-vaccines-the-cia-and-national
the mRNAs are being pushed specifically to shave off the time needed to properly study a new vax or drug; time being money. I think there was an FDA consensus that allowed them to go ahead and approve the mouse-tested bivalent, and they intend this platform for the entire vax schedule. No more maintaining a warm production line. No more years long trials. I expect to never see an official study of the full years long outcomes of the current live experiment. The CDC aren't even studying the data collected up to this point.
If they can get away with it, Unissant will be able to do the same thing. Pretty sure the lack of standing thing applied to the Brook Jackson case because of DoD and the CHD case on bait and switch because of FDA. The courts are trying to use a catch-22 to play Pontius Pilate.
Yes, there is little doubt that a lawsuit wouldn't succeed, but that's essentially true for all the fundamentally important lawsuits that could unwind the whole vaccination program. What would be important would be the information discovered, the responses, and the optics.