09/08/2021 / By Ethan Huff
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) pulled a fast one on Americans with its supposed “approval” of Pfizer’s Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccine.”
As it turns out, the Pfizer jab currently in use was not actually approved by the FDA, which Liberty Counsel says pulled a “bait and switch.”
The well-respected law firm released a statement recently explaining that in order to help push draconian vaccine mandates, the FDA essentially lied to the American public about the approval, which never technically happened.
According to Liberty Counsel, all existing Pfizer vials remain under the federal government’s “emergency use authorization” (EUA), which means that people have the “option to accept or refuse” it.
The third “booster” shot being pushed by Pfizer is also identical to the first two, meaning that it, too, is only authorized for emergency use and does not hold full approval.
“BioNTech received FDA approval for people ages 16 and above under the name Comirnaty, but there are no Comirnaty doses available in the United States,” Liberty Counsel further explains.
“In other words, there is currently NO FDA approved COVID-19 injection available anywhere in the United States. Every COVID shot in America remains under the EUA law and thus people have the ‘option to accept or refuse’ them.”
Truth be told, there will never be a scenario in which one of Donald “father of the vaccine” Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed” injections can ever be forced on anyone against their will.
This is because once a covid shot does get approved by the FDA, federal and state laws still protect the right of people to reject them for sincerely held religious beliefs or conscientious objections.
There are also medical exemptions to vaccines that allow the immunocompromised to forego them in order to protect themselves against further harm or potential death.
On August 23, the FDA issued two separate letters for two legally distinct injections: one offered by Pfizer and the other offered by BioNTech. The current Pfizer-BioNTech injection being widely administered differs from these two other shots.
“The first letter is regarding FDA’s biologics license application approval for the Pfizer Inc. / BioNTech COVID-19 injection which has been named Comirnaty,” Liberty Counsel explains.
“Yet Pfizer has not started manufacturing or labeling this drug for U.S. distribution, so it is not even available in the U.S. It is unclear whether or not it is protected by a liability shield, but web-based U.S. government communication indicates that the same program that provides compensation for COVID vaccine-related injuries will apply Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program (CICP) rather than the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program.”
As of this writing, there is not believed to be any compensation paid via the CICP to anyone who has been injured by any of the Chinese Virus injections currently being administered under EUA.
“The Pfizer injection, on the other hand, is still considered experimental under U.S. law,” Liberty Counsel further notes. “There is a legal difference between products approved under authorization of emergency use (EUA) compared with those the FDA has fully licensed.”
In essence, nothing currently being peddled by the government or the mainstream media as a “covid vaccine” is approved by the FDA, nor can it be mandated under any alleged “law.”
Covid shots constitute experimental gene therapy drugs that every individual has the right to just say no to, should they choose to do so. Just remember: my body, my choice.
Interested in learning more about the dangers and ineffectiveness of Chinese Virus injections? You can do so at ChemicalViolence.com.
Sources for this article include:
Tagged Under: approval, COVID, deception, FDA, law firm, Liberty Counsel, lied, pandemic, Pfizer, Plandemic, propaganda, spike protein, vaccine, vaccine wars, vaccines
COPYRIGHT © 2017 FACTCHECK.NEWS
All content posted on this site is protected under Free Speech. FactCheck.news is not responsible for content written by contributing authors. The information on this site is provided for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended as a substitute for professional advice of any kind. FactCheck.news assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. All trademarks, registered trademarks and service marks mentioned on this site are the property of their respective owners.