When it comes to redactions, the percentage is what should be horrifying, rather than the quantity of words and pages. If 100% of a report has been redacted, why should anyone trust what those particular people say at all?
The amusing (and frightening) thing here is that liberal normies will forget they were all "#TeamPfizer!" and slide right into "This was the deadliest Big Pharma cover-up in history and Trump must be impeached for Operation Warp Speed!" without a flicker of hesitation or self-reflection.
Pfizer pays specific politicians X dollars. Those politicians then vote for Pfizer to be paid through government money, not their own, 10X dollars. Everyone profits... Except the voting public.
Did he? Guess it didn't offset his costs since his net worth dropped precipitously after being president. Imagine whining about a guy who was president for a year during this bullshit and not the guy who actually fucked us.
u/ParadigmShift2070 was most likely lying. I've never heard of Pfizer paying Trump before, and that type of clear-cut bribery would definitely be the kind of things that democrats would be smearing all over the place to "prove" Trump's corruption if it were true.
He didn't respond to my simple request for information about "how much" and "when". Something that he would definitely know, if there was something to be found there.
He made an unsubstantiated accusation to slander Trump, in order to fool anyone stupid enough to take his claims at face value.
First I hear of this. How much, then? And at what dates did he receive those donations?
I'd find it more likely that he was just led astray by people in the government who claimed to know what they were doing. Particularly Fauci and the NHS, who were funding the creation of the damn thing.
I've been calling them that to everyone who's been advocating for them. Generally along the lines of, "I'm glad you're happy with your safe and effective Trump vaccine. I'm going to pass on it though."
Legal liability (and the avoidance thereof), I would imagine. But "releasing" it in this way just makes it all the funnier, IMHO. Because it's entirely pointless, lol.
So either it's extremely damaging to the ''safe and effective'' narrative and they don't want people to have proof they lied.
Or they claim they did a study because automatic risk detection thresholds mandating one were met, but they didn't do a real one, and they don't want people to have proof they lied ( if they publish it, it can be reviewed ).
Yeah, I genuinely don't see the point in releasing this. Like, if you're going to redact every. single. word, then why not just... Not release it..? Are they being forced to release something, even if blank..? I just don't understand the logic here, personally...
They will not give up any info on this until long after their execs are dead, and then it'll be brushed aside as an 'honest mistake in a time of crisis'.
They should never be forgiven, and because of that, never trusted again.
When it comes to redactions, the percentage is what should be horrifying, rather than the quantity of words and pages. If 100% of a report has been redacted, why should anyone trust what those particular people say at all?
Nobody should trust ANY vaccines after seeing this fraud.
Yup.
Wait until the journoscum start referring to the covid vaccines as the "Trump vaccines". That's when you know they are changing the narrative.
The amusing (and frightening) thing here is that liberal normies will forget they were all "#TeamPfizer!" and slide right into "This was the deadliest Big Pharma cover-up in history and Trump must be impeached for Operation Warp Speed!" without a flicker of hesitation or self-reflection.
I hope he does get impeached for it, he's the one going around still claiming credit for it, I hope the Pfizer bucks were worth it
Buddy, the government were the ones footing the bill. Pfizer didn't pay a fuckin dime on this shit.
You only see half the equation.
Pfizer pays specific politicians X dollars. Those politicians then vote for Pfizer to be paid through government money, not their own, 10X dollars. Everyone profits... Except the voting public.
Buddy trump took donations from Pfizer
Did he? Guess it didn't offset his costs since his net worth dropped precipitously after being president. Imagine whining about a guy who was president for a year during this bullshit and not the guy who actually fucked us.
u/ParadigmShift2070 was most likely lying. I've never heard of Pfizer paying Trump before, and that type of clear-cut bribery would definitely be the kind of things that democrats would be smearing all over the place to "prove" Trump's corruption if it were true.
He didn't respond to my simple request for information about "how much" and "when". Something that he would definitely know, if there was something to be found there.
He made an unsubstantiated accusation to slander Trump, in order to fool anyone stupid enough to take his claims at face value.
First I hear of this. How much, then? And at what dates did he receive those donations?
I'd find it more likely that he was just led astray by people in the government who claimed to know what they were doing. Particularly Fauci and the NHS, who were funding the creation of the damn thing.
Schroedinger's vaccines: Trump's when they're bad, Pfizer's when they're good.
This, but very much unironically.
I've been calling them that to everyone who's been advocating for them. Generally along the lines of, "I'm glad you're happy with your safe and effective Trump vaccine. I'm going to pass on it though."
Trust the science! (flips through 148 blank pages)
What possible reason could they have to redact it? It's not like it's a national security thing, or something.
Legal liability (and the avoidance thereof), I would imagine. But "releasing" it in this way just makes it all the funnier, IMHO. Because it's entirely pointless, lol.
So that's why they admitted aliens existed. They had something way more redacted.
_ _ G G _ _ S
So either it's extremely damaging to the ''safe and effective'' narrative and they don't want people to have proof they lied.
Or they claim they did a study because automatic risk detection thresholds mandating one were met, but they didn't do a real one, and they don't want people to have proof they lied ( if they publish it, it can be reviewed ).
[Comment redacted]
This is just a giant passive aggressive middle finger to the public. There is no reason every single word had to be redacted otherwise.
Yeah, I genuinely don't see the point in releasing this. Like, if you're going to redact every. single. word, then why not just... Not release it..? Are they being forced to release something, even if blank..? I just don't understand the logic here, personally...
hot tongs.
They will not give up any info on this until long after their execs are dead, and then it'll be brushed aside as an 'honest mistake in a time of crisis'.
They should never be forgiven, and because of that, never trusted again.
So 150 pages of too afraid to publish. Pretty telling.