Reasoning as if it were a courtroom case

Editor's note: It simply doesn't matter to these Covid fanatics what the evidence suggests contrary to what they believe you can't stop them from destroying themselves so why even care? They are literally continuing to proudly dig their own graves for scumbag politicians and celebrities.

I kept getting sicker. But you won't catch me reaching for a tin foil hat
________

An explosive fact about COVID RNA vaccines

By Jon Rappoport | January 17, 2025

And this fact would apply to all future RNA vaccines.

I'm framing a line of reasoning as if it were a courtroom case, in which an attorney is questioning a vaccine expert. My rendering of the dialogue is based on what an expert would have to admit, if he were being truthful:

—First, isn't it true that studies of people taking a vaccine after it has been approved by the FDA are far different from studies of people done prior to FDA approval?

—No. The studies should be the same.

—But if they are, why is it that so many medications, which have been studied prior to FDA approval, are later taken off the market?

—They're usually taken off the market because of safety concerns.

—And how are those safety concerns established? Through studies of people in the general population who are taking the drug AFTER it was approved. Isn't that so?

—Yes. Of course.

—Therefore, there must be major differences in the outcome of studies done prior to FDA approval and post-approval, right?

________

A mother's fight: Kayla Pollock's journey through "vaccine" injury, loss, and advocacy for justice:

Kayla Pollock: Part One


Related information for the Covid fanatics:

Moderna's only real "FDA approved" product, an RSV mRNA injection is a failure

CDC Data: Covid 'Vaccines' Caused 112,000% Surge in Brain Clots