2022-07-06
You couldn't make it up.
But you don't need to, because Pfizer has made it up for you.
So just take the shot and move on.
"A lawsuit filed by whistleblower Brook Jackson alleging Pfizer and two of its contractors manipulated data and committed other acts of fraud during Pfizer’s COVID-19 clinical trials is paused following a motion by the defendants to dismiss the case"
"Jackson’s lawyer said Pfizer argued the lawsuit ... should be dismissed because the U.S. government knew of the wrongdoings in the clinical trials but continued to do business with the vaccine maker"
Oh OK, so that's all right then because the fraud was not sufficiently "material" to upend the business deal. Contractually that does seem to make some sense ... but are we not forgetting the small matter of the wider public interest?
The US government is not just any commercial party. It has responsibilities far beyond its own narrow commercial interests, such as protecting the public from vaccines that don't work but do disproportionate damage. In this deal it was (in theory) buying the vaccine on behalf of the public, all 300 million of them. The same public that would suffer the consequences and reap the benefits of the vaccine. The same public that finances the US government through their taxes.
So if this motion to dismiss is upheld on these grounds, it opens the doors wide to crony capitalism where government conspires with crony corporations to the detriment of the public, knowing that they have a legal get-out clause.
In this case, we don't need a lawyer to tell us what the outcome should be.
The courts are there to uphold the law, but also to uphold justice. If the law is such that justice is denied then it must be struck down, which is the whole point of trial by jury.
If the Courts judge this case without a jury and prefer to uphold the law rather than to uphold justice, then they demonstrates their failure.
Those 300 million are unlikely to look favourably on such an outcome.
(6 minutes)
