CDC knew the COVID jab was dangerous — and pushed it anyway



Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) dropped a bombshell last week about what the Biden administration knew — and covered up — about the dangers of the COVID shot. His roundtable featured Dr. Peter McCullough, arguably the country’s leading cardiologist and a frequent guest on my show since the pandemic fell upon the land in 2020.

Let’s talk about what they exposed — starting with VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. VAERS came out of the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which gave pharmaceutical companies legal immunity for vaccine-related injuries. In exchange, the government created a “self-reporting” database where anyone could report adverse events. But good luck using it. The interface often crashed or timed out, forced users to restart from scratch, and made tracking real harms nearly impossible.

Far too many Americans can only see COVID in the rearview mirror now, when they should still be seeing it in their nightmares and demanding severe justice.

That wasn’t a bug. It was the point.

A Harvard Medical Review study concluded more than 25 years ago that VAERS undercounted adverse events by a factor of 100. The CDC knew it. During COVID, instead of fixing VAERS, the CDC quietly built a separate system — V-safe — to track mRNA shot outcomes. It compiled peer-to-peer data from over 10 million Americans. The CDC buried those results until Del Bigtree and the Informed Consent Action Network forced the release through a lawsuit.

What did V-safe show? Eight percent of people who got the COVID jab suffered an adverse event requiring medical attention — from checkups to death. That’s not a rounding error. That’s a scandal. The United States has pulled vaccines from the market for far smaller complication rates. Meanwhile, the Biden administration forced this shot on everyone — including healthy kids — while knowing it was more dangerous to them than the virus itself.

Remember the wall-to-wall propaganda campaigns pushing the jab? Did any of them warn you about the 8% of recipients who suffered serious side effects? No. Were you offered a real choice based on your age, health status, or risk profile? Or were you coerced — by a toxic blend of government, corporations, and media lies — into rolling up your sleeve?

We all know the answer.

That’s not just manipulation. That’s a crime. The CDC’s own data from the height of the pandemic showed that only 2% of COVID cases required hospitalization. Yet polls showed Democrats believed the number was 25%. That disconnect didn’t happen by accident. It was manufactured. A psychological operation convinced Americans that the shot was the only way out, even though the jab carried a four times greater risk of harm than the virus itself — before even factoring in age or comorbidities.

RELATED: Heroic COVID docs punished as Abbott, Texas lawmakers stay silent

Deagreez via iStock/Getty Images

Younger, healthier Americans faced almost no threat from COVID. They weren’t told that either. They had to find out on shows like mine.

By spring 2022, the final infection fatality rate was in. Just 0.5% for the elderly. For children and teens (ages 0-19)? A microscopic 0.003%. But the government shut down schools, crushed businesses, and destroyed lives — all while pushing an experimental shot with exponentially higher risks.

No one but MSNBC viewers would have lined up for this poison if they’d known the truth. But platforms like YouTube, the largest video site on the planet, actively censored anyone who tried to sound the alarm. That included me — and brave doctors like McCullough — who were banned for speaking plainly about early treatments and adverse events.

Instead, they stuck ventilators down people’s throats while TikTok nurses danced for clout.

So will anyone ever pay for this disaster before the spike proteins strike midnight? Or are exploding hearts, turbo cancers, and collapsing fertility rates just the price we pay for compliance?

Far too many Americans can only see COVID in the rearview mirror now, when they should still be seeing it in their nightmares and demanding severe justice.

HHS scrapping COVID jab recommendations for pregnant moms and kids: Report



The Department of Health and Human Services is reportedly preparing to scrap its recommendation that pregnant women and kids get the COVID-19 vaccines. Individuals said to be familiar with the matter told the Wall Street Journal that the announcement is imminent and will coincide with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention kicking off a new vaccine approval framework.

While the relevant agencies apparently did not respond to the Journal's requests for comment, U.S. Food and Drug Commissioner Dr. Marty Makary provided a fairly strong indication this week that the change was coming.

Makary told Turning Point USA CEO Charlie Kirk that he would "love to see the evidence to show that giving young, healthy children another COVID-19 shot — you know, a sixth COVID booster — would help them, but that evidence does not exist, and so we're not going to rubber-stamp things at the FDA."

"I don't think you're going to see a push at the CDC to be pushing COVID shots in young, healthy children," continued Makary, adding that he expected an announcement on that front in the coming weeks.

Sources told the Journal that it would only be a matter of days.

At the time of publication, the CDC was still recommending that everyone ages 6 months and older get a COVID-19 vaccine.

'Connected to serious adverse events, including myocarditis and pericarditis, failed pregnancies, and deaths.'

The agency states on its website that getting the shot is especially important for individuals who have survived this long without one, geriatrics, pregnant women, those planning to conceive, and breastfeeding mothers. The agency urges parents to get their children 6 months to 4 years of age loaded up with two doses of the Moderna vaccine or three doses of the Pfizer vaccine if they were starting fresh.

As of April 26, 14.4% of pregnant women had received a 2024-25 COVID-19 vaccine and 13% of children 6 months to 17 years of age were up to date, CDC data shows.

RELATED: Jab first, ask questions never: Vaccine truths your doctor won't tell you

EKIN KIZILKAYA/iStock/Getty Images Plus

The CDC stuck with its recommendations until now despite credible warnings from Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo and other experts; troubling scientific studies demonstrating the vaccines were not as safe and effective as advertised; glaring evidence that kids and teens were at low risk for COVID and could go without; and damning state-leveled allegations that one of the primary vaccine manufacturers sat on evidence that its COVID-19 vaccine "was connected to serious adverse events, including myocarditis and pericarditis, failed pregnancies, and deaths."

Just last month, a preprint study backed by the Florida Department of Health suggested that adults in the Sunshine State who received the Pfizer vaccine had "significantly higher risk of 12-month all-cause, cardiovascular, COVID-19, and non-COVID-19 mortality" than those who received the Moderna shot.

A study conducted by the Global COVID Vaccine Safety Project — a Global Vaccine Data Network initiative supported by both the CDC and the HHS — and published last year in the journal Vaccine detailed troubling links between the AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Pfizer vaccines and medical conditions such as Guillain-Barré syndrome, brain and spinal cord inflammation, Bell's palsy, and convulsions.

Another peer-reviewed study published last year in the pharmacotherapy journal Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety indicated that "COVID-19 vaccination is strongly associated with a serious adverse safety signal of myocarditis, particularly in children and young adults resulting in hospitalization and death."

"COVID-19 vaccines induce an uncontrolled expression of potentially lethal SARS-CoV-2 spike protein within human cells, have a close temporal relationship of events, and are internally and externally consistent with emerging sources of clinical and peer-reviewed data supporting the conclusion that COVID-19 vaccines are deterministic for myocarditis, including fatal cases," said the study.

'The current risks of serious adverse events or deaths outweigh the benefits.'

Texas cardiologist Peter McCullough, a leading critic of the vaccines, said in a statement Thursday, "Two presidents, three HHS Secretaries, three FDA Commissioners, and nearly five years into the disastrous COVID-19 vaccine debacle, women and children receive long overdue yet welcome news. After record vaccine injuries, disabilities, and death, America is wondering will any of these leaders be held accountable?"

Dropping the recommendations appears to be a half measure, given that HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. previously fought to revoke authorization of COVID-19 vaccines altogether.

RELATED: Mandates, masks, and mayhem: Never again!

Photographer: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images

In a petition he filed with the FDA on May 16, 2021, Kennedy said the agency should revoke all emergency use authorizations and refrain from approving future EUAs for any COVID vaccine for all demographic groups "because the current risks of serious adverse events or deaths outweigh the benefits, and because existing, approved drugs provide highly effective prophylaxis and treatment against COVID, mooting the EUAs."

Kennedy noted further that the agency should specifically spare children and pregnant women from the novel vaccines.

Kennedy's warnings and requests evidently fell on deaf ears.

In its final weeks, the Biden HHS extended liability protection to COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and administrators through Dec. 31, 2029, precluding vaccine recipients who reportedly end up injured or their surviving family members from holding those responsible to account. This was the latest of several such extensions.

The reports of the HHS dropping the vaccine recommendations and other moves made in recent months by the Trump administration have elements of the medical establishment clutching pearls.

Paul Offit, director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, told the New York Times, "I think that we are in the midst of watching the vaccine infrastructure being torn down bit by bit."

"I think everything is a target," said Tara Smith, an epidemiologist at Kent State University College of Public Health.

"Overturning the recommendation means that insurance companies will no longer have to cover these vaccines," Dorit Reiss, a law professor at UC Law San Francisco, complained to the health publication Stat.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Mandates, masks, and mayhem: Never again!



Five years ago this month, the government effectively declared martial law. In doing so, it made what may be the worst decision of our lifetime — crushing civil liberties, wrecking the economy, and causing untold deaths through mismanagement of the virus and widespread use of a dangerous vaccine.

We continue to suffer the economic and health consequences of those decisions. Meanwhile, at both the federal level and in many states, lawmakers have failed to address the core liberty issue: preventing those powers from ever being used again.

It took just three years after the Civil War to ratify the 14th Amendment. Yet five years after COVID-era abuses, no comparable protections have passed at the federal level.

After the civil rights abuses that helped spark the Civil War, the country passed sweeping constitutional amendments to protect basic freedoms. Yet Congress has taken no such action after the COVID catastrophe. The same goes for many red states, which have done little over the past five years.

Still, it’s never too late to do the right thing. The following checklist outlines what Congress and state legislatures — especially those with Republican majorities — must do to fix it.

End biomedical tyranny

The COVID-19 era revealed a dangerous truth: It is neither scientifically sound, morally justified, nor constitutionally acceptable to force one person to undergo a medical intervention for the sake of another. Congress and state legislatures must act immediately to codify the following protections:

  • No mandates: No federal or state agency should ever require individuals to use a therapeutic, vaccine, prophylactic, or medical device.
  • No limitless emergencies: A president or governor may not declare a public health emergency lasting more than 30 days unless both legislative chambers approve an extension by a supermajority.
  • No lockdowns: Except for narrowly targeted, short-term quarantines of individuals exposed to deadly, quarantinable diseases like Ebola, the federal government must not restrict individual or property rights under the guise of pandemic control.
  • No masks: Outside surgical or clinical settings, no federal or state government should compel individuals to cover their faces as a condition of participating in public life.

These protections must be enacted at the federal level. While several Republican-led states have passed laws addressing parts of the issue, few have permanently banned public and private vaccine or mask mandates in all settings.

Additionally, county health directors should not have the authority to declare emergencies with criminal or civil penalties unless the county’s legislative body explicitly approves it. Even during such declarations, constitutional rights — such as the right to worship — must remain fully protected.

No experimentation without representation

Ban all mRNA shots: Except for terminally ill cancer patients, mRNA technology should not be used. Data now shows that mRNA does not stay localized, contains DNA contamination, and causes widespread inflammation. After five years of studies and real-world outcomes, mRNA technology has surpassed the threshold that would normally prompt the FDA to pull a product from the market. States should either ban its use or at minimum prohibit state agencies from promoting it.

Repeal the 2004 PREP Act: The Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act shields all public health “countermeasures” from liability, including vaccines, therapeutics, and testing tools used during emergencies. Even cases involving willful misconduct can only be brought by the federal government. Congress must repeal this law and restore accountability.

Repeal the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act: This law exempts all vaccines on the childhood immunization schedule from liability. Congress should repeal it to restore legal recourse for vaccine injuries.

End marketing of emergency-use products: Any product approved only for emergency use should not receive government-backed promotion or special status. These products should be treated solely as private medical decisions between doctors and patients.

Restore informed consent

The FDA and state governments must not mandate or promote new vaccines or biologic products unless they undergo proper safety evaluation. No product should receive approval without long-term, placebo-controlled trials that test for:

  • Allergenicity — potential to cause allergic reactions
  • Carcinogenicity — potential to cause cancer
  • Fertility impact — effects on reproductive health
  • Immunogenicity — ability to generate an immune response
  • Genotoxicity — potential to damage genes or cause mutations

Approval should require evidence of reduced all-cause mortality over time. No vaccine should gain approval if trial data shows more deaths in the vaccinated group than in the placebo group.

Regulators must not approve vaccines for one age group while ignoring safety concerns in another, unless they can clearly demonstrate that risks do not apply to the targeted population. For example, after acknowledging that RSV shots caused Guillain-Barré syndrome and walking back its recommendation for people over 60, the FDA continued to promote the shots for those over 75.

Additional protections should include:

  • Banning self-spreading viruses and biologics.
  • Criminalizing the release of any pathogen, including self-spreading vaccines, and allow individuals to sue those responsible.
  • Prohibiting the placement of vaccine-related materials in the food supply.

Congress should also establish a commission to audit the childhood immunization schedule and review new vaccines in the development pipeline. This includes a full review of their necessity, safety data, and efficacy. Enlightened consent must serve as the foundation for informed consent.

The right to treat

Congress must prohibit the FDA from blocking doctors from prescribing fully approved drugs for off-label use.

All pandemic or emergency public health funding for hospitals must remain treatment-neutral. Funding should not favor one therapy over another. Clinicians — not federal agencies or pharmaceutical companies — should guide treatment decisions based on best practices, not profit motives.

Given ivermectin’s broad-spectrum antiviral properties and well-documented safety profile, it should be made available over the counter. Arkansas has taken the lead in adopting this approach.

Protect doctor-patient autonomy

Doctors must not face penalties — such as loss of their licenses or board certifications — for expressing dissenting views on vaccines or mask mandates. State medical boards must overhaul their complaint processes to focus only on cases with actual patient harm.

Boards should accept complaints only from:

  • Patients alleging direct injury
  • Immediate family of deceased patients
  • Medical professionals with firsthand knowledge of patient harm

All complaints unrelated to patient injury should be dismissed without review.

The Trump administration should direct the Department of Justice to drop all prosecutions against physicians charged with so-called “COVID crimes.” These include cases like that of Utah plastic surgeon Dr. Kirk Moore, who faces federal charges for allegedly providing vaccine exemptions and other patient-centered actions taken during the pandemic.

Adopt a new ‘Patient’s Bill of Rights’

Some states have taken steps in the right direction, but stronger civil and criminal penalties must be in place to protect patient rights across the country. Every hospital and senior care facility should be legally required to:

  • Prohibit denial of treatment, including organ transplants, based on vaccination status.
  • Allow at least one surrogate or visitor to be present for patients in hospitals or nursing homes.
  • Permit patients to use FDA-approved drugs off-label, prescribed by a licensed physician, at their own expense and with informed consent.
  • Guarantee the right to refuse any hospital-prescribed treatment and the right to leave the facility if the patient is mentally competent — effectively banning medical kidnapping.
  • Provide patients or their families a legal cause of action to file civil suits against facilities that violate these rights. District attorneys should also have the authority to pursue criminal charges when appropriate.
  • Revoke state tax-exempt status for hospitals found in violation of these provisions.

It took just three years after the Civil War to ratify the 14th Amendment. Congress codified its principles into law within a year of Lee’s surrender at Appomattox. Yet five years after COVID-era abuses, no comparable protections have passed at the federal level, and only a few states have enacted partial reforms. That needs to change. The time to act is now.

COVID 2.0? New RSV shots are already harming babies



I might not be a doctor, but as early as January 2022 — 16 months before the approval of the first RSV vaccine — I warned that these shots could make children sicker from the virus. For decades, the industry failed to produce an RSV vaccine after an attempt in 1967 was terminated because it caused antibody-dependent disease enhancement.

Now, amid ongoing problems with the first RSV vaccines from Pfizer and GSK, the FDA is acknowledging that Moderna’s mRNA version is causing severe RSV cases in children. It’s time for the incoming Department of Health and Human Services, along with state officials, to pull the plug on both RSV shots and mRNA vaccines of all kinds.

We have simply too much public information to sustain this deception any longer. The time for action on this long-standing failure is January 20, not a day later.

The FDA reported last week at least five cases of severe or very severe RSV in infants who received Moderna’s new mRNA vaccine during a clinical trial. The Biden administration had already approved Pfizer's and GSK’s senior RSV vaccines, Pfizer’s infant vaccine, and a monoclonal antibody treatment for young children — all of which have documented safety concerns. Earlier this year, the administration approved Moderna’s mRNA version (mRESVIA) for seniors.

However, the FDA has now revealed that enrollment of young children in clinical trials is “on hold for all clinical studies of RSV vaccine candidates” under U.S. investigational new drug protocols.

The clinical trial showed shocking results: “Severe illness was 26.3% in the vaccine groups compared with 8.3% in the placebo.” Talk about “the more you inject, the more you infect”! If there are so many problems with infants, why are we giving this shot to anyone — especially seniors, who are not at significant risk for RSV the way they are for flu or COVID?

Moderna used two versions of the vaccine in the clinical trial, and one of them, mRNA-1345 (mRESVIA), induced severe RSV in an infant. This same vaccine is now being administered to seniors.

Given the 60-year concern about enhanced disease, why are we continuing to push any RSV shots? Why are we continuing to approve mRNA vaccines after the documented issues with COVID shots? Why approve Pfizer’s RSV shot for pregnant women when GSK’s nearly identical version was pulled from clinical trials after causing death and injury?

Finally, why are we promoting vaccines for respiratory viruses at all? COVID and flu have shown that respiratory viruses do not respond well to blood-based antibodies and often cause immune imprinting, leading to a higher risk of infection in the long run.

These are straightforward questions any layman can understand, yet our medical experts remain stuck in ignorance — and greed.

Greater risk for babies

Pfizer's and Moderna’s clinical trials for the COVID vaccine in toddlers revealed that leaky respiratory viral vaccines tend to increase, not decrease, the risk of respiratory viruses. In Moderna’s trial of babies ages 6 to 23 months, researchers found a statistically significant increase in respiratory viruses within 28 days of vaccination.

For croup, 1.3% of mRNA-1273 recipients were infected, compared to just 0.3% of placebo recipients. For RSV, the infection rate was 0.8% for mRNA-1273 recipients and 0.5% for the placebo group. For pneumonia, 0.2% of mRNA-1273 recipients were affected, while no cases occurred in the placebo group.

In Moderna’s trial for children ages 2 to 5 years, 0.3% of participants developed pneumonia compared to none of the placebo recipients. For RSV, the rates were 0.4% for vaccinated children and less than 0.1% for the placebo group. In other words, young children in the vaccine group were four times more likely to contract RSV within four weeks of the shot than those in the placebo group.

This trend persisted even among 6- to 11-year-olds, who are less susceptible to RSV. In that group, 0.3% of vaccine recipients experienced the illness compared to zero cases in the placebo group.

Pfizer’s children’s vaccine clinical trial for toddlers (see page 51) also recorded serious adverse events, including RSV bronchiolitis (five participants), pneumonia (two participants), gastroenteritis (two participants), and lower respiratory tract infections (two participants).

Clearly, respiratory viral vaccines make individuals more vulnerable to RSV. Many people now avoid these vaccines, but the industry has adopted a clever marketing tactic: offering a monoclonal antibody as a prophylactic measure against RSV, alongside the GSK, Pfizer, and Moderna shots. Originally developed by AstraZeneca and now distributed by Sanofi, Beyfortus (nirsevimab) has been administered to newborns since last October. New mothers are convinced their babies could suddenly die from RSV, which may have originated in the 1950s through polio vaccine research. According to the CDC, 40.5% of babies in America received Beyfortus during the last RSV season.

The FDA’s briefing document on Moderna’s clinical trial reported that the Moderna shot not only worsened the disease but also “blunted” Beyfortus’ efficacy in babies who received both. But what the report fails to disclose is that Beyfortus is as problematic as Moderna’s mRESVIA.

After hundreds of thousands of French babies received Beyfortus in 2023, Dr. Helen Banoun identified a shocking and unexplained increase in infant deaths linked to the vaccine’s uptake. Banoun also highlighted the FDA’s own data, which shows — clearly and alarmingly — a much higher rate of deaths in the Beyfortus treatment group compared to the placebo. This data appears on page 70 of the Biologics License Application for Beyfortus, but it seems the manufacturers rely on no one reading it.

Other literature cited in the Banoun paper shows that children were getting sicker with respiratory illnesses, signaling immune imprinting and disease enhancement — negative efficacy against the very illness the vaccines are supposed to treat.

According to VAERS reports, a baby boy died immediately after receiving the injection, and a baby girl was found unresponsive seven hours later. “Sudden infant death syndrome,” indeed.

What Trump can do

Moreover, the problem extends beyond the individuals receiving the vaccine. Dr. Peter McCullough has documented growing evidence that these products may be creating super-resistant strains of RSV.

We cannot continue like this as a civilization. Continuing mass vaccination without immediate restrictions and research violates the principles of the pro-life movement, based on the available data. It also violates the Nuremberg Code on human experimentation.

To that end, Trump’s next HHS secretary would do well to implement the following policies regarding vaccines:

  • No shot should be marketed as a vaccine in any way if it is not proven to stop infection.
  • No shot should be approved without a full placebo group that is kept permanently to study long-term differences with the trial group.
  • No shot should be approved unless it shows an all-cause mortality benefit over time and most certainly cannot show more deaths in the trial group.
  • No shot should be approved for one age group when there are clear safety signals in other age groups, unless it can be proven that those safety issues do not apply to the targeted cohort. For example, even after the FDA admitted that RSV shots caused Guillain-Barré syndrome and walked back its approval for people over 60, the agency still recommends the shots for people over 75.
  • No mRNA shots whatsoever.
  • No shot should be approved without oncogenicity, genotoxicity, or long-term safety studies, none of which were conducted with any of the RSV shots.

This issue is no longer just about COVID or Operation Warp Speed. The RSV vaccine approvals were conducted openly, despite known problems with these shots from day one — just like in 1967. They didn’t even need to rely on emergency use authorization.

We have simply too much public information to sustain this deception any longer. The time for action on this long-standing failure is January 20, not a day later.

'Preposterous': Biden admin extends liability protection to COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers



The Biden Department of Health and Human Services has extended liability protection to COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers and administrators through Dec. 31, 2029, precluding vaccine recipients who reportedly end up injured or their surviving family members from holding those responsible to account.

Kim Mack Rosenberg, general counsel for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s Children's Health Defense, called the decision from the outgoing administration "very concerning," not only because it protects pharmaceutical companies and the government but because it "allows for largely unfettered product development."

Health Secretary Xavier Becerra suggested in his declaration that continued coverage for the manufacture, testing, development, distribution, administration, and use of FDA-approved COVID-19 vaccines, drugs, and diagnostics under the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act "is intended to prepare for and mitigate the credible risk presented by COVID-19."

Although the federal public health emergency for COVID-19 expired on May 11, 2023, and the virus has reportedly moved from a pandemic to the endemic phase, Becerra suggested that COVID-19 continues to both "present a credible risk of a future public health emergency" and "cause significant serious illness, morbidity, and mortality during outbreaks." Citing these supposed risks, he suggested that it was necessary to renew liability protection to ensure the continued development and stockpiling of vaccines.

'The only threat is a loss of air-tight liability that leaves the vast majority of victims out of luck.'

The Congressional Research Service previously noted that under the HHS declaration, covered persons in most cases cannot be sued for losses — including death, physical or mental injury, and business interruption loss — relating to the use or administration of COVID-19 vaccines.

The sole exception to PREP Act immunity is for death or serious physical injury caused by "willful misconduct." To qualify as willful misconduct, the covered person must have "acted (i) intentionally to achieve a wrongful purpose; (ii) knowingly without legal or factual justification; and (iii) in disregard of a known or obvious risk that is so great as to make it highly probable that the harm will outweigh the benefit."

The liability protections for the COVID-19 vaccines were first introduced in January 2020. This is the 12th extension.

Children's Health Defense CEO Mary Holland suggested the Biden administration was "attempting to tie the hands of the incoming administration in its treatment of emergencies and pandemics. This is not the way elections and transfer of power are supposed to work."

Ray Flores, who serves as senior outside counsel for Kennedy's organization, told the Defender, "It is preposterous that HHS extended PREP Act protections based on a no-longer-existing threat. The only threat is a loss of air-tight liability that leaves the vast majority of victims out of luck."

Bloomberg Law reported that Becerra's declaration comes amid calls for COVID-19 vaccines to be covered under the HHS' Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. In its notice, the HHS indicated that Americans injured by COVID-19 vaccines will still be unable to seek compensation through the VICP.

COVID-19 vaccines are instead covered "countermeasures" under the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program. The PREP Act authorizes the CICP to provide some compensation to individuals who suffered serious physical injury as the direct result of the supposedly "safe and effective" COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID-19 vaccines have reportedly been shown in some cases to cause significant harm.

A study published January in the pharmacotherapy journal Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety indicated that "COVID-19 vaccination is strongly associated with a serious adverse safety signal of myocarditis, particularly in children and young adults resulting in hospitalization and death."

In addition to noting the well-documented correlation between the COVID-19 vaccines and increased risk of heart conditions, a study conducted by the Global COVID Vaccine Safety Project — a Global Vaccine Data Network initiative supported by both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the HHS — and published February in the journal Vaccine detailed troubling links between the AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Pfizer vaccines and medical conditions such as Guillain-Barré syndrome, brain and spinal cord inflammation, Bell's palsy, and convulsions.

Despite suggesting vaccinations were still worthwhile, a 2023 study published in the Elsevier Journal of Taibah University Medical Sciences noted that "a survey has found that 65% of participants experience adverse reactions."

As of Nov. 1, 13,520 claims were filed with the CIPC. Of the 3,438 decisions made so far, only 65 claims were found eligible for compensation. Of that number, only 18 claims were compensated.

The claims cited a wide range of injuries, including blood clots, strokes, and heart attacks. There were also 671 claims stating the COVID-19 vaccines resulted in death.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

‘It’s not a bug, it’s a feature’: Dr. Naomi Wolf reveals how Pfizer and the FDA lied to us all



Donald Trump may have won the presidency, but Dr. Naomi Wolf isn’t resting on her laurels. Rather, the author of “The Pfizer Papers” is continuing her fight for freedom and truth while exposing the corrupt relationship between Big Pharma, health care, and the United States government.

However, her eyes weren’t always so open.

“I certainly, in the pandemic, saw that the people I’d voted for turned out to be horrible tyrants,” Wolf tells Rick and Bubba of “Rick and Bubba University.” “They censored me when I was trying to warn women accurately about damage to their fertility from the Pfizer injection.”

“I got deplatformed and ousted from that world,” she explains, noting that a successful lawsuit led by attorney Aaron Siri led to the release of Pfizer documents that opened her eyes even further.


“450,000 internal documents released under court order that the FDA had asked the court to keep hidden for 75 years,” Wolf says. “It turns out the FDA was waving through the biggest crime against humanity in recorded history, and you know, more investigations on our team's part found that the White House knew.”

“There was a massive collusion by the very people I’d voted for, in ushering in an injection about which they lied to us, that was sterilizing and disabling and killing people in massive numbers,” she adds.

“Did you just find it strange that we rushed this in? Was the need and the panic by the public for an answer part of this that forced us to jump through so many hoops so fast?” Bubba asks.

“I was hoping when I went into this project that that’s what I would find. Just the usual story of greedy corporations cutting corners, rushing to meet a deadline, because of a putative, epidemic, emergency. That’s not what the Pfizer papers reveal,” Wolf answers.

“Unfortunately, they reveal months and months and months and months before the vaccine was rolled out, in which Pfizer was identifying many, many ways to injure, damage, and destroy the functions of the human body with, again, a special focus on reproduction,” she continues, adding, “It’s not a bug, it’s a feature.”

Want more from Rick and Bubba?

To enjoy more legendary comedy, political arguments, and lessons in common sense, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

US Army ADMITS the vaccine hurt soldiers, but no — the Army won’t help them



Karolina Stancik is a U.S. Army veteran who tragically suffered severe heart conditions after being mandated to take the Moderna COVID-19 vaccine.

While the Army has shockingly acknowledged in an internal memo that her injuries were vaccine-induced, they discharged Stancik and refused to cover her medical treatment.

“I am 24 years old, I have had three heart attacks, a mini stroke, and I am now getting a pacemaker,” Stancik told investigative reporter Catherine Herridge in an interview.

Stancik told Herridge that the COVID vaccine is when “everything flipped upside down” for her and that she was “left behind and trampled” by the U.S. Army.

“So, the Army admits in an internal memo that they referenced that all of these injuries were caused by the vaccine, and yet, you know, they discharged her by the way, because ‘You’re of no use to us now. You’re disabled now,’” Sara Gonzales says, clearly disturbed.

“How sick and how rotten is this administration that we will force servicemen and women to buy into a narrative and if they don’t and then get hurt, you just toss them aside and feed them to the wolves,” Jaco Booyens agrees.

Booyens' own brother, who he says has “3% body fat and is a top former professional athlete,” all of a sudden got myocarditis.

“His doctors lie to him, they tell him it’s called ‘athlete’s heart,’” Booyens explains. “He’s like, ‘What is athlete's heart?’”

“Fights for his life in ICU for 13 days, turned to the brink of death. This has happened hundreds of thousands, if not millions of times,” he continues, adding, “Anthony Fauci should be in front of an international tribunal for crimes against humanity.”


Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

US surgeon general declares new BOGUS public health crisis



The left loves to slap the term “public health crisis” on things like climate change because it paves the way for government overreach and the erosion of our freedoms.

Yesterday, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy formally declared gun violence as a public health crisis and called for a ban on assault weapons and civilian use of large capacity magazines.

EVERYTHING Is A Public Health Crisis Now! This Time It's Guns!youtu.be

Murthy also attests that “gun violence is the leading cause of death for children and adolescents ages one to nineteen,” which is simply “not true,” says Sara Gonzales.

“That in itself should disqualify anything that he's going to say on the subject because that is a lie,” adds Rippaverse Comics’ Eric July. “The fact that people keep pedaling that stuff and it goes unchecked blows my freaking mind.”

According to July, this gun violence public health crisis nonsense means one thing: “What they’re gonna do is punish free people ... people who have used no aggression on anybody and have not committed any actual crimes.”

Sara agrees and makes a fantastic point: “If they were actually serious about gun violence, they would do something to clean up the streets of Chicago," "they wouldn’t be releasing violent criminals into the streets,” and they “would probably do something about the cartels coming in and out of our country.”

But the point, of course, isn’t protecting Americans from gun violence. The point is control.

Jaco Booyens points to New York City as a prime example — Currently in NYC, if someone commits a “sexual offense ... to a disabled person,” they will “walk the same day.”

“Don’t come to me with your want to fight violence,” Booyens says. “This is about taking power away from good American citizens to silence them into submission so Big Daddy Government can rule and rob your life from you.”

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred take to news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Guns: The New Public Health Crisis
play icon

Guns: The New Public Health Crisis

Kansas sues Pfizer for claiming its vaccine was 'safe and effective'



Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach (R) announced Monday that the Sunflower State is suing Pfizer for "misleading claims it made related to the COVID vaccine."

Kobach noted at a press conference in Topeka that "Pfizer made multiple misleading statements to deceive the public about its vaccine at a time when Americans need the truth."

"Pfizer misled the public that it had a 'safe and effective' COVID-19 vaccine," claims the lawsuit, filed in the District Court of Thomas County, Kansas. "Pfizer said its COVID-19 vaccine was safe even though it knew is COVID-19 vaccine was connected to serious adverse events, including myocarditis and pericarditis, failed pregnancies and deaths. Pfizer concealed this critical safety information from the public."

'Pfizer must be held accountable for falsely representing the benefits of its COVID-19 vaccine while concealing and suppressing the truth.'

The complaint further alleges the pharma giant:

  • glossed over the waning efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine as well as its ineffectiveness against variants and the absence of evidence it curbed transmission;
  • "used FOIA denial and delay to conceal critical data relating to the safety and effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine";
  • "used an extended study timeline to conceal critical data relating to the safety and effectiveness of its COVID-19 vaccine";
  • used confidentiality agreements to hide the possible dangers and ineffectiveness of the jab;
  • covered its tracks by destroying the vaccine control group; and
  • engaged in a propaganda campaign wherein it omitted critical data about its vaccine, vilified critics, and mischaracterized its profitable product.

While reportedly making roughly $75 billion from its COVID-19 vaccine sales inside a two-year window — selling $57 billion of COVID products in 2022 alone — the lawsuit claims the company "worked to censor speech on social media that questioned Pfizer's claims about its COVID-19 vaccine."

Former New York Times reporter Alex Berenson, for instance, claimed that Scott Gottlieb, a former U.S. Food and Drug Administration commissioner who became a senior board member of Pfizer, leaned on Twitter in 2021 in an apparent effort to censor criticism of the vaccine. It appears such pressure may have been successful on numerous occasions.

The complaint accuses Pfizer of multiple violations of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act and civil conspiracy.

"Pfizer must be held accountable for falsely representing the benefits of its COVID-19 vaccine while concealing and suppressing the truth about its vaccine's safety risks, waning effectiveness, and inability to prevent transmission," added the lawsuit.

Pfizer, which has produced over 366 million doses of its COVID-19 vaccine, told The Hill the case has "no merit."

"We are proud to have developed the COVID-19 vaccine in record time in the midst of a global pandemic and saved countless lives. The representations made by Pfizer about its COVID-19 vaccine have been accurate and science-based," said the company.

The lawsuit comes several months after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a similar lawsuit, claiming, "Pfizer intentionally misrepresented the efficacy of its COVID-19 vaccine and censored persons who threatened to disseminate the truth in order to facilitate fast adoption of the product and expand its commercial opportunity."

The Texas lawsuit moved to a federal court in January.

Kansas' legal action also follows numerous medical admissions and scientific studies confirming the vaccines were not as advertised, as well as a class-action lawsuit against another COVID-19 vaccine manufacturer in Britain over injuries and deaths.

Blaze News previously reported that a peer-reviewed multinational study examining data from nearly 100 million people not only affirmed the well-documented link between the COVID-19 vaccines and increased risk of heart conditions but has also highlighted troubling links between the AstraZeneca, Moderna, and Pfizer vaccines and medical conditions such as Guillain-Barré syndrome, brain and spinal cord inflammation, Bell's palsy, and convulsions.

The study, published in the esteemed journal Vaccine, also noted there were "significantly higher risks of myocarditis following the first, second and third doses" of Pfizer's BNT162b2 vaccine.

Another peer-reviewed study published Jan. 24 in the Springer Nature Group journal Cureus suggested the COVID-19 vaccines were a rushed product with an "unacceptable harm-to-reward ratio."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!