Malone continues:⁷

"… three months after the CDC presented this data … the FDA is recommending a THIRD booster for little children and babies … The shiver up my spine alerts me to the fact that this feels an awfully lot like child abuse.

Let's recap: A total of less than 600 children in the last three years have died in this age cohort (CDC data⁸), and according to peer reviewed scientific studies virtually none of these deaths were in the 'healthy, normal' cohort. Can our government get any more sick?

The News Release also states that the vaccine is 'broadly protective.' I must say that I am not sure what that even means anymore to government scientists.

To me, 'broadly protective' means that there are a wide range of proteins that immune system responds to. That immune evasion by the virus does not happen after vaccination. That the product clearly protects against infection, replication and spread of the virus.

These mRNA vaccines only offer protection against one protein, which is easily evaded by the virus. So why is the FDA trying to deceive us again?

The FDA also writes that it 'relied on immune response data that it had previously evaluated from a clinical study in adults of a booster dose of Moderna's investigational bivalent COVID-19.'

The bridging evidence of adult immune responses to the bivalent vaccines with what the FDA expects for children was lacking in depth and data. There is no validated immunologic correlate of protection.

In other words, this is non-sensical scientific and regulatory gibberish … Please people — doctors around the country will be reading this news release and advocating that babies and children receive this new bi-valent mRNA vaccine. Be ready and armed with the facts. Do not comply."

Government Deception Continues

How in the world can the FDA rationalize a bivalent booster for babies as young as 6 months old based on data showing 2 out of 10 tweens and teens get so incapacitated they cannot go to school!?

And all to "protect" against an infection that poses a minuscule risk to children in the first place! Statistics show the rate of COVID-19 associated hospitalization among children aged 5 to 11 is 0.0008%.⁹ In real-world terms, that's so close to zero you basically cannot lower it any further. In Pfizer's trial, the only child who required hospitalization was actually in the vaccinated group.

Children's risk of developing symptoms of COVID within the first three weeks of the first dose also INCREASED by 30%,¹⁰ which hardly supports the "safe and effective" narrative.

COVID Shots Shown to Destroy Immune Function (video at link)

There's also growing evidence suggesting the shots may dysregulate your immune system, which can have catastrophic public health consequences when given to masses of people. A study¹¹ posted on the preprint server medRxiv, back in May 2021, found the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID jab "reprograms both adaptive and innate immune responses," causing immune depletion.

While the jab "induced effective humoral and cellular immunity against several SARS-CoV-2 variants," the shot "also modulated the production of inflammatory cytokines by innate immune cells upon stimulation with both specific (SARS-CoV-2) and nonspecific (viral, fungal and bacterial) stimuli."

People who were "fully vaccinated," having received two doses of the Pfizer shot, also produced significantly less interferon upon stimulation, which hampers vitally important innate immune responses.

In other words, we're looking at a horrible tradeoff. Even if you get some protection against SARS-CoV-2 and its variants, you're weakening your overall immune function, thereby opening the door wide to all sorts of other health problems, from bacterial, fungal and viral infections to cancer and autoimmunity.

Is it really wise to expose babies and toddlers to such risks? Just because children aren't dying within a few weeks of the shot does not mean it's harmless and therefore safe to use. Most of the damage from these jabs will emerge long after they've gotten the shot. So, the FDA is really behaving in an incredibly irresponsible and negligent manner, putting every child in America in harm's way in the longer term.

Why Big Pharma Wants COVID Jabs for Babies

SEE VIDEO @ TWITTER LINK

So, how can we explain the irrational behavior of the FDA and CDC? Why don't any of the red flags matter? The short answer is that both agencies are corrupt to the core and are no longer in the business of protecting public health. They are securing profits for the drug industry.

The very same day the CDC voted to add the shots to the vaccine schedule, which also opens the door for states to mandate the jab for school children, Pfizer announced it will raise the price of its jab by about 400%,¹² from $30¹³ per dose to somewhere between $110 and $130 once the current U.S. purchase program expires.

But getting the shot onto the vaccine schedule and then raising prices isn't the primary profit-making scheme. The real boon is that once the COVID jab is on the childhood vaccination schedule, the vaccine makers are permanently shielded from liability for injuries and deaths that occur in any age group, including adults.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. explains how this works in the video clip above. You can also learn more about this indemnification process in "The Real Reason They Want to Give COVID Jabs to Kids."

The only way to break that indemnity is by proving the vaccine maker knew about safety problems and withheld that information. There's also no statute of limitation when it comes to murder, which is what some insist is happening here.

EUA Criteria Aren't Even Fulfilled

What's so crazy is that the COVID shots were added to the vaccine schedules even though they don't have full FDA approval yet. Pfizer's COVID shot Comirnaty has supposedly received full approval, but it's not available in the U.S. Moderna has no approved version, available or otherwise.

The shots used are all under EUA, and not only can an EUA product not be added to the vaccination schedule, but the FDA and CDC are also violating the rules by giving out EUAs in the first place. Products must satisfy all of the following criteria in order to get EUA:

1. There must be an emergency
2. A vaccine must be at least 30% to 50% effective
3. The known and potential benefits of the product must outweigh the known and potential risks of the product
4. There can be no adequate, approved and available alternative treatments (drugs or vaccines)

Unless all four criteria are met, EUA cannot be granted or maintained, yet here we are. COVID, by any reasonable measurement, is no longer an emergency, there are plenty of adequate alternative treatments, and the potential benefits in no way, shape or form outweigh the potential risks — especially not in children.

So, the FDA and CDC are operating way outside rules and regulations. They've both gone rogue and seem to be making up new rules as they go along. For anyone who still believes these agencies are in the business of protecting public health, this should be a massive red flag. When people and agencies refuse to follow established rules and regulations, it's usually because they're up to no good. 

FDA and CDC Operate Under Legal Architecture for Genocide

The FDA and CDC aren't the only ones at fault, however. In a June 2022 interview¹⁴ with Dr. Jane Ruby of "The Jane Ruby Show," legal analyst Katherine Watt explained how the U.S. Congress has, over the past 30 years, slowly but surely paved the way for legalized tyranny and even genocide.

What used to be state and/or federal crimes or human rights violations have been legalized through a series of statutory revisions. Watt also described in an April 28, 2022, Substack article how this regulatory framework grew into being.¹⁵ As noted in that article:

"The basic goal of the architects, which has been achieved, was to set up legal conditions in which all governing power in the United States could be automatically transferred from the citizens and the three Constitutional branches into the two hands of the Health and Human Services Secretary, effective at the moment the HHS Secretary himself declared a public health emergency, legally transforming free citizens into enslaved subjects …

Congress and U.S. Presidents legalized and funded the overthrow of the U.S. Constitution, the U.S. government and the American people, through a massive domestic bioterrorism program relabeled as a public health program, conducted by the HHS Secretary and Secretary of Defense on behalf of the World Health Organization and its financial backers."

The FDA Is Also Part of the US Bioterrorism Program

In another article, Watt explains that the reason why the FDA is not protecting the public from what is clearly the most dangerous "vaccine" the world has ever seen is because:¹⁶

"… Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra and FDA Commissioner Robert Califf are running the U.S. government's bioterrorism program jointly with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, Department of Justice Attorney General Merrick Garland, Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Majorkas, Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, Moderna CEO Stephane Bancel, and World Health Organization Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus."

While the idea that the FDA is actually part of the U.S. bioterrorism program may sound too incredible to be true, we see evidence of this kind of collusion in the "Pfizergate" trial.

Pfizer whistleblower Brook Jackson sued Pfizer for fraud, and in its motion to dismiss, Pfizer claimed that clinical trial data were not material or necessary to the FDA's decisions to grant EUA and approval of its product. The U.S. government formally endorsed Pfizer's motion, and hence its rationale for the motion to dismiss.

But just how can clinical trial data, including adverse event reports, be immaterial and unnecessary to the FDA's decision to authorize the shot for people of all ages? Is this not an admission — both by Pfizer and the U.S. government — that the FDA colluded with Pfizer to get the shots to market without regard for safety?

It appears the FDA — while charged with protecting public health — is actually protecting Big Pharma and the U.S. biowarfare program instead. This makes more sense when you realize that Pfizer and Moderna are part of the biowarfare program too. By protecting Pfizer's and Moderna's products and shielding them from scrutiny and critique, the FDA is protecting and preserving the U.S. biowarfare program as a whole.

How to Protect and Restore Our Rights and Freedoms

So, what can we do to protect and restore the rights and freedoms that are being stripped from us in the name of biosafety? In her interview with Ruby, Watt offered the following suggestions:¹⁷