by Joseph DeMaio, ©2021

(Dec. 10, 2021) — There is an interesting Freedom of Information Act (“FOIA”) lawsuit pending in U.S. District Court in Dallas, Texas.  The lawsuit is brought by a private, non-profit organization, the “Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency” (“PHMPT”).

The suit seeks documents from the federal Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) relating to its August 23, 2021 “approval” of the Biologics License Application (“BLA”) for a so-called COVID-19 “vaccine” produced by Pfizer, Inc. – in collaboration with the actual license applicant, BioNTech Manufacturing GmbH – discussed and commented upon here.

Ironically, and even comically, the August 23 FDA letter to Pfizer is signed by the Director of the FDA “Office of Compliance and Biologics Quality, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research,” one “Mary A. Malarkey.” Not kidding.

But I digress.  

Under the FOIA, there are certain provisions allowing for the redaction or “masking” of information for a variety of reasons (e.g., personal safety, legal confidentiality, national security, etc.).  In responding to the PHMPT FOIA request, the FDA has refused to expedite its disclosure obligations, claiming that the mountain range – not merely a mountain – of documents at issue may need to be examined page-by-page, line-by-line for redaction purposes. 

That task, the FDA originally claimed, would take 55 years, or until 2076.  The FDA wanted the court to ratify that timeline for compliance with the FOIA request.  Upon further consideration, however, the FDA has now revised its estimate of how long it will take to complete the task: 75 years, or until 2096.

Not a typo: 2096. Seriously? 

The FDA scrambles à la “yes, massa…” to prioritize and fast-track the licensing approval process for the Pfizer “vaccine” – not to be confused with formal “vaccine approval” – in the process intentionally bypassing the FDA’s own “Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee” because it thought compliance with that step was unnecessary, discussed here.  Yet now the FDA claims that it will take at least another three-quarters of a century to fully comply with the PHMPT FOIA request.  Really?

And people wonder why there is skepticism and rampant doubt in the “COVID Revealed” docu-series interviewees that the American people are being told the truth about the situation by the FDA; by the Centers for Disease “Control” (sic); by Pfizer; by the mainstream media; and, in particular, by the Goofball at 1600, aka “Brandon.”  Goebbels, Machiavelli and Orwell would be extremely proud to see what is now going on in the C-19 maelstrom.

In Shakespeare’s Hamlet (yes, Virginia, your humble servant still values The Bard’s insights), Marcellus notes: “Something is rotten in the State of Denmark.”  This oft-quoted observation conveys the notion that a particular situation resembles that of a fish that rots from head to tail, or in other words, it posits that everything is not good at the top of a political hierarchy.

Grigori Rasputin, 1869-1916, unknown photographer, public domain

Yikes.  Sound familiar?  Does that not fit the situation today in the Beltway?  Does it not also fit the stunning intransigence of the FDA to reveal exactly what the underpinnings of the fluids being mandated for near universal injection by the Goofball at 1600 – and his mini-Rasputin, aka Anthony Fauci – are?  Will anyone reading this warning even be around in 2096 for the final revelation?

Faithful P&E readers, never forget what the Second Usurper in Chief (“SUC”) said about the Goof: “Don’t underestimate Joe’s [aka, Brandon’s] ability to … [foul] things up.” Moreover, remember as well what he said regarding those who don’t want to disclose the truth.

One might conclude that at the FDA today, that which controls the FOIA disclosure process is Malarkey.

Join the Conversation

1 Comment

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. The FDA informed the requestor that its FOIA request yielded around a third of a million pages. All of which, under FOIA, would have to be examined and as necessary redacted before being released.

    The FDA also explained its 10-person FOIA unit already has hundreds of pending FOIA requests that predate this requestor. Which is how it arrived at its 500 pages per month proposal to this FOIA request.

    If an actual, legally permissible response was truly desired, perhaps the requestor should narrow the search perimeters to narrow the number of responsive pages.