Will Trump Ban the Covid mRNA Vax? By Chris Knight (Florida)
The Infowars article "Report: Deadly Covid Vaccine Could Be Banned by Trump"
https://www.infowars.com/posts/report-deadly-covid-vaccine-could-be-banned-by-trump
from Infowars suggests that President Donald Trump could ban Covid-19 mRNA vaccines in his second term, citing scepticism from key appointees and widespread claims of severe health risks tied to the vaccines. This case builds on emerging evidence, shifting political dynamics, and public distrust, positioning a ban as both a public health imperative and a strategic move to reclaim credibility after Operation Warp Speed.
The primary argument hinges on the vaccines' alleged dangers. The article highlights Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who signed the Hope Accord in July 2024—a petition asserting that mRNA vaccines contribute to "an alarming rise in disability and excess deaths." This echoes claims across social media and web discussions linking mRNA shots to myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome (admitted by the CDC, per the article), and other conditions like blood clots and autoimmune disorders. Critics argue these risks were downplayed during the rollout, with the Infowars piece noting the vaccines' experimental nature and lack of long-term safety data. Unlike traditional vaccines, mRNA technology alters cellular function, raising fears of unforeseen consequences—claims amplified by critics calling it "gene therapy" and citing animal trial failures, despite mainstream rebuttals. The case posits that banning the vaccines would halt a public health crisis masked by regulatory overconfidence and pharmaceutical profit motives.
Political strategy bolsters the argument. Trump's initial support for Operation Warp Speed, which fast-tracked mRNA vaccines, drew fire from his base, as seen in X sentiment (e.g., posts from early 2025 urging him to "distance himself"). The article suggests appointees like Bhattacharya and Kash Patel (FBI director, known for vaccine scepticism) signal a reversal. A ban would align Trump with figures like Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a vocal vaccine critic, and appease supporters who view the jabs as a betrayal of his outsider ethos. Web analyses (e.g., Daily Mail, cited in Infowars) note that a ban could be enacted if the FDA withdraws approval for safety reasons—an achievable step with Trump-appointed regulators. This move would also counter Leftist narratives (e.g., House Democrats' 2025 report blaming Trump for rushing unsafe vaccines), reframing him as a corrective force against a flawed rollout he inherited.
Public sentiment, as reflected on X and in the article, fuels the case. Growing distrust in health institutions—evident in Google Trends spikes for "vaccine injury" (February 2025)—and grassroots calls for accountability create a mandate. The Infowars narrative ties this to "severe injuries and even death," citing the British VDPS compensating vaccine victims, suggesting a precedent for acknowledging harm. A ban would resonate with this base, positioning Trump as a champion against Big Pharma and a complicit "Cathedral" of elites, a term borrowed from Curtis Yarvin's critique of institutional power.
Implementation remains feasible but challenging. The article notes uncertainty—"how a ban would be implemented is still not clear"—but suggests FDA withdrawal or executive orders as pathways. With loyalists like Bhattacharya and Patel potentially leveraging FBI influence, Trump could pressure agencies to act. Historical precedent exists: the 1976 swine flu vaccine was halted over safety concerns after 25 deaths. The mRNA vaccines' higher reported adverse events (e.g., VAERS data, though contested) arguably justify bolder action. Critics might argue this oversteps executive power or ignores supposed benefits like reduced hospitalisations, but the case counters that emerging data—e.g., higher infection rates post-vaccination in some studies—undermines efficacy claims, tipping the risk-benefit scale.
Finally, a ban aligns with a broader ideological shift. The Infowars piece frames mRNA vaccines as a symbol of globalist overreach, a narrative resonating with Trump's MAGA ethos and the conservatives' disdain for unchecked technocracy. Reversing course would restore trust among sceptics who see Warp Speed as a misstep, while challenging the establishment's narrative of unquestioned scientific consensus. X posts laud this as "Alex Jones being right," reflecting a cultural current Trump could harness to cement his legacy.
The case for Trump banning Covid mRNA vaccines rests on claims of documented and emerging health risks—myocarditis, clots, and excess deaths—amplified by appointee scepticism, public outrage, and political necessity. The Infowars article provides a springboard, blending evidence like the Hope Accord with populist fervour. While mainstream sources defend the vaccines' safety and efficacy, the counter-narrative of suppressed harm and institutional failure offers Trump a compelling rationale: halt a dangerous experiment, reclaim his base, and redefine his presidency. Whether through FDA action or executive fiat, the move would be bold, divisive, and defensible on both practical and philosophical grounds.
https://www.infowars.com/posts/report-deadly-covid-vaccine-could-be-banned-by-trump
"President Donald Trump could order a halt to the experimental mRNA Covid-19 vaccine given members joining his administration have previously expressed skepticism over the jabs, which many have blamed for causing severe injuries and even death, the Daily Mail reports.
According to the Mail, Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, who's been nominated to serve as Trump's director of the National Institutes of Health, previously signed a document known as The Hope Accord, a July 2024 petition asserting the "widespread rollout of the novel Covid-19 mRNA vaccine products is contributing to an alarming rise in disability and excess deaths," and that mRNA jabs should be held back from human use until further studies are done.
The Hope Accords calls on healthcare professionals, scientists and the public to support an "immediate suspension of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine products," a "comprehensive re-evaluation of the safety and efficacy of all COVID-19 vaccine products," the "immediate recognition and support for the vaccine-injured," the "restoration of ethical principles abandoned during the COVID-19 era," and for "addressing the root causes of our current predicament."
The Mail goes on to describe other notable figures in Trump's orbit have also previously expressed skepticism toward the mRNA jabs, including Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and British cardiologist Dr. Aseem Malhotra, who's "being considered for a health advisory role in Kennedy's new health departments," The Mail reports.
Spurred on by the sudden cardiac death of his fit and active father in July 2021, Malhotra, an NHS-trained consultant cardiologist, undertook efforts in the UK to debunk the "pandemic of misinformation on Covid-19 mRNA vaccines" using real-world evidence after noticing a spate of heart attacks and sudden cardiac death in people aged between 16 and 39 specifically related to the Covid mRNA vaccines, and not related to Covid.
On top of that, The Mail says prospective FBI director Kash Patel could also be instrumental in bringing down the Covid-19 vaccine program.
"Outside the health agencies, Kash Patel — who has been nominated as FBI director — previously promoted bogus supplements that 'reversed' the supposed damage caused by Covid vaccines," the Mail noted, adding, "How a ban would be implemented is still not clear," but that "A total ban would require the FDA withdrawing its approval status for safety or effectiveness reasons."
While not fully owning up to the alarming number of deaths that followed the jab rollout, the CDC has admitted Covid-19 jabs were found to cause myocarditis and pericarditis as well as Guillain-Barré Syndrome in some people."
Comments