Truth, Inspiration, Hope.

Undercover Video Sting Shows FDA Officer Admitting Whistleblowers Won’t Have ‘Long Shelf Life’ in Agency

Neil lives in Canada and writes about society and politics.
Published: February 18, 2022
FDA Executive Officer Christopher Cole said government agencies will mark whistleblowers and deny them career prospects in an undercover video sting done by Project Veritas
Project Veritas conducted an undercover video sting against FDA Executive Officer of Countermeasures Initiative Christopher Cole, who stated the Biden Administration sought to deploy an annual COVID shot, rubber stamp toddler vaccines, and had a culture that thwarted whistleblowers. (Image: Rumble screenshot)

People who speak out against corrupt and unethical practices inside the Food and Drug Administration will be “marked” and made ineligible for upward or lateral movement within government agencies, an Executive Officer for the Agency admitted during an undercover video sting.

The statements were recorded during a Feb. 17 video recorded during an undercover hidden camera sting against FDA Executive Officer of Countermeasures Initiative Christopher Cole conducted by investigative journalist team Project Veritas. 

Cole’s comments were made in what appears to be a restaurant setting during a candid conversation with a female undercover journalist, a typical trapping employed by the organization. 

Cole revealed more concerns to his date than only those surrounding whistleblowers, “And then there will be an annual [COVID vaccine], eventually an annual [COVID vaccine], just like the flu shot,” he said during a Part 1 video released Feb. 16.

The Executive Officer also stated that he does not agree with the process his agency is employing as it seeks to approve the novel gene therapy Coronavirus Disease 2019 vaccines in children aged 6 months to 5 years old.

A meeting for the approval was scheduled for Feb. 15, the same day as Part 1 of the series, and then abruptly canceled. 

“I don’t completely agree with their [the FDA], the process…They’re looking at trying to inoculate kids under five years old, between six months and five years old,” he stated.

When pressed for clarification by the woman, Cole added, “Well, I mean, they don’t have all the… all the tests aren’t there.”

READ MORE:

Cole stated that although he did agree with injecting toddlers, he objected because, “You can’t provide the parent as much assurity as you normally want to.”

He also stated that he believed the Agency’s approval for toddler vaccination was already in the bag, with the formal process merely being a rubber stamp session, “Just from everything I’ve heard, they’re not going to not approve it.”

Cole also admitted to his undercover-operative-posing-as-a-date that although case counts and risk in toddlers was remarkably low, that because the injections are approved under an Emergency Use Authorization for COVID, the Agency intends to go through the motions to approve injection for each age group all the same.

At the end of Part 1 of the series, Project Veritas published a comment offered by FDA Press Officer Abby Capobianco, who stated, “The person purportedly in the video does not work on vaccine matters and does not represent the views of the FDA.”

In Part 2 of the series, Cole elaborates that Big Pharma companies such as Pfizer and Moderna have at stake nothing less than a “recurring fountain of revenue” ahead of them as the Biden administration seeks to implement a yearly COVID vaccine requirement for citizens.

Moreover, the Executive Officer further elaborated that his Agency is operational precisely because it charges Big Pharma’s companies “millions of dollars in order to hire more drug reviewers and vaccine reviewers, which will speed up the approval process so they make more money.”

In a second clip dated Feb. 9, Cole stated that the FDA’s overall budget is approximately $5.5 billion. In the original clip, he claims that $1 billion of that cache is delivered “from the people we regulate.”

“The drug companies, the food companies, the vaccine companies, they pay us hundreds of millions of dollars a year to hire and keep the reviewers that approve their products.”

He continued, “I think sometimes the Agency whitewashes the impact of the user fees…They tone down the impact of the user fees on their operations, cause they know that they’re dependent on the drug companies and the vaccine companies and these other companies for their agency to operate.”

Nonetheless, Cole said he believed that user fees didn’t fundamentally affect the FDA’s regulatory approval process.

Substantiating his position, in the second clip, he stated that reviewers were handcuffed by the data Big Pharma was able to provide to support their applications, because otherwise “it comes and bites the reviewer in the ass.”

In the Feb. 9 clip, Cole was more direct, stating that he felt sub-agencies within the FDA were “getting a little overzealous in charging the user fees to other non-payroll expenses.”

“The money gets banked. It’s not spent. It’s a multi-year and the money gets banked there, and you want to be able to spend it…on whatever you can, whether it’s right or wrong.”

Cole candidly remarked that he felt there aren’t a lot of people within the Agency speaking out against the practices he described because, “You don’t want to be that person. You’re not going to have a long shelf life in the Agency if you’re always that person.”

He went on to state that those who dare speak out would become “marked,” elaborating, “You’re not going to get to certain levels in government. There’s not an incentive to speak out in government, surprisingly.”

“You would think there would be, but there’s not. It’s better just to not say anything and just ignore it.”

“There’s no protection for someone who speaks up,” he continued. “There is supposed to be, but like, there’s easy ways to get around that.”

Elaborating, he related it back to the principle of being marked, “Well,  you… you’ll be marked from getting other jobs because another office is not going to want to hire you if you’ve spoken out about right or wrong.” 

“They don’t look at what you’ve spoken out about…they’re just not willing to…government’s not rocking the boat, and they don’t want to.”