Elizabeth Warren Exposes RFK, Jr. - WSJ article

6,481 Views | 142 Replies | Last: 16 min ago by Mothra
Tempus Edax Rerum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Elizabeth Warren Exposes RFK Jr.
He wants to keep cashing in on lawsuits against drug makers, as his confirmation hearing for health secretary makes clear.

By
The Editorial Board
Jan. 29, 2025 6:12 pm ET
Secretary of Health and Human Services nominee Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testifies during a Senate Finance Committee hearing on his nomination on Wednesday.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pledged during his confirmation hearing on Wednesday to root out corruption between industry and government. Yet the man who wants to be the nation's Secretary of Health and Human Services refused to rule out personally making money from lawsuits against drug makers. This ought to be disqualifying.

"You just said that you want the American people to know you can't be bought, your decisions won't depend on how much money you could make in the future, you won't go to work for a drug company after you leave HHS," Sen. Elizabeth Warren said. "But you and I both know there's another way to make money." Ah, yes. A fellow friend of trial lawyers, Ms. Warren knows their playbook.

Mr. Kennedy's disclosures show that he has received more than $2.5 million from law firms that have sued drug and vaccine makers. He also has a financial stake in a pending lawsuit against human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine maker Merck. Mr. Kennedy's trial-lawyer ties and financial interests in litigation against drug makers pose a clear conflict of interest.

Ms. Warren asked RFK Jr. to commit to not "suing the drug companies, and taking your rake out of that, while you are Secretary and for four years after." He refused. "You're asking me to not sue drug companies, and I am not going to agree to that," he said. Why not?

Ms. Warren went on to detail that "there's a lot of ways that you can influence those future lawsuits, and pending lawsuits, while you are Secretary of HHS." They include publishing his antivaccine views "on U.S. government letterhead, something a jury might be impressed by." He could change side effects that appear on vaccine labels.

He could "remove vaccines from special compensation programs, which would open up manufacturers to mass torts," Ms. Warren continued, or "make more injuries eligible for compensation even if there is no causal evidence." He could "turn over FDA data to your friends at the law firm and they could use it however it benefited them."

We never thought we'd hear this, but Ms. Warren has an excellent point that Mr. Kennedy, as HHS Secretary, could have the ability to "kill off access to vaccines and make millions of dollars while he does it." This ought to trouble Republican Senators who profess to care about good government and public health.






Midnight Rider
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"We never thought we'd hear this, but Ms. Warren has an excellent point that Mr. Kennedy, as HHS Secretary, could have the ability to "kill off access to vaccines and make millions of dollars while he does it." This ought to trouble Republican Senators who profess to care about good government and public health." - WSJ.

I doubt that this is going to trouble Republican Senators.
ScottS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Midnight Rider said:

"We never thought we'd hear this, but Ms. Warren has an excellent point that Mr. Kennedy, as HHS Secretary, could have the ability to "kill off access to vaccines and make millions of dollars while he does it." This ought to trouble Republican Senators who profess to care about good government and public health." - WSJ.

I doubt that this is going to trouble Republican Senators.
Hmm Warren (or should I say Pochantas) is wondering if RFK Jr is going to be corrupt when for alot of her life was corrupt by checking the Indian box.
william
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Go Bears!
whitetrash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In her defense, during her tirade was the first time ever Warren was truthfully red in the face.
Forest Bueller_bf
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ScottS said:

Midnight Rider said:

"We never thought we'd hear this, but Ms. Warren has an excellent point that Mr. Kennedy, as HHS Secretary, could have the ability to "kill off access to vaccines and make millions of dollars while he does it." This ought to trouble Republican Senators who profess to care about good government and public health." - WSJ.

I doubt that this is going to trouble Republican Senators.
Hmm Warren (or should I say Pochantas) is wondering if RFK Jr is going to be corrupt when for alot of her life was corrupt by checking the Indian box.
Not to mention the money she has procured from big pharma.

It's not like she has any level of corruption.

Those dems are such incredible hypocrites it is pretty astounding.
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tempus Edax Rerum said:

Elizabeth Warren Exposes RFK Jr.
He wants to keep cashing in on lawsuits against drug makers, as his confirmation hearing for health secretary makes clear.

By
The Editorial Board
Jan. 29, 2025 6:12 pm ET
Secretary of Health and Human Services nominee Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testifies during a Senate Finance Committee hearing on his nomination on Wednesday.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pledged during his confirmation hearing on Wednesday to root out corruption between industry and government. Yet the man who wants to be the nation's Secretary of Health and Human Services refused to rule out personally making money from lawsuits against drug makers. This ought to be disqualifying.

"You just said that you want the American people to know you can't be bought, your decisions won't depend on how much money you could make in the future, you won't go to work for a drug company after you leave HHS," Sen. Elizabeth Warren said. "But you and I both know there's another way to make money." Ah, yes. A fellow friend of trial lawyers, Ms. Warren knows their playbook.

Mr. Kennedy's disclosures show that he has received more than $2.5 million from law firms that have sued drug and vaccine makers. He also has a financial stake in a pending lawsuit against human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine maker Merck. Mr. Kennedy's trial-lawyer ties and financial interests in litigation against drug makers pose a clear conflict of interest.

Ms. Warren asked RFK Jr. to commit to not "suing the drug companies, and taking your rake out of that, while you are Secretary and for four years after." He refused. "You're asking me to not sue drug companies, and I am not going to agree to that," he said. Why not?

Ms. Warren went on to detail that "there's a lot of ways that you can influence those future lawsuits, and pending lawsuits, while you are Secretary of HHS." They include publishing his antivaccine views "on U.S. government letterhead, something a jury might be impressed by." He could change side effects that appear on vaccine labels.

He could "remove vaccines from special compensation programs, which would open up manufacturers to mass torts," Ms. Warren continued, or "make more injuries eligible for compensation even if there is no causal evidence." He could "turn over FDA data to your friends at the law firm and they could use it however it benefited them."

We never thought we'd hear this, but Ms. Warren has an excellent point that Mr. Kennedy, as HHS Secretary, could have the ability to "kill off access to vaccines and make millions of dollars while he does it." This ought to trouble Republican Senators who profess to care about good government and public health.







However it is perfectly ok for Ms Warren to receive millions of dollars from Big Pharma lobbyists?
Southtxbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Warren has made over $5.5 million from big pharma, of course she is scared of RFK Jr.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Midnight Rider said:

"We never thought we'd hear this, but Ms. Warren has an excellent point that Mr. Kennedy, as HHS Secretary, could have the ability to "kill off access to vaccines and make millions of dollars while he does it." This ought to trouble Republican Senators who profess to care about good government and public health." - WSJ.

I doubt that this is going to trouble Republican Senators.
LMAO. Elizabeth Warren is a joke.

Hit piece by the predictably biased WSJ.

I love that the added bonus of Kennedy getting nominated is watching your head explode on these boards. It is a guilty pleasure. Time to get off the gravy train you've been on.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KaiBear said:

Tempus Edax Rerum said:

Elizabeth Warren Exposes RFK Jr.
He wants to keep cashing in on lawsuits against drug makers, as his confirmation hearing for health secretary makes clear.

By
The Editorial Board
Jan. 29, 2025 6:12 pm ET
Secretary of Health and Human Services nominee Robert F. Kennedy Jr. testifies during a Senate Finance Committee hearing on his nomination on Wednesday.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. pledged during his confirmation hearing on Wednesday to root out corruption between industry and government. Yet the man who wants to be the nation's Secretary of Health and Human Services refused to rule out personally making money from lawsuits against drug makers. This ought to be disqualifying.

"You just said that you want the American people to know you can't be bought, your decisions won't depend on how much money you could make in the future, you won't go to work for a drug company after you leave HHS," Sen. Elizabeth Warren said. "But you and I both know there's another way to make money." Ah, yes. A fellow friend of trial lawyers, Ms. Warren knows their playbook.

Mr. Kennedy's disclosures show that he has received more than $2.5 million from law firms that have sued drug and vaccine makers. He also has a financial stake in a pending lawsuit against human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine maker Merck. Mr. Kennedy's trial-lawyer ties and financial interests in litigation against drug makers pose a clear conflict of interest.

Ms. Warren asked RFK Jr. to commit to not "suing the drug companies, and taking your rake out of that, while you are Secretary and for four years after." He refused. "You're asking me to not sue drug companies, and I am not going to agree to that," he said. Why not?

Ms. Warren went on to detail that "there's a lot of ways that you can influence those future lawsuits, and pending lawsuits, while you are Secretary of HHS." They include publishing his antivaccine views "on U.S. government letterhead, something a jury might be impressed by." He could change side effects that appear on vaccine labels.

He could "remove vaccines from special compensation programs, which would open up manufacturers to mass torts," Ms. Warren continued, or "make more injuries eligible for compensation even if there is no causal evidence." He could "turn over FDA data to your friends at the law firm and they could use it however it benefited them."

We never thought we'd hear this, but Ms. Warren has an excellent point that Mr. Kennedy, as HHS Secretary, could have the ability to "kill off access to vaccines and make millions of dollars while he does it." This ought to trouble Republican Senators who profess to care about good government and public health.







However it is perfectly ok for Ms Warren to receive millions of dollars from Big Pharma lobbyists?

Of course, because Big Pharma is only trying to "help" humanity.
STxBear81
How long do you want to ignore this user?
but not Pelosi millions , right?
Waco1947
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Her temperament had nothing to do her truth. RFk is a disgrace
Waco1947 ,la
Forest Bueller
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Her temperament had nothing to do her truth. RFk is a disgrace


She is a disgrace. And has millions of Pharma dollars to vouch for it.

Her truth as a fake native American. Or her truth as a huge big pharma beneficiary. Or her truth as just another corrupt lifetime politician and entrenched member of the swamp. These are all "her truth".
By the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved.
ron.reagan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If you truly believe Vaccines are bad for you then he is the guy for the job. If you believe that vaccines are saving millions of lives it seems like an unnecessary gamble to put in a guy that changes his position on vaccines depending on his audience to be in charge
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ron.reagan said:

If you truly believe Vaccines are bad for you then he is the guy for the job. If you believe that vaccines are saving millions of lives it seems like an unnecessary gamble to put in a guy that changes his position on vaccines depending on his audience to be in charge
He doesn't believe vaccines are bad for you. He believes that some vaccines are bad for some people, and that the vaccine schedule for children is absurd.
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:

If you truly believe Vaccines are bad for you then he is the guy for the job. If you believe that vaccines are saving millions of lives it seems like an unnecessary gamble to put in a guy that changes his position on vaccines depending on his audience to be in charge
He doesn't believe vaccines are bad for you. He believes that some vaccines are bad for some people, and that the vaccine schedule for children is absurd.


The vaccine schedule for children is completely crazy..

Hope Kennedy gets confirmed so some legitimate reforms can be enacted.
J.R.
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I, in no way like or respect Sen. Warren, but she is dead on right. This guys is a flip flopping nut job. Variances, abortion ect and you guys want this clown to run this agency.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
J.R. said:

I, in no way like or respect Sen. Warren, but she is dead on right. This guys is a flip flopping nut job. Variances, abortion ect and you guys want this clown to run this agency.
What positions of his do you disagree with, if you know?

Did you like the last transgender sec. of health? Don't recall you complaining about him, er, her.

Edit: When are you going to drop the pretense you are an actual conservative?
ron.reagan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:

If you truly believe Vaccines are bad for you then he is the guy for the job. If you believe that vaccines are saving millions of lives it seems like an unnecessary gamble to put in a guy that changes his position on vaccines depending on his audience to be in charge
He doesn't believe vaccines are bad for you. He believes that some vaccines are bad for some people, and that the vaccine schedule for children is absurd.
If you think the vaccine schedule for children is absurd you should see the schedule of deaths without them. Just because you lost the lottery doesn't mean the rest of us want our children to die because you are scared
J.R.
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

J.R. said:

I, in no way like or respect Sen. Warren, but she is dead on right. This guys is a flip flopping nut job. Variances, abortion ect and you guys want this clown to run this agency.
What positions of his do you disagree with, if you know?

Did you like the last transgender sec. of health? Don't recall you complaining about him, er, her.

Edit: When are you going to drop the pretense you are an actual conservative?
the position I disagree with is he is a liar. Vid evidence about his anti vax stance along with his abortion stance. He did a 180 to get some govt cheese and be a Trump acolyte. He is no different than most other politicians of which Trump and his pathological lying has been deemed ok. Talk about dumbing down politics. I have NO problem with any trans person in jobs they are qualified for. ie, Jo Ellis. As far has "conservative " I don't owe anyone my politicks, but just for you ,, I will reiterate. I'm Fiscally conservative and socially progressive. I don't take the current definition you people expound relative to taking a corrupt view of conservatism as hook, line and sinker. So, you think that RFKj is the most qualified and good for the position he is being considered?
ScottS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Waco1947 said:

Her temperament had nothing to do her truth. RFk is a disgrace
He was shot along time ago.
ScottS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
STxBear81 said:

but not Pelosi millions , right?
Or all the $ funneled through the Biden's accounts.
ScottS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whitetrash said:

In her defense, during her tirade was the first time ever Warren was truthfully red in the face.
Well played. She kept checking that Indian box over the years. She has no place to ask the questions.
KaiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Kennedy confirmation is very doubtful at this point.

Big Pharma $$$$$ is paying off.
sombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KaiBear said:

Kennedy confirmation is very doubtful at this point.

Big Pharma $$$$$ is paying off.
Big trial law isn't backing down . . . .
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
sombear said:

KaiBear said:

Kennedy confirmation is very doubtful at this point.

Big Pharma $$$$$ is paying off.
Big trial law isn't backing down . . . .
big pharma vs big trial law..

“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
sombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4th and Inches said:

sombear said:

KaiBear said:

Kennedy confirmation is very doubtful at this point.

Big Pharma $$$$$ is paying off.
Big trial law isn't backing down . . . .
big pharma vs big trial law..


Really? Why don't you post that exhaustive list of federal tort reform and a list of Dems who have bucked the trial lawyers?
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ron.reagan said:

Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:

If you truly believe Vaccines are bad for you then he is the guy for the job. If you believe that vaccines are saving millions of lives it seems like an unnecessary gamble to put in a guy that changes his position on vaccines depending on his audience to be in charge
He doesn't believe vaccines are bad for you. He believes that some vaccines are bad for some people, and that the vaccine schedule for children is absurd.
If you think the vaccine schedule for children is absurd you should see the schedule of deaths without them. Just because you lost the lottery doesn't mean the rest of us want our children to die because you are scared
I would venture to say I know a damn sight more than you do about it, but why don't you enlighten us with statistics. If you were born pre-1986, you had around 4-6 vaccines total. Now it's around 70 jabs.

Tell us what the mortality rate for children was both before and after 1986 for the diseases kids are being vaccinated for today?
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
J.R. said:

Mothra said:

J.R. said:

I, in no way like or respect Sen. Warren, but she is dead on right. This guys is a flip flopping nut job. Variances, abortion ect and you guys want this clown to run this agency.
What positions of his do you disagree with, if you know?

Did you like the last transgender sec. of health? Don't recall you complaining about him, er, her.

Edit: When are you going to drop the pretense you are an actual conservative?
the position I disagree with is he is a liar. Vid evidence about his anti vax stance along with his abortion stance. He did a 180 to get some govt cheese and be a Trump acolyte. He is no different than most other politicians of which Trump and his pathological lying has been deemed ok. Talk about dumbing down politics. I have NO problem with any trans person in jobs they are qualified for. ie, Jo Ellis. As far has "conservative " I don't owe anyone my politicks, but just for you ,, I will reiterate. I'm Fiscally conservative and socially progressive. I don't take the current definition you people expound relative to taking a corrupt view of conservatism as hook, line and sinker. So, you think that RFKj is the most qualified and good for the position he is being considered?

I appreciate you admitting you aren't a conservative. It's clear now why you hate Trump so bad, and never complained about Biden. You're a lefty, as most on this board have always known. So you can now at least drop the charade.

I think RFK will do a lot to make our society healthier, and I think he's a damn sight more qualified than someone with a mental illness. But as a leftist, I wouldn't expect you to understand or agree.

J.R.
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

J.R. said:

Mothra said:

J.R. said:

I, in no way like or respect Sen. Warren, but she is dead on right. This guys is a flip flopping nut job. Variances, abortion ect and you guys want this clown to run this agency.
What positions of his do you disagree with, if you know?

Did you like the last transgender sec. of health? Don't recall you complaining about him, er, her.

Edit: When are you going to drop the pretense you are an actual conservative?
the position I disagree with is he is a liar. Vid evidence about his anti vax stance along with his abortion stance. He did a 180 to get some govt cheese and be a Trump acolyte. He is no different than most other politicians of which Trump and his pathological lying has been deemed ok. Talk about dumbing down politics. I have NO problem with any trans person in jobs they are qualified for. ie, Jo Ellis. As far has "conservative " I don't owe anyone my politicks, but just for you ,, I will reiterate. I'm Fiscally conservative and socially progressive. I don't take the current definition you people expound relative to taking a corrupt view of conservatism as hook, line and sinker. So, you think that RFKj is the most qualified and good for the position he is being considered?

I appreciate you admitting you aren't a conservative. It's clear now why you hate Trump so bad, and never complained about Biden. You're a lefty, as most on this board have always known. So you can now at least drop the charade.

I think RFK will do a lot to make our society healthier, and I think he's a damn sight more qualified than someone with a mental illness. But as a leftist, I wouldn't expect you to understand or agree.


I don't buy all the conservative hook line and sinker. I'm certainly Fiscally conservative. I have been very transparent that I am socially progressive in terms of what people do is their business, not mine. I did not any anyway like Biden's politics or the vast majority of dems. Full disclosure....I probably wasn't terribly vocal about Biden as he was good for business. Yes , self serving. I cop to that.
Tempus Edax Rerum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:

If you truly believe Vaccines are bad for you then he is the guy for the job. If you believe that vaccines are saving millions of lives it seems like an unnecessary gamble to put in a guy that changes his position on vaccines depending on his audience to be in charge
He doesn't believe vaccines are bad for you. He believes that some vaccines are bad for some people, and that the vaccine schedule for children is absurd.
And yet you provide NO credible evidence to back up your stupid claim.
Tempus Edax Rerum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:

Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:

If you truly believe Vaccines are bad for you then he is the guy for the job. If you believe that vaccines are saving millions of lives it seems like an unnecessary gamble to put in a guy that changes his position on vaccines depending on his audience to be in charge
He doesn't believe vaccines are bad for you. He believes that some vaccines are bad for some people, and that the vaccine schedule for children is absurd.
If you think the vaccine schedule for children is absurd you should see the schedule of deaths without them. Just because you lost the lottery doesn't mean the rest of us want our children to die because you are scared
I would venture to say I know a damn sight more than you do about it, but why don't you enlighten us with statistics. If you were born pre-1986, you had around 4-6 vaccines total. Now it's around 70 jabs.

Tell us what the mortality rate for children was both before and after 1986 for the diseases kids are being vaccinated for today?
Such BS
Tempus Edax Rerum
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KaiBear said:

Mothra said:

ron.reagan said:

If you truly believe Vaccines are bad for you then he is the guy for the job. If you believe that vaccines are saving millions of lives it seems like an unnecessary gamble to put in a guy that changes his position on vaccines depending on his audience to be in charge
He doesn't believe vaccines are bad for you. He believes that some vaccines are bad for some people, and that the vaccine schedule for children is absurd.


The vaccine schedule for children is completely crazy..

Hope Kennedy gets confirmed so some legitimate reforms can be enacted.
No it's not. You and Mothra keep repeating that bs lie and never show us any credible evidence to back up your stupid claim.
El Oso
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's the same 4-6 vaccines with 15 total jabs by 10th grade according to the shot records for my kids. Some vaccines were administered (boostered) multiple times in that time period. Where are you getting 70?
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
El Oso said:

It's the same 4-6 vaccines with 15 total jabs by 10th grade according to the shot records for my kids. Some vaccines were administered (boostered) multiple times in that time period. Where are you getting 70?
No it's not. It's around 15 total vaccines, with 70 doses.

https://www.marinhealthcare.org/upload/public-meetings/2018-06-19-600-pm-mhd-community-health-seminar-vaccination/BRANCO_06192018_MGH%20Vaccine%20Presentation.pdf

 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.