Thought the same - WHERE THE HECK was everybody? They have had similar presentations in the recent past - perhaps this one was advertised in advance, and MOST CHOSE to not sit through it??
Frustrating as all get out, those that KNOW, appear powerless to do more than only talk about it.
HOPEFUL (!) that what Governor DeSantis is doing over in Florida can generate some meaningful traction.
This link includes the response of a Minister Caulfield - Tune In at ~ the 21:00 mark for her "narrative-driven" response. It's like 'Whack-A-Mole', out there.
How is it possible to have a fair and impartial hearing on anything to do with Covid jabs or mandates when the judge and all workers in the courtroom/ courthouse have had the jabs themselves??
That means they for whatever their reasons have submitted to the safe and effective mantra BEFORE the cases are even heard. Here in Vancouver BC Canada currently the Supreme Court is hearing evidence to see if a class action lawsuit can proceed against our provincial health officer dictator Bonnie Henry. I wonder about this bias as I sit and listen to arguments in the courtroom. I pray the judge will certify this case to proceed!
This is huge.... their was no msm reporters covering the story from what I could see....!?
Thank you Jessica for being a brilliant shining light and tirelessly crunching through the data and exposing truth.
I always look forward to and tune into your Substack articles and interviews. Your humour is greatly appreciated too!
(If you ever make it to Vancouver dinner is on me)!
If this matter was argued properly in court, including the undeniable facts you mentioned, Jessica then we can only conclude that the judge made a political judgement and ignored the facts. It's not even a (im)moral argument of 'lesser harm for the greater good', it's harm with NO benefits!
The judiciary system is hopelessly broken and corrupted.
Exactly right. The facts are incontrovertible yet judges make decisions (decisions are cognitive acts, and not emotional or political opinions) without consulting any facts. Additionally, there has been so much pseudoscience published in “reputable” but compromised journals that there is the appearance of controversy where none exists. It is three years since the initial outbreak and garbage continues to be deemed accurate by medical journals and touted by MSM as gospel, so it is no wonder we have uneducated judges making precipitous, harmful and unjust decisions. Thank you Jessica for your continued analysis and deep dives into the data. Your work and the work of colleagues must surely stem the tide.
after all has been said a million times through a million channels for years - none of which mainstream - i am starting to wonder if we will ever re-emerge from the hole we have been put in. when you see the CEOs of pfizer and moderna going about business as usual, continuing to extract billions from governments worldwide for their non-sterilizing killer shot - and now the drugs to go with the shots as they fail - and the MSM continuing to call out the good people like yourself and others to be "hacks peddling misinformation", with no change of direction and narrative in sight, i am starting to wonder where all of this is headed... that said, thanks for all your good work, and please keep it up!
Just trying to imagine that world he lives in. People take the jabs, die from them, but it’s just a hardship experience, that doesn’t change a thing about those safe and effective vaccines. Death is just a hardship in that language.
A damned tangled web - either truly believing in the narrative, or blatant cognitive dissonance.
If I was a judge - I'd be out a job, I think. Could NEVER fail to fairly consider both sides - nor could I ignore the signals we have seen. Mind boggling.
There is no reason for a lack of quantification. No reason to say vaccines are safe and effective. Unless of course, the judge wants to be wilfully blind.
These are the last gasp efforts to perpetuate the fraud, Ed Dowd describes this kind of nonsensical behavior as “fake it till you make it”
I do not believe the judges ruling was based on ignorance, rather a perverse sense of loyalty to a cause. A need to conform, to please a certain subset of actors who have proven over and over that they have nothing but contempt for the credulity of the common man.
Said actors have malign intentions for society as we know it today. We only need to look around us to understand that the destabilization of societies foundations is their goal, the Vax fraud, the Covid pandemic are simply tools in the chest.
"The order says that the state is generally prohibited from enforcing H.B. 702 in health care settings and barred from using the law to interfere with the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare rule requiring health care workers be vaccinated against COVID-19."
Bottom line, from a legal perspective only, the judge is ruling that federal law supersedes state law. As such, everything depends on the lawsuit by the Montana AG and 21 other state AGs asking the federal government to repeal the COVID vaccine mandate for health care workers.
Hilarious ... “vaccine preventable diseases” and “safe and effective vaccines” ... this judge is living under a rock. I did read though a part of the ruling that made slight sense ... the law in question prevented the collection of vaccine data which would make it impossible to accommodate employees requiring non exposure to unvaccinated staff. Or! Unvaxxed staff wanting to not be shed all over by vaxxed staff ... I added that part because this dopey judge forgot
👏👏👏👏💯👍🙏 unfortunately we are still running about 9-12months behind schedule- the judge will either be over ruled or change their rule, quoting ""changed/new information" or ""circumstances". 😑🙄🤷♀️ it's tiresome, little like watching graphic/horrible/heart achingly terrible paint dry! But slowly, incrementally, there are more who know or questioning out loud. The tsunami is beginning. This judge is still swimming in shallow waters😉
Right idea, wrong century, wrong context. Near or soon after the end of the Spanish flu epidemic the US Supreme Court ruled against a vaccine refuser, finding that individual rights do not supersede public safety.
Back then vaccines were real and they worked. Now their bastard children provide negative protection, serious, often fatal side effects, and have ushered in a new syndrome that awakens latent diseases and causes various other metabolic dysfunctions.
If none of the aforementioned was happening, and the "difficulties" weren't damaging and/or fatal, the judge would still be on the wrong side of informed consent and other clauses in the Nuremberg Treaty that the US ratified.
Requiring the courts to determine the meaning of safe and effective might beat this stupidity.
I didn't check what kind of a proceeding the Montana court ruling was conducting, but maybe a mistrial can be declared for failure to enter the judge's head into evidence of the fact that the spike protein can cross the brain blood barrier.
I took that view at the beginning of the pandemic, as did many others. It was more of a reaction to being labelled "antivaxer" than an actual informed opinion. Having since informed myself, my opinion has changed. There may be some vaccines that are safe, but most of them are not. It's just that the damage isn't quite as obvious, nor were people looking as closely back then as they are now.
It makes me wonder if they presented evidence showing everything you said with someone able to explain it? It's almost like this judge made this decision because the BBC or CNN depending on the country. This is, I feel an example of either judges being bought or pure ignorance because he was given the jab. This is the direction of the judicial branch and it is scary. I just pray and sometimes on twitter tell people, "I will pray for them because I can't fix stupid." Probably not very Christian but damn I am tired of the people that refuse to listen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5hb_8T5GQs
This MP’s speech is spot on! Please watch this.
“. . . we’ve got the poacher paying the gamekeeper. . . “
Brilliant speech heard by 6 or 7 people in the house! I cannot articulate the inner emotions I have after listening and seeing.... is this reality??
Thought the same - WHERE THE HECK was everybody? They have had similar presentations in the recent past - perhaps this one was advertised in advance, and MOST CHOSE to not sit through it??
Frustrating as all get out, those that KNOW, appear powerless to do more than only talk about it.
HOPEFUL (!) that what Governor DeSantis is doing over in Florida can generate some meaningful traction.
https://rumble.com/v20gs5s-desantis-announces-petition-to-investigate-any-and-all-wrongdoing-with-resp.html
There are a few pieces to DeSantis' plan - 🤞
This link includes the response of a Minister Caulfield - Tune In at ~ the 21:00 mark for her "narrative-driven" response. It's like 'Whack-A-Mole', out there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wV-WV6Ssl8
How is it possible to have a fair and impartial hearing on anything to do with Covid jabs or mandates when the judge and all workers in the courtroom/ courthouse have had the jabs themselves??
That means they for whatever their reasons have submitted to the safe and effective mantra BEFORE the cases are even heard. Here in Vancouver BC Canada currently the Supreme Court is hearing evidence to see if a class action lawsuit can proceed against our provincial health officer dictator Bonnie Henry. I wonder about this bias as I sit and listen to arguments in the courtroom. I pray the judge will certify this case to proceed!
This is huge.... their was no msm reporters covering the story from what I could see....!?
Thank you Jessica for being a brilliant shining light and tirelessly crunching through the data and exposing truth.
I always look forward to and tune into your Substack articles and interviews. Your humour is greatly appreciated too!
(If you ever make it to Vancouver dinner is on me)!
The injectable COVID products are just as safe and effective as the showers from Auschwitz; they were designed by the same people after all...
They kill safely and effectively, hence they are safe and effective.
If this matter was argued properly in court, including the undeniable facts you mentioned, Jessica then we can only conclude that the judge made a political judgement and ignored the facts. It's not even a (im)moral argument of 'lesser harm for the greater good', it's harm with NO benefits!
The judiciary system is hopelessly broken and corrupted.
I hope this will be appealed.
Exactly right. The facts are incontrovertible yet judges make decisions (decisions are cognitive acts, and not emotional or political opinions) without consulting any facts. Additionally, there has been so much pseudoscience published in “reputable” but compromised journals that there is the appearance of controversy where none exists. It is three years since the initial outbreak and garbage continues to be deemed accurate by medical journals and touted by MSM as gospel, so it is no wonder we have uneducated judges making precipitous, harmful and unjust decisions. Thank you Jessica for your continued analysis and deep dives into the data. Your work and the work of colleagues must surely stem the tide.
And the ruling was essentially in favor of benefit with only “hardship” to detract from it ... wow ... death and maiming are some kind of hardship 😭
after all has been said a million times through a million channels for years - none of which mainstream - i am starting to wonder if we will ever re-emerge from the hole we have been put in. when you see the CEOs of pfizer and moderna going about business as usual, continuing to extract billions from governments worldwide for their non-sterilizing killer shot - and now the drugs to go with the shots as they fail - and the MSM continuing to call out the good people like yourself and others to be "hacks peddling misinformation", with no change of direction and narrative in sight, i am starting to wonder where all of this is headed... that said, thanks for all your good work, and please keep it up!
Judge should be very careful when he mandates death. He should know why.
Just trying to imagine that world he lives in. People take the jabs, die from them, but it’s just a hardship experience, that doesn’t change a thing about those safe and effective vaccines. Death is just a hardship in that language.
Outstanding. Bravo, your honor ... also it is time for another booster
sad to suggest - collateral damage?
A damned tangled web - either truly believing in the narrative, or blatant cognitive dissonance.
If I was a judge - I'd be out a job, I think. Could NEVER fail to fairly consider both sides - nor could I ignore the signals we have seen. Mind boggling.
There is no reason for a lack of quantification. No reason to say vaccines are safe and effective. Unless of course, the judge wants to be wilfully blind.
If an intelligent person - willfully blind seems the best answer.
As you say ☝️ , it kills in a safe and effective manner - not to mention difficult to prove.
Once there is will to get the truth, the prove becomes possible and facts become understamdable.
These are the last gasp efforts to perpetuate the fraud, Ed Dowd describes this kind of nonsensical behavior as “fake it till you make it”
I do not believe the judges ruling was based on ignorance, rather a perverse sense of loyalty to a cause. A need to conform, to please a certain subset of actors who have proven over and over that they have nothing but contempt for the credulity of the common man.
Said actors have malign intentions for society as we know it today. We only need to look around us to understand that the destabilization of societies foundations is their goal, the Vax fraud, the Covid pandemic are simply tools in the chest.
"The order says that the state is generally prohibited from enforcing H.B. 702 in health care settings and barred from using the law to interfere with the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare rule requiring health care workers be vaccinated against COVID-19."
https://flatheadbeacon.com/2022/12/11/federal-judge-strikes-down-montana-vaccine-choice-law-in-health-settings/
=====
Bottom line, from a legal perspective only, the judge is ruling that federal law supersedes state law. As such, everything depends on the lawsuit by the Montana AG and 21 other state AGs asking the federal government to repeal the COVID vaccine mandate for health care workers.
Tried to share the science direct paper and a HUGE fact check came up discrediting it. Scary times when you are gas lit around every corner!
Hilarious ... “vaccine preventable diseases” and “safe and effective vaccines” ... this judge is living under a rock. I did read though a part of the ruling that made slight sense ... the law in question prevented the collection of vaccine data which would make it impossible to accommodate employees requiring non exposure to unvaccinated staff. Or! Unvaxxed staff wanting to not be shed all over by vaxxed staff ... I added that part because this dopey judge forgot
👏👏👏👏💯👍🙏 unfortunately we are still running about 9-12months behind schedule- the judge will either be over ruled or change their rule, quoting ""changed/new information" or ""circumstances". 😑🙄🤷♀️ it's tiresome, little like watching graphic/horrible/heart achingly terrible paint dry! But slowly, incrementally, there are more who know or questioning out loud. The tsunami is beginning. This judge is still swimming in shallow waters😉
Right idea, wrong century, wrong context. Near or soon after the end of the Spanish flu epidemic the US Supreme Court ruled against a vaccine refuser, finding that individual rights do not supersede public safety.
Back then vaccines were real and they worked. Now their bastard children provide negative protection, serious, often fatal side effects, and have ushered in a new syndrome that awakens latent diseases and causes various other metabolic dysfunctions.
If none of the aforementioned was happening, and the "difficulties" weren't damaging and/or fatal, the judge would still be on the wrong side of informed consent and other clauses in the Nuremberg Treaty that the US ratified.
Requiring the courts to determine the meaning of safe and effective might beat this stupidity.
I didn't check what kind of a proceeding the Montana court ruling was conducting, but maybe a mistrial can be declared for failure to enter the judge's head into evidence of the fact that the spike protein can cross the brain blood barrier.
Or just do a regular bribery investigation!
"Back then vaccines were real and they worked."
I took that view at the beginning of the pandemic, as did many others. It was more of a reaction to being labelled "antivaxer" than an actual informed opinion. Having since informed myself, my opinion has changed. There may be some vaccines that are safe, but most of them are not. It's just that the damage isn't quite as obvious, nor were people looking as closely back then as they are now.
If it doesn’t stop transmission, no need to mandate it. If it does stop transmission, no need to mandate it.
If it’s not completely 100% safe and effective for everyone, it’s unethical to mandate it. The mandates do not hold up to the most basic scrutiny.
It makes me wonder if they presented evidence showing everything you said with someone able to explain it? It's almost like this judge made this decision because the BBC or CNN depending on the country. This is, I feel an example of either judges being bought or pure ignorance because he was given the jab. This is the direction of the judicial branch and it is scary. I just pray and sometimes on twitter tell people, "I will pray for them because I can't fix stupid." Probably not very Christian but damn I am tired of the people that refuse to listen.
https://icthruit.substack.com/p/sayin-a-lie-audio-track