The ruling leaves Federal Employees' health choices at the whim of whatever sitting President believes about vaccines - and the COVID19 jab proved that's as arbitrary and capricious as things come.
Thank you so much for addressing this concerning development, James. I saw Mobeen Syed's video on this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6267fBUipo) and was hoping to get more info as I was surprised no one else appeared to be discussing the ruling's implications or next steps.
I would think inherent in Informed Consent IS choice. Why bother with informing if it doesn't matter? Seems to me when the subject is brought up, Informed Consent is not consistently protected from state to state.
I think its clear if mandates are a possibility, science is indeed dead and there is an inherent corruption in our system as well as an inherent cognitive dissonance in regards to vaccine safety never mind our constitution: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness for ALL.
Our Godless world is regressing back to the dark ages, where non conformists' heretics are cast out! Doctor Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis comes to mind for his radical "not conforming properly", just like evil pharma "medicine" attack on FLCCC doctors who saved many lives, as Dr. Semmelweis [circa 1860's] did [for a short while, till he was cast out & died penniless in a nut house, for saving mothers lives! As the good book says,
Definition of science involves replication. To know what you are trying to replicate you must have raw data. Raw data not available for the trials. Therefore trials literally not science.
Another argument that ought to be sufficient:
No raw data = no possibility of proving trials were not fraudulent.
Are 5 billion in fruad fines pharma cartel don't need no stinking raw data or trials, because thay can't be sued for killing you! I.E. nothing to lose everything to gain!
Wonderful analysis; you have been a hero, and remain so! Still, my one nagging doubt (could be erroneous?) is that I thought if the injections were classed as "countermeasures," via DARPA and the stinking military-pharmaceutical cabal, they did not have to be tested at ALL...And, yes, I'm an acolyte -- to my grave!! -- of Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt.
Why do critical thinking free people call an unproven experimental forced drug a Vaccine? Boys & girls did you know a Vaccines is a tested FDA approved drug that helps prevent spreading & catching a disease? But I guess, if you can be brainwashes to calling boys girls, our 5 billion in fruad fines big pharma's cartel could force you to take dog turd as a "vaccines"! Right?
Great explanations for a complicated subject, In May, when Biden signs onto the new WHO rules, it'll all be moot anyway.. On the other hand, we could bring back "The Revolution."
45 CFR 46.116 wasn't used in any of these cases which, imo, made the SCOTUS rulings easier (or even required?) for the Justices to make. Correct me if I'm wrong. Regardless, everything that is being said by Jack in this brilliant post is 100% correct.
LOL - yes, great for sure! Even better, get our state representatives to tell the federal government to get off States' rights and do the only jobs the federal government is constitutionally good for: immigration, commerce, sovereignty, and our safety.
Yeah I like the clean Air act you can stop spraying us with chemtrails now that's not good for our air it's actually killing us then the plants and the animals
Seems that all the examples you cite were instances of Federal legislation supplanting state laws not "precedents for how federal legislation has often been supplanted by state laws and societal shifts, leading to more uniform and fair policies across the United States" as you misconstrue them. It further seems to me that 60 years of the "progressive" federal policies cited are exactly the reason we are in the foyer of our totalitarian prison today. It scarcely needs pointing out that the supremes have been deliberately dodging the constitutional and common law issues in order to solidify the walls of that federal prison.
JLW - Every member of the Supreme Court needs to be shot at least three times, with the latest jab. Rest assured NONE of them has received even ONE shot. Rules for thee, not for me Mr. Mulder.
The Supreme Court was not subject to the mandates. If they were, how many would have dropped dead? How many would have changed their ruling due to the mandate of forced experimentation?
EUA Countermeasures are NOT INVESTIGATIONAL!! They are NOT subject to research. Informed consent IS NOT required for non-investigational drugs, and it is a legal impossibility to obtain it. This is clear as day in EUA law, yet everyone ignores this fact. These are poisons that are not possible to study in clinical trials. This is fully intentional. THIS must be challenged in a lawsuit.
This tangled web was no accident. The pandemic/vaccine combo to gain control was planned a LONG time ago and when Bill and Fauci giggle and say a pandemic is coming it is because they knew.
Common sense
If so, the Common Rule would have been the basis of the lawsuits.
Thank you so much for addressing this concerning development, James. I saw Mobeen Syed's video on this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6267fBUipo) and was hoping to get more info as I was surprised no one else appeared to be discussing the ruling's implications or next steps.
I didn't know about it either. surprising CHD hasn't covered it yet. I'm sure they will soon.
I would think inherent in Informed Consent IS choice. Why bother with informing if it doesn't matter? Seems to me when the subject is brought up, Informed Consent is not consistently protected from state to state.
I think its clear if mandates are a possibility, science is indeed dead and there is an inherent corruption in our system as well as an inherent cognitive dissonance in regards to vaccine safety never mind our constitution: Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness for ALL.
Our Godless world is regressing back to the dark ages, where non conformists' heretics are cast out! Doctor Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis comes to mind for his radical "not conforming properly", just like evil pharma "medicine" attack on FLCCC doctors who saved many lives, as Dr. Semmelweis [circa 1860's] did [for a short while, till he was cast out & died penniless in a nut house, for saving mothers lives! As the good book says,
"There's nothing new under the sun."
One argument that ought to be sufficient:
Definition of science involves replication. To know what you are trying to replicate you must have raw data. Raw data not available for the trials. Therefore trials literally not science.
Another argument that ought to be sufficient:
No raw data = no possibility of proving trials were not fraudulent.
Are 5 billion in fruad fines pharma cartel don't need no stinking raw data or trials, because thay can't be sued for killing you! I.E. nothing to lose everything to gain!
Wonderful analysis; you have been a hero, and remain so! Still, my one nagging doubt (could be erroneous?) is that I thought if the injections were classed as "countermeasures," via DARPA and the stinking military-pharmaceutical cabal, they did not have to be tested at ALL...And, yes, I'm an acolyte -- to my grave!! -- of Sasha Latypova and Katherine Watt.
Why do critical thinking free people call an unproven experimental forced drug a Vaccine? Boys & girls did you know a Vaccines is a tested FDA approved drug that helps prevent spreading & catching a disease? But I guess, if you can be brainwashes to calling boys girls, our 5 billion in fruad fines big pharma's cartel could force you to take dog turd as a "vaccines"! Right?
Great explanations for a complicated subject, In May, when Biden signs onto the new WHO rules, it'll all be moot anyway.. On the other hand, we could bring back "The Revolution."
45 CFR 46.116 wasn't used in any of these cases which, imo, made the SCOTUS rulings easier (or even required?) for the Justices to make. Correct me if I'm wrong. Regardless, everything that is being said by Jack in this brilliant post is 100% correct.
Wouldn't it be great if no one wanted to work for the federal government now because of this?
That would be great.
LOL - yes, great for sure! Even better, get our state representatives to tell the federal government to get off States' rights and do the only jobs the federal government is constitutionally good for: immigration, commerce, sovereignty, and our safety.
Yeah I like the clean Air act you can stop spraying us with chemtrails now that's not good for our air it's actually killing us then the plants and the animals
I’ve just donated to Fed’s for Freedom, Dr. Jack, and thank you for all you do!
Seems that all the examples you cite were instances of Federal legislation supplanting state laws not "precedents for how federal legislation has often been supplanted by state laws and societal shifts, leading to more uniform and fair policies across the United States" as you misconstrue them. It further seems to me that 60 years of the "progressive" federal policies cited are exactly the reason we are in the foyer of our totalitarian prison today. It scarcely needs pointing out that the supremes have been deliberately dodging the constitutional and common law issues in order to solidify the walls of that federal prison.
JLW - Every member of the Supreme Court needs to be shot at least three times, with the latest jab. Rest assured NONE of them has received even ONE shot. Rules for thee, not for me Mr. Mulder.
The Supreme Court was not subject to the mandates. If they were, how many would have dropped dead? How many would have changed their ruling due to the mandate of forced experimentation?
EUA Countermeasures are NOT INVESTIGATIONAL!! They are NOT subject to research. Informed consent IS NOT required for non-investigational drugs, and it is a legal impossibility to obtain it. This is clear as day in EUA law, yet everyone ignores this fact. These are poisons that are not possible to study in clinical trials. This is fully intentional. THIS must be challenged in a lawsuit.
This tangled web was no accident. The pandemic/vaccine combo to gain control was planned a LONG time ago and when Bill and Fauci giggle and say a pandemic is coming it is because they knew.
NOTHING is a "legal impossibility". The route to change varies.
Second to last paragraph—you can omit the last bit because this is all that needs be said:
“The US government does not have the right to enslave people to make them use their immune systems in any way they themselves have not decided.”
Full stop.