Let’s put an end to the pandemic charade.
The United States Supreme Court has decided that it will hold an expedited hearing on two out of four of the Biden vaccine mandates, with oral arguments scheduled for Saturday, January 7, 2022. The SCOTUS will be reviewing the Sixth Circuit’s decision affirming the private employer OSHA mandates after the Fifth Circuit unanimously held that OSHA did not have jurisdiction over the seasonal flu and issued a nationwide injunction. The Court will also be reviewing the “CMS Mandate” dictating that health care workers working for authorized Medicaid and Medicare providers must also be vaxxed. Both the Eighth Circuit and the Fifth Circuit have enjoined the CMS Mandate, making the CMS Mandate uneforceable in 25 states. As of this writing, the Court will not be reviewing injunctions against the “federal contractor” mandate which has been halted by federal judges in Georgia and Florida.
I hope readers of this piece will be persuaded that whatever the Supreme Court decides, it will be a win for those who do not want to participate in federally coerced drug experiments.
If the Court follows the trend among Federalist Society judges and rules against the mandates, that will be a win because it will put an end to to the make-believe pandemic and a so-called vaccine mandate that is in fact a massive medical experiment that violates informed consent and the Nuremberg Code. If, however, the Court is cowed by the Administrative Law State and issues another absurdly political decision and affirms the vaccine mandate like it did in the last health care mandate case–the Obamacare mandate decision–that will be an even bigger win. It will be a bigger win because it will cause the already very strong vax opposition to get stronger. The current divide between employers and the goverment will only grow bigger and become more irreconcilable if the Supreme Court affirms. As more employers opt out of this federal scheme, the federal goverment will rapidly lose credibility and then it will lose authority and legitimacy.
Smart employers, including Boeing and Southwest Airlines, have already gotten the memo and know how to keep their employees safe while at the same time complying with ALL federal laws, not just the diktats relating to vaccines. They do this by encouraging their employees to request vaccine exemptions. They grant every request, no questions asked. This complies with the law. If SCOTUS upholds the mandates, this strategy will continue to work because it places an unbearable administrative enforcement burden on the federal agencies. If OSHA/CMS attempt to attack an employer who is liberally granting exemption requests, they will be in the impossible position of second-guessing an employer for accepting its employee’s lawful exemption request based on the employee’s sincerely-held, subjective beliefs. Exemption requests therefore place the battle where federal agencies cannot win–the minds of employees. If the Supreme Court affirms the bureaucracy’s mandates, OSHA/CMS will be faced with dissipating their limited resources in an unwinnable war over whether over 80 million people really believe what they have put in their exemption requests.
For interested employees, the latest vaccine exemption request letter 3.0 is below.
THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW STATE CALLS THE SHOTS
As two very isolated judges on the Sixth Circuit have now made clear, the pandemic narrative was never about health or safety. It was always about obtaining mass vaccine compliance, by psychological hook or bullying crook. The Sixth Circuit’s decision gives OSHA the green light to coerce private employers (with threats of federal fines) into coercing their employees to submit to a global drug experiment that violates the Nuremberg Code’s informed consent principles. OSHA’s emergency rule seeks to force employers into causing unnecessary friction in the lives of their unvaxxed employees with threats of termination, weekly testing, and masks which do not prevent the spread of anything and the only purpose of which is to stigmatize non-compliant employees. If the Supreme Court affirms the bureaucracy’s “temporary” mandates, employers who blindly obey OSHA or the CMS will be putting their employees at risk and may be exposing themselves to signficant liability if the federally mandated drug experiment goes awry as many credible doctors foresee.
If you are a private employer or Medicaid/Medicare care provider and have been going along to get along through the pandemic psyop, it’s time to wake up.
Here is the Sixth Circuit’s decision restated in plain English:
(1) OSHA always has and always will have juridiction over the seasonal flu even though a co-equal court, the Fifth Circuit, in a unanimous decision issued just weeks ago stated that OSHA never had and never will have juridiction over the seasonal flu;
(2) the 2020 seasonal flu (a/k/a “Covid”) is a deadly, dangerous, and scary disease and we will keep repeating deadly, dangerous, and scary until you accept that it is true and stop asking for relevant risk information, things like scientifically-determined, blood test verified, infection-to-fatality (IFR) rates which show a greater than 99.83 survival rate in all but the over 70 y.o., multiple co-morbidity, and extremely isolated cohort; and
(3) Dear Serfs and Employers of Serfs, this decision will put you on notice that we live in an administrative law state where the federal bureauracy runs the show, determines what reality is, determines what is risky and what is not and has the power and authority to compel over 80 million innocent people to submit to a no-safety-net drug experiment against their will and sound judgment.
If you were wondering, like I was, how one co-equal federal circuit court can “overrule” another co-equal federal circuit court after the first court issued a nationwide order and determined that OSHA’s case showed very little likelihood of success, there is of course a law that allows for such a thing. The federal bureaucracy has seen to it. The federal bureaucracy invoked the law, and a “lottery” was held somewhere. Price Waterhouse did not audit this lottery. Predictably, neither the mandate-thumping 8th Circuit or 5th Circuit won the lottery. The lottery “winner,” the Sixth Circuit, Justice Kavanaugh’s assigned circuit, then held a vote on whether the entire court should hear the case en banc, or whether it should be decided by a panel of three judges. The vote was 8-8 and a majority was needed to hear the case en banc. So it was decided by a panel of three judges and the decison was nevertheless 2-1 in favor of the mandates, with a vigorous dissent. To date, 25 federal judges have issued opinions on the mandates. 20 have opposed the mandates and only 5 have supported it. Great luck for the Administrative Law State that two isolated friendly judges were on the lottery-winning Sixth Circuit.
When even federal judges do not appear to be getting their way, it seems possible that hideous bureaucratic strength is pressuring them. The Obamacare decision is Exhibit A showing the impotency of federal judges when up against the federal bureaucracy.
The most pertinent sentence in the Sixth Circuit’s decision:
But the ultimate determination of what level of risk constitutes a “grave danger” is a “policy consideration that belongs, in the first intance, to the Agency.”
You read that correctly. Risk is not determined by facts, namely a statistically proven greater than 99.83 percent survival rate for everyone under 70 years old. Two lonely judges on the Sixth Circuit have temporarily turned the anti-vax tide and stated that the federal bureaucracy gets to ignore facts and determine what is risky for over 80 million private employees as a matter of “policy.” The two Sixth Circuit Judges who issued the decision are Jane Stranch and Julia Gibbons. The dissent was authored by Joan Larsen.
Yet fear not.
ACCURATE INFORMATION, RISK, UNCERTAINTY, AND DEATH
The most valuable resource is not gold or silver or diamonds or rubies. It is accurate information. And accurate risk information is the most precious of all accurate information. The lack of accurate vaccine (“Shot”) risk information and its active concealment is what has made the natives restless. The Reptile Mind hates concealment and hates uncertainty. It demands, and usually gets, vengeance when the truth finally is revealed.
Before the FDA was subject to regulatory capture by the pharmceutical industry, the typical timeline for FDA drug approval was long, usually years. This is because it takes time and careful observation to gather accurate risk information on new, experimental drugs. This all began to change when, in 1992, federal law was changed to require pharmaceutical companies to pay “user fees” for FDA approval. Although pitched as a taxpayer relief bill, it was in reality a “he who pays the piper calls the tune” law that resulted in the FDA and other federal agenies serving as agents of Big Pharm. Today, over 50 percent of the FDA’s budget comes from user fees. When the public absorbs the fact that “FDA approved” actually means “Pfizer has bribed and coerced the FDA into approving,” only then will the public be able to understand why and how the seasonal flu has been transubstaniated into a dangerous pandemic requiring mass and unending “vaccinations.”
The Covid Scare and Donald J. Chump’s September 19, 2019 Executive Order completed the regulatory capture. Look no further than Trump’s acceptance of a $1 million inauguration donation/bribe from Pfizer to understand why he might sign the 2019 EO declaring war against the seasonal flu. Trump’s 2019 EO gave birth to Emergency Use Authorization, which really means fast, mass, no-safety-net, human experimentation. “Operation Warp Speed,” as Trump dubbed it, was a joint big pharma, federal agency operation aided by a coalition of big media, big data, and big health, employing vast federal and private resources (let loose by Trump’s 2019 Executive Order) tasked with the goal of transposing the normal seasonal flu, with its very real and very neglible risk (a proven survival rate of 99.83%) into a “pandemic” to scare people into submitting to a massive medical experiment without being first able to fully assess the risk. If you doubt this, ask yourself why even the federal goverment admits that the seasonal flu virtually disappeared in 2020 while Covid “cases” went parabolic. The answer is that Trump’s 2019 Executive Order was the word-game hocus pocus that made seasonal flu = pandemic possible. The fear induced by the word “pandemic” was effective in turning off the herd’s critical thinking about the normal, and very real, dangers of the seasonal flu.
The accurate risk of the 2020 Seasonal Flu (n/k/a Covid-19) is in–a greater than 99.83 percent survival rate for the under 70 cohort. The accurate risk information for the Shot is unknown and can’t be known for many years, although there is much information that suggests that it is very dangerous.
With that context, the Sixth Circuit’s decision dodges the fact that any employer involved in compelling the Shot (the compliance deadline has been moved forward to February so we can expect the Supreme Court to decide before then) will be violating the principle of informed consent. Informed consent assumes the ability to gather and curate accurate risk information in order to make an informed risk decision. If not enough time has passed or not enough data has been gathered, accurate risk information cannot be obtained and informed consent is therefore impossible. Every employer who blindly follows the Sixth Circuit rather than listening to the “still small voice” of his conscience and common sense will therefore risk violating informed consent as reflected in the Nuremberg Code. The informed consent terms of the Nuremberg Code are codified into U.S. law at 45 C.F.R. 46.116. All federal agencies conducting human health experiments, including OSHA and CMS, must first obtain informed consent.
In the present case, however, OSHA and CMS will not comply with 45 C.F.R. 46.116. OSHA and CMS can credibly claim that they are not conducting a human experiment. You know “the story.” They are responding to a health emergency caused by a “pandemic”; a pandemic that has no serious adverse effects on 99.83 percent of the population. And the fact is that these federal agencies are not actually conducting an experiment. They are coercing employers into conducting the experiment. Smart employers must see through this. If the Shot mandate results in a future eugenic culling that many sober doctors fear, or even if the Shots only cause small numbers of serious injuries supported by the current anecdotal information, creative plaintiff’s lawyers will not look to legally immune OSHA or statutorily immune Pfizer for collection, they will instead look to collect from employers who accepted illegitimate goverment promises and believed that liability waivers or “just following orders” would be a valid defense to sacrificing their employees on the Big Pharma altar. The “just following orders” defense did not work in the first Nuremberg trials and it won’t work here after all the facts are in on the pandemic charade.
If the Supreme Court affirms the Sixth Circuit, employers would be unwise to trust any claim that immunity from liability will extend to employers. This is because, in the case of both the OSHA ETS and the CMS “temporary rule,” they operate as a fast-tracked administrative rule. That is, the “temporary” rule goes into effect immediately and at the same time there is a 6-month “notice and comment” period in which OSHA can evaluate the temporary rule’s efficacy and reasonableness. In the case of the Shot mandate, unwise employers will be demanding that their employess submit to the drug experiment Shot (and causing known health risks, including death and serious injury, to their employees) at the same time OSHA is receiving notice and comment “feedback.” So, it is certainly possible that, after 6 months and X millions have been jabbed and Y million have been injured or killed, OSHA and CMS simply withdraw temporary rules based on the “risk.” Of course, at that point the “risk” will be a “reality” and the potential culling will be irreversible. The Shots will then be in the subjects of the mass human experiment.
While the federal agencies may withdraw the temporary mass medical experiment rules at the end of the notice and comment period, the injuries and potential exposure to liability will nevertheless remain. OSHA/CMS and the pharmaceutical companies will not be left holding the risk bag. That is because they are not conducting the experiment. They are responding to an emergency caused by “a pandemic” in case you have forgotten the narrative. Any employer, therefore, who unwisely denies an exemption request from a worker who is later injured or killed in this medical experiment will be exposed. If the eugenics-loving SCOTUS affirms, this bureaucratic pull-the-rug-out tactic is a distinct possibility.
There is ample, credible, accurate risk data available right now that shows: (1) the risk of contracting the seasonal flu, whether you label it “Covid” or “pandemic” or “death virus” is negligible–greater than 99.83 percent survival rate for everyone under 70 and in relatively good health; (2) the anecdotal Shot risk is real and signficant and includes death by heart attack, myocarditis (heart injury), blood clotting, Guillain Barre Syndrome (paralysis), and miscarriage; and (3) the presently unknown and nascent future Shot risk, Shot uncertainty, is potentially catastrophic and could involve a range of auto-immune diseases and ultimate immune system collapse. Mandating employers are much more exposed to risky and uncertain adverse Shot outcomes than the goverment or the pharmaceutical companies. If, as some doctors predict, the Shots result in something like AIDS on a larger scale, then liability waivers and “just following orders” will not be an effective defense. Again, it didn’t work for the the Nazi enforcers of the medical experiments in the last Nuremberg trials.