I'm not sure who is checking the comments, but I hope someone is. I am hoping this gets added to the amended filings on the mandates.
Here are the December 18 and December 21 Omicron reports from Denmark. As you will see, 90% of confirmed Omicron patients are either vaccinated or vaccinated plus boosted.
Also, when it comes to US numbers, I found some interesting fraud from NY. The estimate these wildly high percentages of unvaccinated patients currently in the hospital. But, if you notice, they state it's an "estimate" of vaccinated v unvaccinated. To calculate that break-out they are using an outdated study of hospitalized vaccinated v unvaccinated for those in the hospital from May 3rd - July 25th. IF ANY ATTORNEY CLAIMS THE CURRENT RATES OF HOSPITALIZATION BY VACCINATION STATUS JUSTIFY THE MANDATES< PLEASE NOTE THEY ARE NOT ACTUALY COUNTING THEM CURRENTLY. These links are the final links.
and if you scroll down to "methodological notes" and click on the MMWR publication they are using to "estimate" the number of currently hospitalized you will find this (revised and very outdated) "study" in which data collection ended July 25th.
I understand the ideological arguments, but I am also begging you all to introduce the 2 new studies out, and official data, from both the U.K. and Denmark showing clearly the vaccines have negative efficiency. While they might save the post-working age from severe infection, the fully vaccinated working age population is MORE likely to test positive.
Combined with the denial of natural immunity and the “emergency” standard wanting to vaccinate the entire working age population, the emergency order is useless at accomplishing what it claims to accomplish. New or experimental medical procedures cannot and should not be mandated because, as we are seeing, they often don’t work.
It’s concerning SCOTUS has allowed this to move forward (along with other mandates). How can any government agency mandate a drug that has negative efficiency?
It's just crazy that our government in the USA thinks it's okay to force people to take these shots. (No jab =no job). The shots were rushed out, no animal trials (besides the one going on now with humans), no liability for the pharmaceutical companies, people having terrible adverse effects and no one knows how to help them, no long term studies, all of the shots are EUA. Even if they were approved and not EUA, it's still wrong to mandate them. What will be mandated next if this is allowed to continue?
How can they mandate any drug or gene therapy period? Robert Barnes has said that Jacobson (1905) is flawed. What do you say re Jacobson Mr. Siri?
Amy Coney Barrett really likes Jacobson as an excuse for governmental overreach. Doesn’t bode well for what SCOTUS will ultimately decide about this mess. Barrett could’ve used Pritzker to define “emergency” but instead used the word as an excuse for egregious abuse of gubernatorial power. Would love to see your take. If I can find it elsewhere can anyone say where?
Regarding the landmark Supreme Court case Jacobsen from 1904, people says it supports the government forcing shots on everyone. But, Jacobsen took place during smallpox -- which had a 30% mortality. If a person didn't want to get the shot they also had other options even under Jacobsen. They could pay a small fine (around $150 in today's dollars) or could get an exemption. If there's a mandate that benefits the public health you could require somebody to do it but there's opportunity to opt out by paying a fine or by having an exemption. The underlying science of Jacobsen is there's a highly lethal disease going around with a 30% mortality and the science behind the smallpox vaccines had been around a very long time as opposed to the science of these covid shots which is very new for vaccines. Lots of differences between Jacobsen and what's going on now. Jacobsen flat out says the public mandate couldn't exist unless it actually benefitted the public. But are these covid shots actually benefitting the public? Turns out no. The shots only work, to the extent they work, against the initial variant which is long gone. And the shots don't stop transmission of a new variant. Is this a public health measure at all or just personal treatment? Very clear it's not for public health, it's personal treatment only. No legal authority for government to interfere in your choice to take something for yourself. Evidence is clear, to the extent the shots work, they work only to reduce personal symptoms and severity. Absolutely do not work to prevent transmission. This moves it to cases under Cruzan which clearly states that people have inalienable right to chose own medical treatment. (For example, if you're diabetic neither the government nor anyone else can make/mandate you to take insulin).
NOTE: I got this information from this video by Dr. Simone Gold (Frontline Doctors). In this video she explains Injunction Against Kaiser and discusses the Jacobsen case)
I confess I am very worried that the US will try to mandate covid vaccines for everyone (like what just apparently happened in Ecuador - kids too). Thank you so much for fighting for our medical freedom.
I think they already banned the fired from getting unemployment.
Yup, it's like what happens to people who get "canceled" on social media. Your job is the first thing that goes, no due process, no proof that you're a threat.
THANKS.... I may have "skipped" that here, but would "mention" it during the "opening and closing" statements, and leave the JURY to deliberate that grand Nirenberg out-come!
Guttermouth, I already read about a woman in a custody battle in which a judge ordered she lose custody of her children because she hadn't taken the jab
In Chicago. I think it was reversed but I don’t recall by what legal mechanism. The guy who was denied contact with his child was a case on Long Island I believe. Don’t know the outcome on that one. Can someone jump in?
Anna, these things are already happening in poor parts of India with the "digital wallets". Poor people have literally starved to death because they couldn't get their rations of food because digital ID prevented it for various reasons.
According to the International Labor Organization, back in the first part of this Plannedamic.. 2.3 BILLION workers, men woman etc, are going to be totally without food and starve to DEATH, along with 1.3 BILLON children, of those workers, and just children living on the streets, in to many nations! The WHO estimated 3.3 BILLION will "starve to death because of the lockdowns.
And all that was BEFORE any "digital vaxx killing de-vices!"
BUT if ONE child dies of these fake, fraudulent "lock downs," that is TO MANY ALREADY!
I’ve worried about that, too, Anna, but I can’t imagine a coercive hold on SS without a similar coercive hold on welfare recipients, too. And because a fair number of welfare recipients are declining the shots, that whole proposal would be very messy and hugely controversial. So though I fear it, I just can’t see that happening. Hopefully.
It appears the covid shots are saving them a huge amount of money. I've heard that at one point CMS data showed that 44,000 people had died within 2 weeks of covid shots. Of course some of those would have died regardless but 44, 000 people x $700/month in social security benefits = $30,800,000 savings in a month ( and I was low with using $700/month benefit) + add in what the government pays for doctor's visits, hospitalizations, etc thru Medicare. Plus even more if they are subsidizing long term care.
Actually, most on this list didn't go along. I thought I was going to lose my job. I told my bosses: I am preparing to be fired because I am not taking the so called vaccine.
You guys are champs. You're gonna have so much fun on this case - maybe not in the moment, but definitely retrospectively. Keep up the good work, and thanks for fighting for American freedom.
My guess is SCOTUS will allow the mandate to proceed. After all, why should they be any different from Congress and the Executive branch? (The Federal govt is apparently fully controlled by the Deep State now.) But I'd love to be wrong.
The aberrant vaccine mandates should have never happened. Why the supreme court needs additional data is puzzling. Why they didn't rule for the stay is very troubling.
Thank you for fighting for freedom. In addition to all of the constitutional and moral issues, there’s also the practical issue that few tests are available these days so how the hell can I test every week
While I'm glad that this mandate is being fought, I'm uncomfortable with hanging your hat on the fact that states apparently have (unfettered) rights to impose the same mandate. I'm in a one-party blue state full of leftist scared sheep who are perfectly content giving up all rights for their perceived "public safety."
Sorry you are trapped. I'm in a purple state (Georgia) but it should be a state issue, not federal. However, even then it needs to be legislation, not governor executive privileges because each state has their own constitution. Join the millions moving to red states. When we said "The South Shall Rise Again", this is what we meant. Freedom is in the red states.
I feel immensely relieved that legal action is being taking to push back after the Sixth Circuit outrageously upheld this unconstitutional mandate.
I cannot thank you and your team enough, Aaron, for continuing to vigilantly fight for our inalienable rights.
100% this
I'm not sure who is checking the comments, but I hope someone is. I am hoping this gets added to the amended filings on the mandates.
Here are the December 18 and December 21 Omicron reports from Denmark. As you will see, 90% of confirmed Omicron patients are either vaccinated or vaccinated plus boosted.
Also, when it comes to US numbers, I found some interesting fraud from NY. The estimate these wildly high percentages of unvaccinated patients currently in the hospital. But, if you notice, they state it's an "estimate" of vaccinated v unvaccinated. To calculate that break-out they are using an outdated study of hospitalized vaccinated v unvaccinated for those in the hospital from May 3rd - July 25th. IF ANY ATTORNEY CLAIMS THE CURRENT RATES OF HOSPITALIZATION BY VACCINATION STATUS JUSTIFY THE MANDATES< PLEASE NOTE THEY ARE NOT ACTUALY COUNTING THEM CURRENTLY. These links are the final links.
Denmark links first:
https://files.ssi.dk/covid19/omikron/statusrapport/rapport-omikronvarianten-18122021-wj25
https://files.ssi.dk/covid19/omikron/statusrapport/rapport-omikronvarianten-21122021-14tk
Now NY Covid Hospitalization Links
https://coronavirus.health.ny.gov/covid-19-breakthrough-data
and if you scroll down to "methodological notes" and click on the MMWR publication they are using to "estimate" the number of currently hospitalized you will find this (revised and very outdated) "study" in which data collection ended July 25th.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7037a7.htm?s_cid=mm7037a7_w
Thankfully, some rights are not legal rights, they're inalienable rights.
I understand the ideological arguments, but I am also begging you all to introduce the 2 new studies out, and official data, from both the U.K. and Denmark showing clearly the vaccines have negative efficiency. While they might save the post-working age from severe infection, the fully vaccinated working age population is MORE likely to test positive.
Combined with the denial of natural immunity and the “emergency” standard wanting to vaccinate the entire working age population, the emergency order is useless at accomplishing what it claims to accomplish. New or experimental medical procedures cannot and should not be mandated because, as we are seeing, they often don’t work.
It’s concerning SCOTUS has allowed this to move forward (along with other mandates). How can any government agency mandate a drug that has negative efficiency?
And this from the Canadian Covid Care Alliance: https://rumble.com/vqx3kb-the-pfizer-inoculations-do-more-harm-than-good.html
Pfizer's own 6 month report data on its COVID-19 inoculation shows that greater illness and death in the inoculation arm than the placebo arm. Plus, poor trial design, missing data, underpowered studies, passive surveillance and more. For the PDF of this presentation visit: https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/media-resources/the-pfizer-inoculations-for-covid-19-more-harm-than-good/
It's just crazy that our government in the USA thinks it's okay to force people to take these shots. (No jab =no job). The shots were rushed out, no animal trials (besides the one going on now with humans), no liability for the pharmaceutical companies, people having terrible adverse effects and no one knows how to help them, no long term studies, all of the shots are EUA. Even if they were approved and not EUA, it's still wrong to mandate them. What will be mandated next if this is allowed to continue?
How can they mandate any drug or gene therapy period? Robert Barnes has said that Jacobson (1905) is flawed. What do you say re Jacobson Mr. Siri?
Amy Coney Barrett really likes Jacobson as an excuse for governmental overreach. Doesn’t bode well for what SCOTUS will ultimately decide about this mess. Barrett could’ve used Pritzker to define “emergency” but instead used the word as an excuse for egregious abuse of gubernatorial power. Would love to see your take. If I can find it elsewhere can anyone say where?
Regarding the landmark Supreme Court case Jacobsen from 1904, people says it supports the government forcing shots on everyone. But, Jacobsen took place during smallpox -- which had a 30% mortality. If a person didn't want to get the shot they also had other options even under Jacobsen. They could pay a small fine (around $150 in today's dollars) or could get an exemption. If there's a mandate that benefits the public health you could require somebody to do it but there's opportunity to opt out by paying a fine or by having an exemption. The underlying science of Jacobsen is there's a highly lethal disease going around with a 30% mortality and the science behind the smallpox vaccines had been around a very long time as opposed to the science of these covid shots which is very new for vaccines. Lots of differences between Jacobsen and what's going on now. Jacobsen flat out says the public mandate couldn't exist unless it actually benefitted the public. But are these covid shots actually benefitting the public? Turns out no. The shots only work, to the extent they work, against the initial variant which is long gone. And the shots don't stop transmission of a new variant. Is this a public health measure at all or just personal treatment? Very clear it's not for public health, it's personal treatment only. No legal authority for government to interfere in your choice to take something for yourself. Evidence is clear, to the extent the shots work, they work only to reduce personal symptoms and severity. Absolutely do not work to prevent transmission. This moves it to cases under Cruzan which clearly states that people have inalienable right to chose own medical treatment. (For example, if you're diabetic neither the government nor anyone else can make/mandate you to take insulin).
NOTE: I got this information from this video by Dr. Simone Gold (Frontline Doctors). In this video she explains Injunction Against Kaiser and discusses the Jacobsen case)
https://rumble.com/vomav2-dr.-gold-explains-the-preliminary-injunction-against-kaiser-permanente.html
Can you please post links to the studies?
I need to dig the studies up again, which I can do (just not at the moment). The other two are the government funded surveillance reports.
Look up “UK Covid surveillance report” and Denmark search the title of the report (I’m attaching December 21st report).
Since this post another study came out in JAMA also showing we were not told the truth by these big pharma companies.
https://www.docdroid.com/C9UY7Ef/dk-serum-institut-rapport-omikronvarianten-21122021-14tk-pdf
I confess I am very worried that the US will try to mandate covid vaccines for everyone (like what just apparently happened in Ecuador - kids too). Thank you so much for fighting for our medical freedom.
Boston is mandating them for 5 year olds on May 1st!
Child murderers
😱😡
Commie leaders can keep pushing decent, hard working people into a corner.... it won't end well for treasonous, cowardly commies
After this victory, their next step will be to bar workers fired under the mandate from collecting unemployment.
Then confiscate their children. They're an imminent risk, after all.
And from there? Who knows what.
You folks that went along to get along? Wait until you see what they threaten your job with next time.
I think they already banned the fired from getting unemployment.
Yup, it's like what happens to people who get "canceled" on social media. Your job is the first thing that goes, no due process, no proof that you're a threat.
I believe some states will let those that get fired for not taking covid shots get unemployment.
I avoid getting any state support, especially this fascist state of SF CA
Lawsuit
Criminal RICO Complaint, ..... than the "lawsuit!"
First things first!
RICO than their go after their "ILL" Gained, fortunes, that they gained at their CRIMINAL enterprise!
Suey Suey suits are while the MURDERS are sitting in G-Pop, awaiting their "futile"
attempts at appeals, form their sentencing, of their murder, and mayhem!
QUESTION.....
IF someone, KILLS someone else, and says after the act......
"But officer I didn't think the gun was LOADED!"
Does the DA, or Prosecutors, 1. just file a suey suey suit, or do they 2. file CRIMINAL Charges?
WHICH is MORE correct? 1 or 2?
YEPPER... criminals should be criminally CHARGED!
Easy Pesey against the sleasy!
Excellent. You didn't mention hanging after their trials
THANKS.... I may have "skipped" that here, but would "mention" it during the "opening and closing" statements, and leave the JURY to deliberate that grand Nirenberg out-come!
They never care about proof
That would mean the freaking law meant something
They use the laws as Sledge hammers for needlerape
Evidence is allowed for those who write the laws, not so much the folk those freakin laws are imposed upon with the excuse if public health or safety
Viruganda is deadly, most of the laws are just speculation in reality of application anymore.
Criminal.sic.justice.sic system sick
Every state has different rules
Guttermouth, I already read about a woman in a custody battle in which a judge ordered she lose custody of her children because she hadn't taken the jab
Yeah, there was a guy months ago lost custody the same way.
So far it's just been divorced parents losing custody battles against vaxed spouses.
I'm wondering when vaccinations will become a condition to just keeping your children. Something they can call cps on you for.
In Chicago. I think it was reversed but I don’t recall by what legal mechanism. The guy who was denied contact with his child was a case on Long Island I believe. Don’t know the outcome on that one. Can someone jump in?
Sure, dude, pick a fight.
I love how much my name winds you guys up.
Merry fucking Christmas.
My parents were going to go with "Louise" but it was already taken.
also, no in-person voting w/o showing vax id. This ensures the fraud of mail-in to help the Dems in Nov.
Ooh, I hadn't even thought of that.
Son of a bitch.
I am also worried that the time will come when all who have not registered through the Vax ID will see their SS and pension deposits cancelled.
Sure. They can starve us and literally kill us that way. Healthy people who have at no time been a threat to others and broken no laws.
Let's see how far they go.
they will go as far as we let them.
I need to climb out of this rabbit hole before I spend all of Christmas too furious to even think straight.
Anna, these things are already happening in poor parts of India with the "digital wallets". Poor people have literally starved to death because they couldn't get their rations of food because digital ID prevented it for various reasons.
I don't imagine anyone is very sorry.
Certainly not Bill Gates counterpart in India who put it in place
According to the International Labor Organization, back in the first part of this Plannedamic.. 2.3 BILLION workers, men woman etc, are going to be totally without food and starve to DEATH, along with 1.3 BILLON children, of those workers, and just children living on the streets, in to many nations! The WHO estimated 3.3 BILLION will "starve to death because of the lockdowns.
And all that was BEFORE any "digital vaxx killing de-vices!"
BUT if ONE child dies of these fake, fraudulent "lock downs," that is TO MANY ALREADY!
And that’s what the Eugenics Elites call a win-win.
I’ve worried about that, too, Anna, but I can’t imagine a coercive hold on SS without a similar coercive hold on welfare recipients, too. And because a fair number of welfare recipients are declining the shots, that whole proposal would be very messy and hugely controversial. So though I fear it, I just can’t see that happening. Hopefully.
It would save them a huge amount of money on useless eaters.
It appears the covid shots are saving them a huge amount of money. I've heard that at one point CMS data showed that 44,000 people had died within 2 weeks of covid shots. Of course some of those would have died regardless but 44, 000 people x $700/month in social security benefits = $30,800,000 savings in a month ( and I was low with using $700/month benefit) + add in what the government pays for doctor's visits, hospitalizations, etc thru Medicare. Plus even more if they are subsidizing long term care.
Actually, most on this list didn't go along. I thought I was going to lose my job. I told my bosses: I am preparing to be fired because I am not taking the so called vaccine.
They’ll also require jabs in order to qualify for Medicare and SSI disability.
Well, that'll make sure they die off real quick. Good thinking.
I can picture Twiteratti pieces of shit nodding their zombie heads and grinning zombie grins unironically at such a statement.
You guys are champs. You're gonna have so much fun on this case - maybe not in the moment, but definitely retrospectively. Keep up the good work, and thanks for fighting for American freedom.
My guess is SCOTUS will allow the mandate to proceed. After all, why should they be any different from Congress and the Executive branch? (The Federal govt is apparently fully controlled by the Deep State now.) But I'd love to be wrong.
Thank you Aaron!!! Also I sent a little note to thank your petitioner here:
https://www.bettenbakermuskegon.com/ContactUsForm
May God bless and prosper your work. Merry Christmas and Happy New year!
Thank you, Mr. Siri. Like many others, this legislation (or lack thereof) will have significant impact on my daily life.
The aberrant vaccine mandates should have never happened. Why the supreme court needs additional data is puzzling. Why they didn't rule for the stay is very troubling.
Agree!
God bless you. My prayers are the SCOTUS does the just thing.
Merry Christmas!
Thank you for fighting for freedom. In addition to all of the constitutional and moral issues, there’s also the practical issue that few tests are available these days so how the hell can I test every week
May God bless and keep you! Thank you for you and your teams tireless efforts!
Thank you Mr Siri.
Bless You and Thank You from the Bottom Of Our Hearts!! Please Lord, Hear Our Prayers. Amen!!
❤️🙏❤️😘👍💪❤️🙏❤️
While I'm glad that this mandate is being fought, I'm uncomfortable with hanging your hat on the fact that states apparently have (unfettered) rights to impose the same mandate. I'm in a one-party blue state full of leftist scared sheep who are perfectly content giving up all rights for their perceived "public safety."
Sorry you are trapped. I'm in a purple state (Georgia) but it should be a state issue, not federal. However, even then it needs to be legislation, not governor executive privileges because each state has their own constitution. Join the millions moving to red states. When we said "The South Shall Rise Again", this is what we meant. Freedom is in the red states.