On 7-31-2020, just before 1:30pm in the afternoon, my wife and I were asked to leave the Sprouts Store located on 82nd and Quaker, in Lubbock, TX, because they specifically said they do not recognize medical exemptions to wearing masks. We were wearing medical exemption badges, which are not required by law to be worn, to help inform others. I was given a store policy sheet, and I was invited to shop online, from home.
I hereby demand that you cease and desist requiring wearing masks to shop at your stores owned and operated by Sprouts Farmers Market, Inc.
I hereby demand that you stop violating the law in numerous ways, as follows.
You are in violation of both the City of Lubbock and the State of Texas masking laws, both of which make provisions for medical exemptions. You are not allowing medical exemptions, in violation of both laws, laws which you are fraudulently attempting to enforce.
1A. You are not a police officer. You are not empowered to enforce laws.
You are practicing medicine without a licence, which illegal in all States in America, which is a felony, and carries with it a prison term from 1 to 8 years. A mask to prevent viral transmission is a medical intervetion that carries with it risks, such as reduced oxygen intake, increased CO2 intake, increased risk of viral and bacterial and fungal lung infections, fungal face infections, and potential brain damage from reduced oxygen. A list of up to 131 scientific articles and reasons to avoid wearing a mask can be found online at https://revealingfraud.com/2020/05/health/refuse/ You are overriding both the science, the law, and other doctor’s orders, in overriding the legal medical exemptions, without a medical license, in violation of numerous laws. When engaged in practicing medicine without a licence, you can be sued for damages that your advice might cause, there not need be any actual damages. You can be sued for “possible brain damage” that often carries rewards exceeding $1-10 million dollars in damages, and you can be held personally and corporately liable. I hereby again claim my own medical exemption, and I’m not required by law to tell you my medical history, nor are you allowed to ask, because of medical privacy laws protected by HIPAA. But my medical history is published online at revealingfraud.com anyway.
2.(A) Medical Professionals can only “prescribe” medical procedures, which means to give advice. They are not even legally allowed to mandate a medical procedure. In order for Doctors to mandate a medical procedure, they first need to either obtain a medical power of attorney document over a patient, and/or declare the person unconscious and/or unfit to decline a life saving procedure. You neither have a medial power of attorney over me, nor have I hired you to be my doctor, nor am I unconscious. Nor am I mentally compromised in any way. By wearing a mask, you restrict your own oxygen, and you mentally compromise yourself. You might want to take off your mask, and take a few deep breaths to get oxygen to your brain, to help you understand the rest of this.
You are violating the ADA Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act, that requires that you make reasonable accommodation to those with disabilities that could include numerous medical disabilities that could prevent people from wearing masks, such as, but not limited to, the following: asthma, allergies, anemia, fungal infections, blood clotting disorders, diabetes, PTSD, autism, pre existing lung problems, “being a human”, and needing to meet basic OSHA air quality requirements of more then 19.5% oxygen, and less then 400 parts per million CO2. Masks have been shown to reduce oxygen to 18% and increase CO2 to over 10,000 ppm.
3.(A) To help you understand the level of offense of your illegal discrimination, try demanding that black people not enter your store on the basis that give off particles that are offensive, and requiring them to shop at home. That is as offensive as refusing service to those not wearing masks for reasons of a medical exemption. The ADA also requires you to make reasonable accommodations for people with a religious exemption to wearing masks, because discrimination based on religion is also illegal.
Your demand that customers wear masks, with no medical exemptions, fraudulently assumes that masks work. They do not. Air easily slips around all masks, such as the very large air gaps around the nose, cheeks and chin. Furthermore, the particle size of the coronavirus is typically 1/1000th of the size of the spacing between threads of the mask itself. A coronavirus is 0.1 microns. Holes in cloth masks are up to 100 microns. If you “zoom in” this is like expecting two threads, spaced as far apart as three football fields, 900 feet, to filter out a shoe the size of one foot. That is insane. Furthermore, there are 1000 microns per millimeter. The air gaps around the mask, by the nose, if they are half a centimeter, are 5000 microns. A coronavirus is 0.1 microns. The difference is 50,000 times in size. This gap is so big, and the virus is so small, it’s like two lines, 10 miles apart, (52,800 feet) trying to filter out a basketball (just under a foot). Mask wearing is mental insanity. In both theory and actual fact, masks cannot possibly work to do what you expect them to do, so your position is not based on science, but rather, irrational fear, and irrational expectations that masks work, when they cannot. Since your position is based on insanity and the fraud that masks work, it cannot be said to follow the law and be “reasonable”. Furthermore, restaurants are open, with up to 60-100 people eating at once, with nobody wearing a mask while eating, and that fully complies with the law. So how could one person not wearing a mask in a grocery store be a danger compared to that? Fraud also carries with it a prison sentence, as fraud is a felony.
When informed that mandatory masking was a fraud, and therefore a felony, the Orange County board of Supervisors abandoned their mandatory mask policy, back on June 9th, 2020. https://www.thehealthyamerican.org/
The COVID19 scare is a fraud, from top to bottom. Politicians and the Media are immune from the consequences of lying, but commercial stores have no such immunity from practicing fraud. COVID19 is fraud for the following reasons.
A. The test kits do not work. The tests have a 50% to 80% false positive rate.
B. The rate of positives has always been about 10%, from the very beginning of the crisis. The rate of people testing positive has not gone up, they have only increased the number and rate of tests given.
D. While “confirmed case” counts have been going up, there is no such thing as a “confirmed case” because the test kits say directly on them “not to be used for diagnostic purposes” and therefore a fraudulent test with a high false positive rate cannot “confirm” anything.
To determine the lethality of any disease, they need to compare cases to deaths. Both numbers suffer from massive fraud. Regarding death counts:
A. The death counts are overinflated, as States have been directed by the CDC to include presumptive or presumed cases that would not even include the fraudulent test kit non confirmation, which, itself, over counts things with that false positive rate of from 50% to 80%. “COVID-19 should be reported on the death certificate for all decedents where the disease caused or is assumed to have caused or contributed to death.” https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/coronavirus/Alert-2-New-ICD-code-introduced-for-COVID-19-deaths.pdf
B. Other nations have determined that 99% of their “died with COVID” cases did not die “from COVID” as 99% of other patients were elderly and had from 1-4 other co-morbid chronic conditions. If that is true, it takes the real death rate down to nearly nothing. This was reported by Bloomberg, back on March 18th, which basically shows and admits that this is all a media hoax. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-18/99-of-those-who-died-from-virus-had-other-illness-italy-says
C. The real death counts are not higher than the rate of normal rates of pnumonia. People vastly overestimate their chances of “catching” COVID, and vastly overestimate their chances of death, with younger people, aged 18-34 giving the highest estimations, at 90% estimated chances of catching it, and a 20% chance of death if they do catch it. https://www.nber.org/papers/w27494.pdf see chart on p. 12. These estimates would have COVID killing about 328 million x .9 x .2 = 59 million Americans. Even the White House estimations of the deaths of 2 million Americans were vastly over exaggerated, and the man responsible for that model resigned in disgrace. The “official” death toll, which is grossly over exaggerated, for multiple reasons, as I am going over, stands at 137,922, per the CDC as of July 31: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/index.htm see Table 1. That is a total death rate of the population of 0.04%, which is substantially lower than the CDC’s latest death rate estimate last month of 0.26%. Typical flu deaths in a year vary from 50,000 to 80,000.
E. The real death rate could well be 137,922 x 1% (no comorbidities) x 50% due to false positives, which would be 689! Given that there is no higher overall death rate than normal, the risk from a fraudulent disease that is not increasing the total death rate is zero. A real pandemic would not require fraudulently overstating things at all levels, from test kits that don’t work, to fraudulently claiming an increase in the infected, to inflated death counts, to masks that don’t work.
People with honor do not practice nor support games of fraud. If managers wish to stop participating in the COVID media lies, they may wish to remind their employer of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which makes it illegal to discriminate based on religious beliefs. Sections 703 A(1)(2). My own religious beliefs also prohibit me from participating in fraud, or from lying in any way.
Managers of businesses cannot be hired to break the law. You may have been told by a supervisor to “enforce store policy”, but you cannot be hired to break the law nor be hired to commit one felony, let alone multiple felonies. You always have the right to tell your supervisor, “You cannot legally require me to break the law.” You may wish to present this letter to your immediate supervisors and/or human resources department, and/or legal department and/or corporate board and/or company owners.
Even if you were a doctor, and a lawyer, and a police officer, you would still not have the right to demand that free people wear masks to shop at your store.
Even if you petitioned congress to change all the laws above, you would still not have the right to trample on people’s Constitutional rights, and it would remain unwise to do so.
Numerous “emergency COVID orders” have already been struck down as un-Constitutional in various other states.
Several other large retailers in Lubbock, at their corporate level, such as Market Street United Supermarkets and Wal-Mart, have decided to honor medical exemptions to mask wearing, presumably because they have been informed of the legal issues involved, or maybe because they are already involved in litigation over it, and are engaged in actions designed to settle the disputes.
After having been informed of the law, such as through a cease and desist letter like this one, if you continue to violate the law, it will be presumed that you are “willfully” violating the law, which often carries with it additional penalties, such as double the criminal prison sentence to be served, and/or double the civil fines to be paid.
You know my response. It would take one of the masks below, to protect you from a deadly disease spreading. The stupid little masks that people wear, does not even cover their eyes.
Kelleigh Nelson has been researching the Christian right and their connections to the left, the new age, and cults since 1975. Formerly an executive producer for three different national radio talk show hosts, she was adept at finding and scheduling a variety of wonderful guests for her radio hosts. She has owned her own wholesale commercial bakery since 1990. Previously, Kelleigh was marketing communications and advertising manager for a fortune 100 company. Born and raised in Chicago, Illinois, she was a Goldwater girl with high school classmate, Hillary Rodham, in Park Ridge, Illinois. Kelleigh is well acquainted with Chicago politics and was working in downtown Chicago during the 1968 Democratic convention riots. Email: Proverbs133@bellsouth.net
Censoring HCQ, Zithromax and the Cure For Covid
By Kelleigh Nelson|July 31st, 2020
Kelleigh Nelson
The Communists’ chief purpose is to destroy every form of independence—independent work, independent action, independent property, independent thought, an independent mind, or an independent man. Conformity, alikeness, servility, submission and obedience are necessary to establish a Communist slave-state. —Ayn Rand
Censorship reflects society’s lack of confidence in itself. It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime. —Potter Stewart, Supreme Court Justice
Free speech is the whole thing, the whole ball game. Free speech is life itself. —Salman Rushdie
Quite obviously, Hillary loving Dr. Anthony Fauci would prefer to make beaucoup bucks on his Remdesivir which is unproven to cure Covid-19 than promote a 65-year-old drug that has proven to be effective throughout the world in curing the Wuhan virus. His purely political hatred of those who are promoting Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and Azithromycin smacks of monetary prerequisites of his approval. Despite the fact that his National Institute of Health approved HCQ in 2005 for Covid, his leftist politics refuse to admit that lives all over the world are saved by HCQ and Z-Pacs as so many physicians have testified to.
President Trump is hated for promoting HCQ and for taking it as a preventative, despite physicians who have said it works for both. Facebook, Google and Twitter have deleted the truth about HCQ. Even attorney Sidney Powell who retweeted President Trump’s tweet about HCQ was removed from twitter as was Donald Trump Jr. Free speech is a core of a free society. So, are we free? Not hardly.
Silencing truth.
Doctors Back Trump
Physicians in America have taken a stand and are backing the president’s recommendation to use HCQ to treat Coronavirus. Across America doctors are standing behind the president and announcing that it’s time for America to reopen. A group of doctors standing before the Supreme Court building in Washington DC, claimed there is no reason to keep the country locked down when we already have a cure for the virus…Hydroxychloroquine. Dr. Simone Gold, an ER physician in Los Angeles for 20 years, who appeared with several other physicians said, “If you’ve gotten the virus, there is treatment and that’s what we’re here to tell you.” Dr. Gold said, “The American people aren’t hearing from all the experts across the country.
After this video aired and was viewed millions of times, Dr. Gold was summarily fired from her job. She has hired attorney L. Lin Wood to defend her.
Americans are being forced to take advice from doctors who have allowed their political bias against Donald Trump to stop them from treating patients they have the ability to cure. Of course, we’re speaking about the appointed head of the Coronavirus Task Force, VP Pence, whose chosen expert was Dr. Anthony Fauci.
(Koch Dark Money operative, Marc Short is Chief of Staff to VP Pence and he owns stocks that could conflict with Coronavirus response.)
Dr. James Todaro said, “If it seems like there’s an orchestrated attack against HCQ, it’s because there is. When have you ever heard of a medication generating this degree of controversy? HCQ is a 65-year-old medication that has been listed as the World Health Organization’s (WHO) safest medications for years and it’s over the counter in many countries. What we’re seeing is a lot of misinformation.” HCQ has been prescribed to hundreds of millions of people all over the world for over a half a century with no side effects. It has never been a controversial medicine until President Trump suggested it might be used to help Coronavirus patients and the Deep State went ballistic.
President Trump tweeted a copy of the doctors’ video which went viral with over 14 million views. Nigerian physician, Stella Immanuel is a primary care physician from Houston, Texas and her video alone reached 20 million on Facebook before it was removed.
Twitter, Google, Facebook and other media giants rushed to delete all traces of these important videos from the internet. Dr. Simone Gold said,“Our website host, which is Squarespace, has just completely and arbitrarily shut down our website, claiming a violation of their terms of service. This is crazy. We are a group of doctors advocating for a better understanding of COVID-19 and its available treatment options. This is outrageous. We’re not subverting anything. We’re not purposely countering medical ethics. We’re not making anybody sick. We’re advocating for a better understanding of COVID-19. They take us down.”
Silencing truth.
Dr. Gold said, “We implore you to hear this because this message has been silenced. There are many thousands of physicians who have been silenced from telling the American people the good news about the situation, that we can manage the virus, carefully and intelligently, but we cannot live with this spiderweb of fear that is constricting our country.” She said that doctors are not being allowed to prescribe HCQ, and that if they do, the pharmacists can overrule the physician’s diagnosis and medications.
She is absolutely right, fear is what Fauci, Birx and Redfield have promoted and sold to the American public from the very beginning, and it appears to be purposeful. Dr. Fauci, WHO and the promoters of Remdesivir decided they wanted their drug to be the cureall for all patients of Covid. Why? Because they’d make beaucoup bucks off it, but it hasn’t proven to be nearly as effective as the older and cheaper HCQ.
Our economy is in shambles and democratic governors and mayors are purposely keeping businesses shut down because it’s an election year, and to hell with the people they represent.
The physicians all explained that Dr. Fauci is citing flawed studies and the negative reports on HCQ involve treating patients with lethal doses of the drug, something no physician should ever be doing. The physicians stated that Dr. Fauci has never treated a Covid-19 patient himself.
They added that with a cure like HCQ available, there is no need for social distancing, there’s no need for masks, there’s no need to keep our children home from school (other than keeping them from the common core and BLM rot) and there’s certainly no need to keep our country or the economy locked down.
Dr. Bob Hamilton stated that it was important for all people present during their talks that America’s children are not really the ones who are driving the infection; it is being driven by older individuals. He believes children can go back to school without fear. Dr. Hamilton stated, “There has not been one documented case of Covid being transferred from a student to a teacher in the world.” He explained that teachers’ unions are demanding conditions to return to school, some of which are totally outlandish and unrelated to the virus. In Los Angeles, California, the teacher’s union is demanding more money by defunding the police and calling for Medicare for all.
Doctors have warned that the effects of the lockdown are far worse than the virus, including a 600 percent increase in suicides.
The doctors said the biggest problem for them has been the government blocking doctors from treating patients they have the ability to cure right now. Dr. Hamilton said, “I think the important thing is we need to not act out of fear. We need to act out of science, we need to do it and get it done.”
Silencing truth.
Saving Lives
Dr. George Fareed of El Centro, California, a 1970 honors graduate of Harvard, sent a letter to President Trump and the Task Force. He has used the HCQ, Azithromycin and Zinc cocktail to cure his patients and says it has kept them out of the hospital. He said, “Not only have I seen outstanding results with this approach, I have not seen any patient exhibit serious side-effects. To be clear — this drug has been used as an anti-malarial and to treat systemic lupus erythematosus as well as rheumatoid arthritis, and has over a 50-year track record for safety. It is shocking that it only now is being characterized as a dangerous drug.”
“Moreover, I am in my seventies, and I (as well as some other older physicians in the hospital) use hydroxychloroquine and zinc as prophylaxis. None of us have contracted the disease despite our high exposure to COVID patients nor have we experienced any side-effects.”
Hydroxychloroquine is the Key
It’s making a comeback from Lancet’s and Fauci’s false reports. Doctors all over the world are using it and their patients are recovering. When given early, not one patient dies, when taken as a prophylactic, it prevents physicians from contracting Covid from their patients. It’s cheap, it’s plentiful and it’s been around for over six decades, and Fauci and his gang don’t like it. Why? Because it’s all about money. The more money he can put in the pockets and his cohorts and himself, the happier he is, and to hell with the many lives that can be saved with the cheap drugs already available.
A Michigan hospital study says: “Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine Cut Death Rate Significantly in COVID-19 Patients. Treatment with HCQ cut the death rate significantly in sick patients hospitalized with Covid-19, and without heart-related side-effects, according to a new study published by Henry Ford Health System.
“Our analysis shows that using hydroxychloroquine helped saves lives,” said neurosurgeon Dr. Steven Kalkanis, CEO, Henry Ford Medical Group and Senior Vice President and Chief Academic Officer of Henry Ford Health System. “As doctors and scientists, we look to the data for insight. And the data here is clear that there was benefit to using the drug as a treatment for sick, hospitalized patients.”
So why the hatred of this life saving cocktail of drugs?
There are doctors all over the country, who are singing the praises of this drug, but there is a conspiracy of silence.The hydroxychloroquine cocktail, azithromycin, (Z-Pak) and zincwould solve some of the very basic problems that we’re now facing. It’s also a preventative. It would prevent hospitalizations. It keeps hospitals and ICUs from being overrun with Covid-19 patients, and it keeps patients off the deadly ventilators where 90% die after being on a ventilator long term. It apparently can be used early on in hospitalization to prevent patients from requiring ventilators, and reduces the length of a hospital stay.
Yet there’s literally no desire to use this cheap drug. America has lost 150,000 people to this flu-like virus. We lost so many during the H1N1 virus that we stopped counting, but we didn’t wear masks everywhere, we didn’t close schools, we didn’t keep six feet apart and we didn’t close the economy, yet more allegedly died in 2009-2010 under the Obama presidency than have died with this Wuhan virus under Donald Trump’s presidency.The CDC estimates that influenza has resulted in between 9 million to 45 million illnesses, between 140,000 to 810,000 hospitalizations and between 12,000 to 61,000 deaths annually since 2010, but we never donned masks.
Silencing truth.
Nursing Home Deaths
Governors of five states: Andrew Cuomo of New York, Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan, Gavin Newsom of California, Phil Murphy of New Jersey, and Tom Wolf of Pennsylvania put Covid patients in nursing homes and the virus spread rapidly to the elderly population with co-morbidities.
At least 62,000 residents and workers have died from the coronavirus at nursing homes and other long-term care facilities for older adults in the United States, according to a New York Times database. As of July 30, the virus has infected more than 362,000 people at some 16,000 facilities. Had they been given the cheap drug as a preventative, perhaps most of these older Americans would not have died alone.
Are these governors guilty of murder?
Conclusion
President Trump was lied to, our economy did not need to be shut down. Masks are to keep healthcare workers from contaminating open wounds of patients. They do little to prevent viruses. Healthy people are never quarantined. Distancing of six feet apart has no scientific authority whatsoever; it was born in a high school student’s science project. Had we remained open, and sheltered only the vulnerable, most likely we would have had her immunity within 40 to 70 days.
Thousands of Americans have died needlessly, which plays into the United Nations Agenda 2030 of decimating the world’s population. Yes, China is responsible, but more than China, the collateral damage to Americans from the shutdown is far greater than the damage done by the Wuhan virus. And that damage, which is still going on, was brought to us by Dr. Fauci, Dr. Birx, Dr. Redfield and the Democratic Party.
Share This Article
FacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWhatsappGoogle+TumblrPinterestVkEmail
About the Author: Kelleigh Nelson
Kelleigh Nelson has been researching the Christian right and their connections to the left, the new age, and cults since 1975. Formerly an executive producer for three different national radio talk show hosts, she was adept at finding and scheduling a variety of wonderful guests for her radio hosts. She has owned her own wholesale commercial bakery since 1990. Previously, Kelleigh was marketing communications and advertising manager for a fortune 100 company. Born and raised in Chicago, Illinois, she was a Goldwater girl with high school classmate, Hillary Rodham, in Park Ridge, Illinois. Kelleigh is well acquainted with Chicago politics and was working in downtown Chicago during the 1968 Democratic convention riots. Email: Proverbs133@bellsouth.net
sexual harassment concept with man and women (Image from Shutterstock.com)
Lawyer’s sexual harassment was ‘monstrous and inhuman,’ lawsuit alleges
By Debra Cassens Weiss
July 30, 2020, 2:07 pm CDT
A sexual harassment lawsuit filed against a Kentucky lawyer claims that he sexually harassed two employees with “outrageous and intolerable” conduct, leading one of them to threaten to cut off his exposed penis.
The lawsuit accuses Corbin, Kentucky, lawyer Shane Romines of fondling the employees, sending them “perverse and beyond obscene” videos of himself, and requiring one of them to perform oral sex. The plaintiffs are a former receptionist and legal assistant at the law firm.
The Louisville Courier Journal and the Times-Tribune have coverage; the Kentucky Trial Court Review’s Facebook page links to the July 28 complaint.
Romines denied the allegations, telling the Louisville Courier Journal that the claims “will prove to be untrue.”
The suit alleges that Romines allowed the receptionist to keep her $22,000-per-year job in exchange for his “monstrous and inhuman behaviors.”
Romines also made clear to the legal assistant that he expected her to “be friendly” and loyal if she expected to keep her job, according to the suit.
The legal assistant put up with Romines exposing himself until March 10, when he “flopped out his partially erect penis between her penholder and stapler and started shaking it, saying, ‘Just give it a little touch, c’mon, just a little touch,’” according the suit.
“Scared, shaken and physically ill, but at the end of her rope, [the employee] picked up her letter opener and said, ‘Or, like Lorena Bobbitt, I can cut it right off,’ ” the suit says.
After that, Romines stopped giving work to the legal assistant, “ghosted her and hired someone to replace her,” the suit says.
The two employees reached out to each other May 1 and learned that they were both victims, the suit says. They took sick leave and never returned. After the employees left, Romines called them each “a gold digger and slut,” according to the suit.
The suit alleges sexual harassment, retaliation, constructive discharge and infliction of emotional distress.
Romines is a personal injury lawyer with the Copeland & Romines Law Office. His uses the slogan “In pain? Call Shane!”
The Michael Flynn case has opened a new front in the woke war on objectivity: Within the federal judiciary, we now have judges taking sides in the cases before them. It’s a development directly at war with the political philosophy that animates our Constitution. It would, if left unchecked, destroy the neutrality of the federal courts. If that were to go, the judiciary’s legitimacy and public respect for its dictates would be destroyed.
When the Justice Department decided to agree with Flynn that his prosecution was unfounded and joined in his motion to dismiss the criminal charges against him, presiding Judge Emmet Sullivan refused. Instead, he appointed another lawyer, who had already gone on public record opposing dismissal, to “advise” the court whether Flynn should be prosecuted even after the prosecutor chose to end the case. The adviser later came through with a 70-page brief accusing the Justice Department of cronyism and corruption.
Flynn appealed, and the Court of Appeals held the judge had no authority to do anything other than what the prosecutor and the defendant had jointly agreed upon. He could not, the court held, take a side in the case or seek a resolution unwanted by either of the actual parties.
Now, Sullivan has doubled down on his insistence that he need not be neutral: He has, as if he were a party to the case, filed a motion in the court of appeals asking that its decision be vacated and that the entire District of Columbia appellate bench rehears the matter. In so doing, he has dropped all pretense of neutrality and revealed his desire to steer the criminal case against Flynn, rather than presiding over it as a neutral figure who interprets and applies the law.
So why isn’t it the case that … if the government makes a considered but racist decision that it just does not want to have a white officer stand trial for excessive force on a black victim that the District Court can deny the motion and then the political chips can fall where they may, and perhaps under pressure from the public or Congress or whatever, the District Court may not be able itself to force government to prosecute the case that maybe through operation of the legislative branch or other pressures from the public and the media…a new prosecutor is appointed and the case proceeds?
Like Sullivan, the judge in Wilkins’s example is not a neutral decisor. He is on the political ramparts and inviting others to join him there.
How would this work in practice? A motion for dismissal of an indictment, under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 48(a), would be denied by a judge who distrusts the prosecutor and believes the decision to dismiss is animated by impermissible considerations. Many people now believe that virtually every decision made by the Trump administration is driven by racism. Perhaps the judge before whom our Rule 48(a) motion is pending is such a person. So the judge writes an opinion, denouncing the effort by the prosecution to dismiss the case and making whatever allegations about the prosecutor’s motivation the judge finds persuasive. The judge has life tenure after all; he can say whatever he wants. Such a ruling isn’t appealable. Then the fun starts.
“Pressure from the public” is brought to bear. “The media,” who may share the judge’s hostility to the prosecutor or the prosecutor’s boss (the president) do their part to amplify the judge’s allegations in newspaper stories, interviews, talk shows, and late-night monologues. Sympathetic members of Congress join the effort. Most importantly, an election is never too far away. Elections can produce a new president, and that’s how you get a new attorney general and then, as Wilkins says, “a new prosecutor.” According to this understanding of the federal courts’ role, the judge’s denunciation of the prosecutor is appropriately a part of that process, which will end when “the political chips fall where they may.” If the judge gets his way, “a new prosecutor is appointed, and the case proceeds.”
A judge who rules with the expectation that he can make “political chips fall” as a result of how he rules has crossed the clearest line there is distinguishing the federal courts from the other two branches.
It should hardly need explaining that judges don’t (they can’t) take sides from the bench in political disputes. They are neutral interpreters of the law; they aren’t parties to the case.
President Dwight Eisenhower was able to send the army to enforce Brown v. Board of Education, and so to integrate the schools in Little Rock, because the nation recognized that if the Supreme Court had decided the law required it, then the law required it. We had, and have, no choice as a country but to follow the law.
If the federal courts allow judges to become parties, no one will any longer believe that the judges are applying the law. They will be revealed as people trying to advance political goals. A nonelected body trying to advance political goals will not long be obeyed in a democracy.
There’s a simple way to put a stop to this: When the Court of Appeals denies (or better, dismisses) Sullivan’s petition for rehearing, it should reassign the case to a judge — an actual judge, who will be neutral. That would have to be someone other than Emmet Sullivan.
Jerome Marcus is an attorney in private practice and a former federal prosecutor.
Looks like the rest of the country gets to become familiar with the way normal people have been treated by the federal courts, and state courts alike for going on more than 20 years now.
And what was it that was said around 100 years ago now? In 1960, the ruling was already 30 years old so, yes, around 100 years ago…
It was in ELKINS v. UNITED STATES, 364 U.S. 206 (1960) 364 U.S. 206?? No. 126.
Argued March 28-29, 1960. Decided June 27, 1960.
The Court, discussing the use of evidence illegally obtained by State Police, by federal prosecutors, and the FBI, and the Rights violations are discussed pretty heavily. Hell nowadays, the Courts do not give a second thought to violations of our civil and constitutional rights:
Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206, 222-23 (1960) (“These, then, are the considerations of reason and experience which point to the rejection of a doctrine that would freely admit in a federal criminal trial evidence seized by state agents in violation of the defendant’s constitutional rights. But there is another consideration — the imperative of judicial integrity. It was of this that Mr. Justice Holmes and Mr. Justice Brandeis so eloquently spoke in Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, at 469, 471, more than 30 years ago.
“For those who agree with me,” said Mr. Justice Holmes, “no distinction can be taken between the Government as prosecutor and the Government as judge.” 277 U.S., at 470. (Dissenting opinion.) “In a government of laws,” said Mr. Justice Brandeis, “existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe the law scrupulously. Our Government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. To declare that in the administration of the criminal law the end justifies the means — to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure the conviction of a private criminal — would bring terrible retribution. Against that pernicious doctrine this Court should resolutely set its face.” 277 U.S., at 485. (Dissenting opinion.)”)
This basic principle was accepted by the Court in McNabb v. United States, 318 U.S. 332. There it was held that “a conviction resting on evidence secured through such a flagrant disregard of the procedure which Congress has commanded cannot be allowed to stand without making the courts themselves accomplices in willful disobedience of law.” 318 U.S., at 345. Even less should the federal courts be accomplices in the willful disobedience of a Constitution they are sworn to uphold.
For these reasons we hold that evidence obtained by state officers during a search which, if conducted by federal officers, would have violated the defendant’s immunity from unreasonable searches and seizures under the Fourth Amendment is inadmissible over the defendant’s timely objection in a federal criminal trial. In determining whether there has been an unreasonable search and seizure by state officers, a federal court must make an independent inquiry, whether or not there has been such an inquiry by a state court, and irrespective of how any such inquiry may have turned out. The test is one of federal law, neither enlarged by what one state court may have countenanced, nor diminished by what another may have colorably suppressed.
Elkins v. United States, 364 U.S. 206, 223-24 (1960)
Now think about the Flynn case, and numerous other cases, where the last thing the Courts think about, is if the evidence was illegally obtained, or if someone’s rights were violated in the illegal obtaining of the evidence.
We have no rights, and the many Courts’ flagrant disregard of the procedure
which Congress had commanded cannot stand…
I personally can’t believe that the authorities have taken these people’s guns, and did it on tv, showing that they are now unarmed! The cops showed up with a search warrant! What is going to protect these people now that the clowns that broke their gate and entered their property, know that they are unarmed?
Reports: St. Louis police execute search warrant, seize rifle from Mark and Patricia McCloskey
Twelve Republican members of Congress have written to U.S. Attorney General William Barr, arguing in defense of the Second Amendment rights of a Missouri couple whose rifle and handgun are now in the possession of local authorities.
Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who made national headlines in late June when they took up arms to defend their home from protesters who stormed into their gated St. Louis neighborhood, had their rifle seized Friday when local police executed a search warrant.
Then on Saturday, a lawyer — who represented the couple until recently – surrendered to police a handgun that Patricia McCloskey held during the June incident, FOX 2 of St. Louis reported.
MISSOURI COUPLE WHO DEFENDED HOME HAVE RIFLE SEIZED DURING POLICE SEARCH: REPORT
Attorney Al Watkins said he had taken possession of the handgun while still representing the couple, in anticipation of using it as evidence in a possible court appearance, FOX 2 reported.
“It was my duty and obligation to make sure that evidence was preserved to maintain the integrity of the defense of Mr. and/or Mrs. McCloskey in the event, in what I believe the highly unlikely event, of any charges being brought,” Watkins said, according to KSDK-TV of St. Louis.
"It was my duty and obligation to make sure that evidence was preserved to maintain the integrity of the defense of Mr. and/or Mrs. McCloskey."
— Al Watkins, attorney
Watkins said the gun was “inoperable” prior to the June incident, and Patricia McCloskey knew it was inoperable. But he said there were some potential legal issues with the way Patricia McCloskey held her weapon versus the way Mark McCloskey held his, making the weapon’s condition an issue, KSDK reported.
Since the June incident, the McCloskeys have faced scrutiny from the St. Louis Police Department and from the city’s circuit attorney, Kimberly Gardner, who have been investigating the incident – but there was no indication the couple were facing any charges.
In a statement June 29, Gardner wrote that protesters had First Amendment rights that needed to be protected from “intimidation or threat of deadly force,” and said any such behavior would “not be tolerated.”
Rights threatened ‘by mob rule’
In their letter to Barr, dated Friday, the dozen Republican lawmakers claimed that any charges filed against the couple would have “a chilling effect” on an American populace whose rights to bear arms are guaranteed in the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
“At this crucial time in history, our nation needs the Department of Justice to exert strong leadership to ensure that none of our constitutional protections are eroded by mob rule,” the lawmakers wrote in part to Barr. “Charges against this couple will have a chilling effect on the entire nation, sending the message that American citizens no longer have the right to protect themselves at their own homes.”
“Charges against this couple will have a chilling effect on the entire nation, sending the message that American citizens no longer have the right to protect themselves at their own homes.”
— Letter to AG Barr from 12 GOP lawmakers
Signing the letter were U.S. Reps. Louis Gohmert of Texas; Mo Brooks of Alabama; Greg Steube of Florida; Brian Babin of Texas; Paul Gosar of Arizona; Alex Mooney of West Virginia; Andy Harris of Maryland; Ted Budd of North Carolina; Steve King of Iowa; Steve Watkins of Kansas; Jody Hice of Georgia; and Scott Perry of Pennsylvania.
Saturday’s handover of the pistol occurred outside Watkins’ St. Louis office, in full view of reporters and bystanders, who watched and took photos. Some photos appeared on the website of FOX 2 of St. Louis.
Watkins said he was no longer representing the McCloskeys because his decision to hold the couple’s handgun in his office had made him a potential witness in any court case involving the couple, KSDK reported. The couple’s new lawyer is Joel Schwartz.
Mark and Patricia McCloskey are seen outside their St. Louis home in a clash with protesters, June 28, 2020. (Getty Images)
Mark and Patricia McCloskey are seen outside their St. Louis home in a clash with protesters, June 28, 2020. (Getty Images)
Authorities wanted the handgun in their possession to be sure it was inoperable as the McCloskeys and Watkins have claimed, FOX 2 reported. The reason for the rifle being confiscated on Friday remained unclear.
The protesters claimed they marched past the McCloskeys’ home on the way to a planned gathering outside the home of St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson.
Schwartz, the couple’s new lawyer, told KSDK on Friday that he does not believe the McCloskeys will face any charges in connection with the June incident, and said he is trying to arrange a meeting with the office of Gardner, the circuit attorney.
If they do face charges and are convicted, they would likely get probation or be required to perform community service, a law professor at St. Louis University told KSDK.
“There’s very little likelihood that the McCloskeys would see any jail time or prison time on these kind of charges,” Professor John Ammann told the station.
Dom Calicchio is a Senior Editor at FoxNews.com. Reach him at dom.calicchio@foxnews.com.
That is ridiculous, not only are the disarmed, but their chicken shit lawyer has bailed on them too. What a brave man! NOT
Prominent Baltimore defense lawyer Ken Ravenell has been indicted on federal charges based on allegations he helped a Jamaican marijuana kingpin and his crew members launder drug proceeds and avoid detection.
The indictment returned Wednesday charges Ravenell, 60, with racketeering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit money laundering, and narcotics conspiracy, according to the Baltimore Sun and a press release.
The indictment alleges Ravenell instructed crew members to “utilize certain drug couriers, to utilize specific modes of transportation and to transport shipments of drugs and money at particular times of day, all for the purpose of evading law enforcement.”
The indictment also claims Ravenell told crew members they should use payphones and prepaid phones, and should remove batteries from their phones when meeting to discuss illegal activities.
Prosecutors say Ravenell used the law firm where he was a partner in furtherance of the conspiracy, which took place between 2009 and 2014.
Some of the drug crew’s meetings were held at the law firm, and Ravenell used law firm bank accounts to launder drug money and pay lawyers representing other members of the conspiracy, according to the indictment.
Prosecutors also say Ravenell found lawyers who refused to represent cooperating witnesses to represent crew members, and required the crew members to sign retainer agreements that allowed their lawyers to withdraw from the case if the client tried to cooperate.
Ravenell obtained information about the status of the cases and whether the defendants were cooperating, and then relayed that information to other conspirators, prosecutors say. Ravenell also met with defendants in jail without permission of their lawyers and encouraged them to accept plea deals that did not include cooperation, according to the indictment.
The Baltimore Sun identified Ravenell’s former firm as the Murphy Law Firm. Since leaving the firm, Ravenell has emerged as a top defense lawyer who has handled high-profile murder cases, according to the Sun.
From the moment of “COVID-19’s” naming—and particularly since the imposition of unprecedented restrictions on “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”—some people have smelled a rat. And with each passing week, the smell becomes worse. A growing chorus of ordinary citizens and world-renowned medical and scientific experts is raising questions about matters ranging from the coronavirus’s origins to the rationale for continued lockdowns (see here, here and here).
The mainstream media have shown themselves only too ready to lob ad hominem attacks against any and all such non-conformists. However, one does not have to be insensitive to the illness and deaths associated with COVID-19 to recognize that powerful agendas are riding on the coattails of SARS-CoV-2. Citizens are waking up to the fact that the countries, officials and public figures who embrace draconian interventions such as immunity certificates, microchipping, forced vaccination and the removal of children from their homes also approve of making our sovereign rights—whether to earn a living, maintain bodily integrity, congregate to practice our spirituality, enjoy the arts or protect and educate our children—contingent upon our acceptance of these Big Brother measures and technologies.
To make it easier for the public to assess what is happening and what is at stake, Children’s Health Defense has put together the following timeline of selected events. We invite readers to consider how these events—some of them seemingly unrelated—and the network of partnerships and relationships that they illustrate have contributed to the unfolding set of circumstances in which we now find ourselves.
While the lockdown is a cataclysm for the world economy, it is an opportunity for Gates” and his billionaire brotherhood…
Notes/Explanatory Context
Gain-of-function research: COVID-19 has prompted renewed questioning about a long-debated branch of virology that, around 2012, scientists benignly rebranded as “gain-of-function” (GOF) research. GOF experiments seek to generate viruses “with properties that do not exist in nature” or, stated another way, “alter a pathogen to make it more transmissible or deadly.” One of the leading proponents of GOF work is Dr. Ralph Baric at the University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (UNC), a “legend in coronavirology” and “trailblazer of synthetic genomic manipulation techniques” who specializes in engineering lethal coronaviruses from “mail-order DNA.” Baric and other GOF enthusiasts argue that this type of viral tinkering is “critical to the development of broad-based vaccines and therapeutics,” but critics, such as Dr. Thomas Inglesby (director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security), dispute this putative benefit.
Big Data and Big Telecom: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dafna Tachover (director of CHD’s “Stop 5G and Wireless Harms Project”) wrote on May 8: “5G has almost nothing to do with improving your lives; it’s all about controlling your life, marketing products, and harvesting your data for Artificial Intelligence purposes. The 21st century’s ‘black gold’ is data.” They note that Bill Gates, along with a number of other players and companies, is helping set up a “microwave radiation-emitting spider web [that] will allow Big Data/Big Telecom and Big Brother to capture what happens inside and outside every person at every moment of life” using a sinister brain-machine interface and other technologies, many financed by Gates. In short, “While the lockdown is a cataclysm for the world economy, it is an opportunity for Gates” and his billionaire brotherhood, ably assisted by an unadmirable fleet of medical and scientist yes-men.
Timeline of selected events
1998
May 18: The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and 20 states file antitrust charges against Microsoft.
2000
2000: Bill Gates steps down from his position as Microsoft CEO, and Bill and Melinda Gates launch their eponymous foundation.
2000: The Gates Foundation (along with other partners) launches the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation (GAVI), known today as Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. The foundation has given $4.1 billion to Gavi over the past 20 years.
2001
November: After initially losing the antitrust lawsuit and appealing the decision, Microsoft settles its case with the DOJ out of court.
2002
November 2002: University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (UNC) researcher Ralph Baric publishes a “breakthrough work” in gain-of-function research (studies that alter pathogens to make them more transmissible or deadly, see Notes above), describing the creation of a synthetic clone of a natural mouse coronavirus.
November 2002: China’s Guangdong province reports the first case of “atypical pneumonia” (later labeled as SARS).
The speed of the Baric group illustrates how quickly a qualified team of virologists can create a synthetic clone from a natural virus, and therefore make genetic modifications to it.
2003
October 28: A paper by the Baric research group at UNC describes their synthetic recreation of the “previously undescribed” SARS coronavirus. (Writing in 2020, a scientist states, “The speed of the Baric group illustrates how quickly a qualified team of virologists can create a synthetic clone from a natural virus, and therefore make genetic modifications to it. Moreover, that was back in 2003. Today, a qualified laboratory can repeat those steps in a matter of weeks.”)
2005
December: Congress approves the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness (PREP) Act, which authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) “to issue a PREP Act Declaration . . . that provides immunity from liability for any loss caused, arising out of, relating to, or resulting from administration or use of countermeasures to diseases, threats, and conditions determined in the Declaration to constitute a present or credible risk of a future public health emergency.”
2009
2009-present (and earlier): The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation awards millions of dollars in global health funding to Imperial College London; funding covers areas such as polio, HIV, family planning, malaria, health care delivery, agricultural development, information technology and “public awareness and analysis.”
2009: The Gates Foundation funds human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine trials in India, administering the vaccine to 23,000 young girls in remote provinces. Seven die and approximately 1,200 suffer autoimmune conditions, fertility disorders or other severe reactions. Ethical violations include forged consent forms and refusal of medical treatment for the injured girls.
October 2009: Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), goes on YouTube to declare that serious adverse events for the H1N1 influenza vaccine are “very, very, very rare.” Months later, serious adverse events such as miscarriages, narcolepsy and febrile convulsions explode in multiple countries.
2010
January: Bill Gates pledges $10 billion in funding for the World Health Organization (WHO) and announces “the Decade of Vaccines.”
May 18: Senator and physician Tom Coburn calls out Dr. Fauci for misleadingly touting “significant progress in HIV vaccine research”—research that has ushered millions into NIAID’s coffers. Dr. Coburn stated, “Most scientists involved in AIDS research believe that an HIV vaccine is further away than ever.”
2011
December 30: Dr. Fauci promotes gain-of-function research on bird flu viruses, arguing that the research is worth the risk. The risks worry other “seasoned researchers.”
2012
April 20: Baylor College researchers publish their evaluation of four vaccine candidates for SARS, concluding that “Caution in proceeding to application of a SARS-CoV vaccine in humans is indicated.”
May: The 194 Member States of the World Health Assembly endorse the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP), led by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in collaboration with NIAID, WHO, Gavi, UNICEF and others. Dr. Fauci is one of five members on the GVAP’s Leadership Council.
2014
2014: Dr. Deborah Birx takes the helm of PEPFAR (the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief), which Dr. Fauci helped launch (in 2003) and which benefits from generous Gates Foundation support. Birx and Fauci are long-time allies, having worked together during the early years of AIDS and sharing overlapping career paths.
October 7: National Institutes of Health (NIH) director Francis Collins announces a “new phase of cooperation” between NIH and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, including partnering for vaccine development.
October 17: Under President Obama, the NIH halts federal funding for gain-of-function (GOF) research (see Notes) and asks federally funded GOF researchers to “agree to a voluntary moratorium.” The funding hiatus applies to 21 studies “reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route.” NIH later allows 10 of the studies to resume.
[T]hese data and restrictions represent a crossroads of [gain-of-function] research concerns; the potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks must be weighed against the risk of creating more dangerous pathogens.
2015
2015: NIAID, under Fauci, awards a five-year, $3.7 million grant to EcoHealth Alliance (whose director gets credit on subsequent publications for “funding acquisition” rather than scientific work) to conduct gain-of-function studies on the “risk of bat coronavirus emergence.” Ten percent of the award goes to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which does “the bulk of the on-the-ground sample collection and analysis.”
January: In a public appearance, Bill Gates states, “We’re taking things that are genetically modified organisms and we’re injecting them into little kids’ arms; we just shoot ‘em right into the vein.”
September 24: UNC’s Ralph Baric is granted a patent for the creation of chimeric coronavirus spike proteins.
November 9: Baric and the Wuhan Institute’s Shi Zheng-Li (the leading GOF coronavirus researcher in China) publish what some refer to as “the most famous gain-of-function virology paper” (in Nature Medicine), describing their creation of a synthetic chimeric coronavirus. The authors state: “[T]hese data and restrictions represent a crossroads of GOF research concerns; the potential to prepare for and mitigate future outbreaks must be weighed against the risk of creating more dangerous pathogens [emphasis added]. In developing policies moving forward, it is important to consider the value of the data generated by these studies and whether these types of chimeric virus studies warrant further investigation versus the inherent risks involved.”
2016
2016: The National Science Advisory Board for Biosecurity states that “very few government-funded gain-of-function experiments [pose] a significant threat to public health.”
…researchers blame the Gates-funded polio vaccination campaign for almost half a million cases of childhood paralysis.
2017
February 8: The Modi administration in India severs ties with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, after researchers blame the Gates-funded polio vaccination campaign for almost half a million cases of childhood paralysis.
November 30: Shi Zheng-Li and coauthors publish a paper in PLoS Pathogens describing the creation of eight new synthetic coronaviruses.
December 19: The NIH and Dr. Fauci’s NIAID restore federal funding for gain-of-function research, ending the moratorium that began in October 2014.
December 19: Dr. Marc Lipsitch of the Harvard School of Public Health tells the New York Times that the type of gain-of-function experiments endorsed by Dr. Fauci’s NIAID have “done almost nothing to improve our preparedness for pandemics, and yet risked creating an accidental pandemic.”
NIAID awards a six-year renewal grant of $3.7 million to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology to continue their gain-of-function studies on bat coronaviruses.
2019
2019: NIAID awards a six-year renewal grant of $3.7 million to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology to continue their gain-of-function studies on bat coronaviruses. The renewal is approved “unusually quickly,” receiving a “really extremely high priority for funding.”
August 14: Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) records show that the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation owns 5.3 million shares of Crown Castle International Corp., representing the Foundation’s second largest tech holding after Microsoft. Crown Castle dominates ownership of 5G infrastructure throughout the U.S., including cell towers, small cell nodes and fiber.
October: A report released by NBC News in May, 2020 declares, “The analysis of commercial telemetry data in Wuhan suggests the COVID-19 pandemic began earlier than initially reported” and “supports the release of COVID-19 at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.” NBC’s May 8 summary states, “there was no cellphone activity in a high-security portion of the Wuhan Institute of Virology from Oct. 7 through Oct. 24, 2019, and that there may have been a ‘hazardous event’ sometime between Oct. 6 and Oct. 11.”
October 6: On May 5, 2020, British and French researchers publish a study estimating that COVID-19 could have started as early as October 6, 2019.
October 18-27: Wuhan hosts the Military World Games (“Wuhan 2019”), held every four years. More than 9,000 athletes from over 100 countries compete. The telecom systems for the Athletes’ Village constructed for the event are powered by 5G technology, “showcas[ing] its infrastructure and technological prowess.”
October 18: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the World Economic Forum and the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security convene an invitation-only “tabletop exercise” called Event 201 to map out the response to a hypothetical global coronavirus pandemic.
November-December: General practitioners in northern Italy start noticing a “strange pneumonia.”
December 2-3: Vaccine scientists attending the WHO’s Global Vaccine Safety Summit confirm major problems with vaccine safety around the world.
December 18: Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) report the development of a “novel way to record a patient’s vaccination history,” using smartphone-readable nanocrystals called “quantum dots” embedded in the skin using microneedles—this work is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
December 31: Chinese officials inform the WHO about a cluster of “mysterious pneumonia” cases. Later, the South China Morning Post reports that it can trace the first case back to November 17.
Dr. Peter Hotez of Baylor College … tells a Congressional Committee that coronavirus vaccines have always had a “unique potential safety problem”
2020
January 7: Chinese authorities formally identify a “novel” coronavirus.
January 10: China makes the genome sequence of the new coronavirus publicly available.
January 11: China records its first death attributed to the new coronavirus.
January 20: The first U.S. coronavirus case is reported in Washington State.
January 23: Shi Zheng-Li releases a paper reporting that the new coronavirus is 96% identical to a strain that her lab isolated from bats in 2013 but never publicized.
January 30: The WHO declares the new coronavirus a “global health emergency.”
Jan. 31, 2020: A group of Indian scientists publishes a study finding HIV sequences in the 2019-nCoV coronavirus. The scientists withdraw the study within 24 hours, presumably under some pressure.
February 4: Sixty-seven year-old scientist Dr. Frank Plummer, head until 2015 of Canada’s level-4 National Microbiology Laboratory, dies under mysterious circumstances while in Nairobi, Kenya. During the SARS outbreak in the early 2000s, Plummer told the New York Times that 60% of “probable” and “suspected” SARS cases had failed the test needed to confirm a link between coronavirus and SARS: “[W]hether it is the entire explanation for SARS I am just not sure yet.”
February 4: With just 11 people in the U.S. who are confirmed to have COVID-19, HHS issues a Declaration, published on March 17 in the Federal Register, that places the new coronavirus under the umbrella of the 2005 PREP Act, making medical countermeasures (including vaccines) immune from liability.
February 5: Bill and Melinda Gates announce $100 million in funding for coronavirus vaccine research and treatment efforts.
February 10: French and Canadian scientists publish a paper about the new coronavirus describing an “important” anomaly—12 additional nucleotides—not observed in previous coronaviruses. They suggest that the distinct feature “may provide a gain-of-function . . . for efficient spreading in the human population.”
February 11: The WHO gives the disease thought to be caused by the new coronavirus a name: “COVID-19.” WHO’s Director-General explains, “We had to find a name that did not refer to a geographical location, an animal, an individual or group of people, and which is also pronounceable and related to the disease.”
February 24: Moderna, Inc. sends the first batch of its experimental coronavirus vaccine, mRNA-1273, to its research partner, NIAID.
February 25: Moderna stock shares trade 15% higher.
February 29: The U.S. reports its first COVID-19 death.
March 5: Dr. Peter Hotez of Baylor College (who has previously tried to develop a SARS vaccine) tells a Congressional Committee that coronavirus vaccines have always had a “unique potential safety problem”—a “kind of paradoxical immune enhancement phenomenon.”
March 6: President Trump signs an $8.3 billion emergency coronavirus spending package, much of which “directly benefit[s] the drug industry.”
March 10: Dr. Paul Offit of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia expresses concerns about the push to “rush [a vaccine] through,” particularly in the absence of “any history of making a coronavirus vaccine.”
March 10: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome and Mastercard commit $125 million to identify, assess, develop and scale up COVID-19 treatments, forming the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator. The $50 million in Gates Foundation funding is part of the $100 million in COVID-19 funding announced by Gates on February 5.
March 11: The WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic.
March 13: Bill Gates steps down from the Boards of Microsoft and Berkshire Hathaway to “dedicate more time to philanthropic priorities.”
March 16: Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London, scientific advisor to the UK government, publishes his computer simulations warning that there will be over two million COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. unless the country adopts “intensive and socially disruptive measures.”
March 16: Dr. Fauci tells Americans that they must be prepared to “take more drastic steps” and “hunker down significantly” to slow the coronavirus’s spread.
March 16: NIAID launches a Phase 1 trial in 45 healthy adults of the mRNA-1273 coronavirus vaccine co-developed by NIAID and Moderna, Inc. The trial skips the customary step of testing the vaccine in animal models prior to proceeding to human trials.
March 17: The Nation publishes an analysis covering conflicts of interest in the Gates Foundation’s charitable giving, describing “close to $2 billion in tax-deductible charitable donations to private companies,” including GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), and “close to $250 million in charitable grants . . . to companies in which the foundation holds corporate stocks and bonds,” including Merck, GSK, Sanofi and other pharmaceutical corporations. A critic states that the foundation has “created one of the most problematic precedents in the history of foundation giving by essentially opening the door for corporations to see themselves as deserving charity claimants at a time when corporate profits are at an all-time high.”
March 22: U.S. bioweapons expert Dr. Francis Boyle repeats earlier statements that the purpose of Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) labs such as the Wuhan Institute of Virology “is the research, development, testing and stockpiling of offensive biological weapons” and that the new virus is a “weaponized” SARS coronavirus that leaked out of the Wuhan BSL-4 lab.
Bill Gates announces significant funding for a company, EarthNow, that will blanket Earth with $1 billion in video surveillance satellites.
March 24: Bill Gates announces significant funding for a company, EarthNow, that will blanket Earth with $1 billion in video surveillance satellites.
March 26: Microsoft announces that it is acquiring Affirmed Networks, a company focused on 5G and “edge computing.”
March 26: Dr. Fauci publishes an editorial in the New England Journal of Medicine (with senior NIAID official H. Clifford Lane and CDC director Robert Redfield), stating that “the overall clinical consequences of Covid-19 may ultimately be more akin to those of a severe seasonal influenza,” with a case fatality rate of perhaps 0.1%.
March 27: President Trump signs the $2 trillion CARES Act into law.
March 27: Children’s Health Defense publishes its video and article, “Dr. Fauci and COVID-19 priorities: therapeutics now or vaccines later?” Shortly thereafter, Mailchimp deactivates CHD’s account with no advance notice and no violation of Mailchimp’s rules.
March 29: President Trump extends nationwide social distancing guidelines until April 30.
March 31: White House coronavirus advisors Dr. Deborah Birx and Dr. Fauci cite models showing a potential 100,000 to 240,000 coronavirus deaths “even if the country keeps stringent social distancing guidelines in place.” Fauci describes social distancing and lockdowns as “inconvenient” but “the answer to our problems.”
April 2: Bill Gates states that a coronavirus vaccine “is the only thing that will allow us to return to normal.”
April 3: Forbes reports that Moderna’s CEO has become an overnight billionaire after the company ended 2019 with a net loss.
April 6: Dr. Fauci describes a COVID-19 vaccine as a “showstopper” and states, “I hope we don’t have so many people infected that we actually have . . . herd immunity.”
April 9: Dr. Fauci states that the U.S. death toll from the coronavirus “looks more like the 60,000 [range],” adding the “models are really only as good as the assumptions that you put into the model.”
April 9: The Gates-funded Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) reports that 115 COVID-19 vaccines are in the pipeline.
April 9: Children’s Health Defense publishes “Gates’ globalist vaccine agenda: a win-win for pharma and mandatory vaccination.”
April 11: Children’s Health Defense publishes “Here’s why Bill Gates wants indemnity… Are you willing to take the risk?”
April 15: Bill Gates pledges another $150 million to coronavirus vaccine development and other measures. He states, “There are seven billion people on the planet. We are going to need to vaccinate nearly every one.”
April 16: Moderna announces up to $483 million in funding from the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) to speed up the mRNA-1273 vaccine’s development.
April 18: Professor Luc Montagnier, recipient of the 2008 Nobel Prize in Medicine for his discovery of HIV, appears on French television and states that SARS-CoV-2 has been “manipulated” to include “added sequences” from HIV. Professor Montagnier asserts that this “meticulous” insertion could only have been carried out in a laboratory. Others raise similar questions about the origins of SARS-CoV-2.
April 18: News outlets report that the country’s first coronavirus tests are ineffective due to CDC lab contamination and the CDC’s violation of its manufacturing standards.
April 21: Washington State announces plans to have a 1,500-person contact tracing team in place by mid-May.
April 23: Researchers issue a preprint reporting “direct evidence” of at least 30 different SARS-CoV-2 genetic variants.
April 23: News outlets report that American billionaires’ wealth increased by 10% during the first few months of COVID-19.
April 23: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. publishes “The Bill Gates effect: WHO’s DTP vaccine killed more children in Africa than the diseases it targeted.”
April 24: The NIH cancels the funding awarded to EcoHealth Alliance and the Wuhan Institute of Virology for gain-of-function research on coronaviruses (funding awarded continuously since 2015). The NIH and Dr. Fauci decline to comment.
April 27: Former FDA head Scott Gottlieb (now with Pfizer) and former Medicare/Medicaid official Andy Slavitt urge the Trump administration to dedicate $46 billion to contact tracing and isolation.
April 28: A Newsweek article reports, “Dr. Fauci backed controversial Wuhan lab with U.S. dollars for risky coronavirus research.” Fauci does not respond to requests for comments.
April 29: Bloomberg publishes a story about President Trump’s “Operation Warp Speed,” a planned pharmaceutical-government-military collaboration to shrink the development time for a coronavirus vaccine.
April 30: Bill Gates writes that “the world will be able to go back to the way things were . . . when almost every person on the planet has been vaccinated against coronavirus.” Gates also states that “Governments will need to expedite their usual drug approval processes in order to deliver the vaccine to over 7 billion people quickly.”
April 30: Dr. Fauci states that it is “doable” to have hundreds of millions of doses of a coronavirus vaccine available by January 2021.
May 1: Dr. Thomas Inglesby (director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security), discussing gain-of-function research, states that “laboratory systems are not infallible, and even in the greatest laboratories of the world, there are mistakes.”
May 1: Democratic Representative Bobby Rush of Illinois introduces the TRACE Act (“HR 6666: COVID-19 Testing, Reaching, and Contacting Everyone”). The conspicuously vague Act would allocate $100 billion to CDC-hired entities for contact tracing and “other purposes,” including family separation. (See also May 15.)
May 4: Bill Gates pledges another $50 million toward COVID-19, for a total of $300 million in commitments.
May 4: President Trump states that the U.S. will have a coronavirus vaccine by the end of 2020.
May 5: British and French researchers publish “Emergence of genomic diversity and recurrent mutations in SARS-CoV-2,” suggesting that the recurrent mutations detected “may indicate ongoing adaptation of SARS-CoV-2 to its novel human host.”
May 5: Neil Ferguson resigns from the UK government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) after flouting his own social distancing rules. The married lover with whom Ferguson has his trysts works for an organization “loosely connected with Bill Gates, through the World Economic Forum.”
May 5: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. publishes “Redfield and Birx: can they be trusted with COVID?”
May 6: An anonymous software engineer (ex-Google) pronounces Neil Ferguson’s COVID-19 computer model “unusable for scientific purposes.”
May 6: New York governor Andrew Cuomo announces that the state will partner with “visionary” Bill Gates to restructure education by placing “technology at the forefront.” Cuomo appoints former Google CEO Eric Schmidt to lead a blue-ribbon committee for this purpose. Critics push back, describing past Gates-Foundation-funded educational fiascos that amassed “detailed personal information about millions of students” in the cloud.
May 7: Business Insider reports that over 33 million Americans have filed for unemployment over the seven-week period since COVID-19 restrictions began.
May 7: NPR reports that 44 states and the District of Columbia have plans to deploy a contact tracing workforce of over 66,000 workers.
May 8: NBC News releases a private report describing an unconfirmed shutdown of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in October 2019.
May 8: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and Dafna Tachover (director of CHD’s “Stop 5G and Wireless Harms Project”) publish “The brave new world of Bill Gates and Big Telecom.”
May 11: UK chief medical officer Dr. Chris Whitty (an insider who has received millions in malaria research funding from the Gates Foundation and who endorses stigma as a useful public health intervention) states that COVID-19 is “harmless to [the] vast majority.”
May 13: Australian researchers report that “SARS-CoV-2 is uniquely adapted to infect humans, raising important questions as to whether it arose in nature by a rare chance event or whether its origins might lie elsewhere.”
May 14: Microsoft announces that it is acquiring UK-based Metaswitch Networks “to expand its Azure 5G strategy.”
May 15: The House passes the 1,815-page, $3 trillion HEROES Act (“Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions Act”), sneaking in portions of the TRACE ACT that would funnel $75 billion to the CDC for “coronavirus testing, contact tracing and isolation measures.”
May 18: Moderna announces interim results from the Phase 1 trial of its mRNA-1273 coronavirus vaccine. The company reports that three out of 15 healthy participants (20%) experienced Grade 3 systemic adverse events following a second dose. (The Merck Manual defines Grade 3 as “severe or medically significant but not immediately life-threatening; hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization indicated; disabling; limiting self care.”)
May 18: Discussing the interim results from Moderna’s Phase 1 trial of its mRNA-1273 vaccine—co-developed with NIAID—Dr. Fauci states: “I must warn that there’s also the possibility of negative consequences, where certain vaccines can actually enhance the negative effect of the infection.”
May 18: After describing its interim Phase 1 results as “promising,” shares of Moderna stock soar 25%, closing at a “record high.” The company’s stock has gained 241% since the beginning of 2020.
May 19: Children’s Health Defense Chairman Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. publishes “How Bill Gates controls global messaging and censorship.”
May 20: Microsoft announces its new supercomputer intended to create “human-like” artificial intelligence.
Stop the conveyor belt
Around the world, many people are understandably reeling in shock at the rapid economic, social and cultural changes that have followed in the wake of the phenomenon called “COVID-19.” Many of these changes involve ever-tighter restrictions on our rights and freedoms, accompanied by inexorable messaging—both public and subliminal—that a “vaccine for all” and 24/7 tracking and surveillance are the only way out. Increasingly, however, there are hopeful signs that more members of the public are recognizing the duplicity and self-interest of those offering false salvation. Each of us needs to do our part to expose these issues, standing up for individual sovereignty and working to halt the transition “to a totalitarian singularity more despotic than Orwell ever imagined.”
Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense. CHD is planning many strategies, including legal, in an effort to defend the health of our children and obtain justice for those already injured. Your support is essential to CHD’s successful mission.
The New Jersey Supreme Court on Tuesday removed a judge from the bench who asked a woman whether she had tried to close her legs to stop a sexual assault.
The court ordered the removal of Judge John Russo in a May 26 decision.
The woman was in Russo’s Ocean County courtroom in 2016 to seek a final restraining order against her alleged assailant. Russo took over questioning after cross-examination by defense counsel. The judge asked the woman whether she had tried to block her body parts, close her legs, call police or leave.
The questions were unwarranted, inappropriate and discourteous, the supreme court said in an opinion by Chief Justice Stuart Rabner. “No witness, alleged victim or litigant should be treated that way in a court of law,” the court said.
Russo claimed the woman was a demoralized witness, and he was trying to help her get reengaged in the hearing. But that explanation “does not square with the record,” the court said. “The plaintiff plainly testified that defendant forced her to have sexual intercourse against her will. She also described other acts of alleged domestic violence. And she did so without needing any assistance from the trial judge to express herself.”
“Beyond that,” the court said, Russo’s “coarse questions about how the plaintiff responded during the alleged assault were not relevant.” Sexual assault in New Jersey turns on the use of physical force by the alleged assailant, not the victim’s state of mind or resistance.
Just as problematic were Russo’s comments to court staff after the hearing, the court said. Russo asked whether staffers heard “the sex stuff” and said he was the master of “being able to talk about sex acts with a straight face.”
“Judges set the tone for a courtroom,” the court said. “Especially when it comes to sensitive matters like domestic violence and sexual assault, that tone must be dignified, solemn and respectful, not demeaning or sophomoric. [Russo] failed in that regard.”
The court said Russo also committed misconduct in three instances.
• Russo ruled in a hearing even though he stated at the outset that he knew both the defendant and his wife since high school. The defendant was arrested after failing to comply with a judge’s order to pay. $10,000 out of nearly $145,000 in past-due child support. Russo vacated the arrest warrant and lowered the purge amount from $10,000 to $300 based on the defendant’s uncorroborated financial information.
• Russo made an ex parte call to a mother in a paternity matter who failed to appear in court. When Russo asked for the woman’s address, she said she didn’t want to disclose it because she was afraid. She said the putative father had molested her daughter, and she feared for her son’s safety. Russo threatened the woman with financial penalties and said she wouldn’t be able to keep her address secret. “He’s going to find you, ma’am,” Russo told the woman. “We’re all going to find you.”
• Russo asked the family division manager in his courthouse to intercede in another vicinage to reschedule a guardianship hearing in a personal matter involving himself, his ex-wife and his son. Russo should have worked through his lawyer rather than the manager, the court said.
“The series of ethical failures that [Russo] committed are not errors of law, innocent missteps or isolated words taken out of context,” the court said. “Viewed as a whole, they are flagrant and serious acts of misconduct.”
Russo is a former mayor of Toms River, New Jersey. Law360, Courthouse News Service, Law.com, NJ.com and the Legal Profession Blog had coverage of the decision.
Award against the United States granted Aug 19.19 on behalf of all Americans
From CLAIMANT Phil Hudok
After 4 years, a monumental battle has resulted in an arbitration award that returns to whomsoever choose, the status of heir of the Creator with free will choice vs. subject of the state and forced compliance. And the best part, it applies to you via an opt-in clause.
The award is in-hand and cannot be challenged.
Anyone can opt-in with no risk, monetary or otherwise.
The settlement is yet to be decided and is somewhat contingent on the numbers that demand it. [Spread the word so people opt in]
The documents for download verify the following three aspects:
The scope of this Arbitration Award is without precedent.
The Arbitration Act passed a recent test in the Supreme Court.
A 2016 Congressional Bill on the private side produced the settlement of an arbitration award that while quite impressive, pales in comparison to Treaty of Peace 2020.
A deadline for Opt-In is approaching and the window is short
Simply put, with freedom comes responsibility. Claim the free will and responsibility as heirs of the Creator or linger as a subject of the state where compliance is the rule.
Bill of Peace 2020 defines who can opt in …..
By and Between Gene Stalnaker, Phillip Hudok, Alicia Lutz-Rolow, Leonard Frank house of Harview, Keith Lawrence Moore, any and all natural born men/women so opting in by Free-will choice (born on the soil of the United States of America to a father and/or mother who is natural born or naturalized by and through lawful means) and the United States of America [etc.]
(7) The term “Beneficiaries” means any one of the following beneficiaries either individually or in any combination thereof or both-
Gene Stalnaker
Phillip Hudok
Alicia Lutz-Rolow
Leonard Frank house of Harview
Keith Lawrence Moore
Any and all natural born men/women so opting in by Free-will choice and the immediately family thereof [etc.]
Everyone who opts in claims the immunity, privileges, and freedom Americans should have had under the original Contract [Constitution] breached several hundred years ago.
All required documents including an Award Summary and detailed Opt In instructions are at http://www.hudok.info/
Please disseminate!
With No Apologies,
Phillip Hudok
Private Law Immunity
Private law and arbitration are international however you need to know how your governance system is set up before taking lawful action. USA Private Immunity Law case will not work in Canada because of the Canadian system of governance.
Please share widely to inform Americans of this rare opportunity. Thank you.
DISCLAIMER
This information is not intended to provide legal or lawful advice. It is for educational purposes only.
Sincerely,
Doreen A Agostino
Without Prejudice and Without Recourse http://freetobewealthy.net
Sent via hardwired computer
All wireless turned off to safeguard life
Thomas BrejchaBy Thomas Brejcha
MARCH 10, 2020
From the time of its founding and fight for independence, America has been synonymous with the idea of freedom – freedom to speak your mind, pursue your own dreams, worship as you want. The American press has often been called the “Fourth Estate” or referred to as the fourth branch of government for its ability to hold leaders to transparency with the ability to expose wrongdoing. Today, that cherished Freedom of the Press is at risk. Why? Because of the power of the abortion lobby and its insistence that the rules are different when it comes to the business of selling death.
The Federalist
Read The Federalist article by Tom Brejcha, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society, on how the rights of all journalists are at risk because a California federal court deemed David Daleiden’s undercover work – exposing baby body parts trafficking by abortion vendors – a crime.
“What does it tell you that the Daleiden case may have been the first time that any journalist has been criminally charged with violating the California recording law in the many years it has been on the books?” from California Throws The Books At Undercover Reporter Who Exposed Baby Body Trafficking by Tom Brejcha.
California Throws The Books At Undercover Reporter Who Exposed Baby Body Trafficking
Even those who disagree with David Daleiden and his techniques but care about how the legal actions against him could define press freedom need to follow this case.
An undercover reporter has been arraigned in California and charged with ten felonies for secretly recording conversations, and it’s time to revisit how the judiciary and the law can stifle the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of the press.
The accused, David Daleiden, used standard media undercover techniques to investigate and expose Planned Parenthood’s sale of aborted fetus body parts. While the use of undercover techniques like Daleiden’s is a controversial practice even within journalism circles, Daleiden’s upcoming jury trial has far wider implications for journalists.
Namely, can and should government criminalize undercover reporting, which historically has revealed otherwise hidden wrongdoing of all kinds?
Being Pro-Life Is Not a Crime
Let’s first put aside that Daleiden, as director of the Center for Medical Progress, is a pro-life activist—which is not a crime. He should have the same right to penetrate the practices of America’s abortion providers and report his findings just as other reporters and publications investigate other matters.
Consider the multitude of covertly conducted investigations exposing threats to public health and safety, racism, and various other injustices, dating back to the dawn of our republic. To mention a few: In a classic case of disguised reporters using hidden cameras, ABC “Prime Time Live” outed Food Lion’s alleged unsanitary food handling practices. “Dateline” NBC deployed decoys and hidden cameras to expose men who solicited sex with minors on the Internet. Vanity Fair had a clandestine reporter join a tour group to the Holy Land to probe then-President George W. Bush’s alleged ties to religious right leaders.
Undercover Chicago Tribune reporters, working from the inside as employees, exposed life-threatening conditions in nursing homes. Another Tribune reporter worked undercover in the city’s election board to reveal widespread election fraud. Chicago Sun-Times reporters, working inside, turned up dangerous practices at abortion clinics. The paper also opened a bar, the Mirage, in a sting using hidden cameras to bare shakedowns by city inspectors.
Jerry Thompson of the Nashville Tennessean infiltrated the Ku Klux Klan to provide a first-person account of its racist practices and beliefs. BBC used clandestine students to describe a “sex for grades” scandal. In Los Angeles, CBSN’s David Goldstein regularly goes undercover.
The Washington Post captured a Pulitzer Prize for Public Service by disclosing disgusting and unsanitary conditions at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. The reporters never identified themselves as such, which, according to Brooke Kroeger, a New York University law and journalism professor, defines their action as investigative reporting. It is, she argued, yet another demonstration of how deception in investigative reporting is not only permissible but a necessary tool regularly exposing wrongdoing that can’t be found any other way.
Attacking Whistleblowers Who Exposed Crime
Instead, Daleiden faces a legal system that has unleashed both criminal and civil actions against him for a variety of supposed violations of law, including criminal trespass, fraud, and breach of contract, even federal civil racketeering. A jury in the civil trial awarded the plaintiffs more than $2.2 million in damages, enough to permanently silence Daleiden’s small pro-life and nonprofit operation. We are appealing.
The criminal case, the one more likely to chill undercover work, was the product of then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris. A judge threw out six of 15 criminal charges against Daleiden and co-investigator Sandra Merritt but ruled that the other counts can go to a criminal trial. Thus, the arraignment. Never mind that Harris violated shield laws protecting reporters by raiding Daleiden’s home and capturing previously unpublished raw journalism materials.
How ironic, because about the time that Daleiden published his findings, animal rights activists were praised for documenting abuse in the poultry industry. Unlike in Daleiden’s case, Harris launched probes of the poultry industry and didn’t charge the reporters.
That Harris received campaign donations from, and touted her support for, pro-choice groups suggests she was motivated by political bias. Same for the judge in the civil case, who was affiliated with an organization that had a joint venture with a Planned Parenthood affiliate whose successor is now one of the entities suing Daleiden.
No one can be blamed for thinking that the legal actions were inspired and carried out by pro-choice organizations to punish and silence their opponents. What does it tell you that the Daleiden case may have been the first time that any journalist has been criminally charged with violating the California recording law in the many years it has been on the books?
Putting Reporting Under Government Threat
Even if the government’s action were bias-free, Daleiden’s pursuit still jeopardizes quality journalism. The California accusations are based on the claim his targets had an expectation of privacy even when the conversations were conducted in a public place, like a restaurant or hotel convention hall, where bystanders could hear them. It’s a ludicrous assertion, a gross misinterpretation, and an undue and overbroad extension of the law.
I refer to two pro-choice law professors, Sherry F. Colb and Michael C. Dorf, who support Planned Parenthood’s work but warned that the criminal pursuit of Daleiden “follows a troubling pattern in American constitutional jurisprudence” to cripple investigative journalism. In a CNN opinion article, they wrote, “Whatever the precise facts of this case prove to be, the prosecution has broader implications, and not just for abortion and anti-abortion speech. Undercover exposés play a vital role in informing the American public of important facts that would otherwise remain hidden.” The Los Angeles Times deemed the prosecution “disturbingly aggressive” and an “overreach.”
Possible prison sentences and burdensome fines attached to criminal conduct cannot be ignored in this debate. They are more than a disincentive to expose wrongdoing; they give the upper hand to criminal enterprises, powerful corporations, avenging politicians, ideologues, and special interests to protect themselves from public condemnation and costly penalties for misconduct. This is not a loophole that the Founding Fathers had in mind when they crafted the constitutional protection of freedom of the press.
Even those who disagree with Daleiden and his techniques but care about how the precedent-setting legal actions against him that could define press freedom in the future need to follow this case as it winds through the legal system, possibly all the way up to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Thomas Brejcha is founder, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Society, a national public interest law firm defending life, family and religious liberty. It represents David Daleiden.
Photo kambodza / Flickr
Could there be a link between the Coronavirus and 5G? Researcher and building biologist Paul Doyon has just spent the last 18 months in China. He’s written a brilliant article laying out the evidence. And how you can protect yourself—an EMF based protection strategy. Warning: this is a heavy science based article with nearly 100 references to studies—neither Paul or myself want to be accused of fear-mongering:
My heart goes out to China and to all its people who have suffered so much due to this new “novel” Wuhan coronavirus outbreak (COVID-19).
However, as someone who had become very sick and had his immune system break down and was sick for six months looking for answers before even suspecting that living in close vicinity to several cell phone towers was actually what was causing the problem and making him sick, I feel I cannot in good conscience remain silent, and I strongly suspect that China and the rest of the world are looking under the wrong stone for what is actually the problem here.
At the moment, with 10,000 recently installed 5G antennas plastering its city, Wuhan is probably one of the most 5G-electropolluted cities on the planet.
Electrosmog Warnings from Scientists for Over 40 Years
Respected scientists, researchers, doctors, and activists have been — for over forty years — warning us about the dangers of wireless radiation and electromagnetic fields. In 1977, the reporter Paul Brodeur published a book called The Zapping of America; in 1985, the late Dr. Robert O. Becker (twice nominated for the Nobel Prize in Medicine for his work on cellular dedifferentiation and re-differentiation in the healing process) wrote The Body Electric, and later published Cross Currents: The Perils of Electropollution, The Promise of Electromedicine in 1990; in 1995 (and again later in 2007), B. Blake Levitt, author and researcher, published Electromagnetic Fields: A Consumer’s Guide to the Issues and How to Protect Ourselves. Since then there have been a slew of other books and documentary movies put out on the subject. And the list goes on and on.
Dr. Leif Stafford, Swedish neuro-oncologist, has called this wireless rollout
“the largest biological experiment ever.” 1
And Dr. Robert O. Becker wrote in 1985 that
The dangers of electropollution are real and well documented. It changes, often pathologically, every biological system [emphasis added]. What we don`t know is exactly how serious these changes are, for how many people. The longer we as a society, put off a search for that knowledge, the greater the damage is likely to be and the harder it will be to correct. (p. 304) 2
And finally, Dr. Martin Pall, PhD, and Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University has stated recently that
Putting in tens of millions of 5G antennae without a single biological test of safety has got to be about the stupidest idea anyone has had in the history of the world. 3
The BioInitiative
In 2007, a report titled the BioInitiative was published, it was republished again in 2012, and there have been ongoing updates between 2014 and 2019. Its website states that
the BioInitiative 2012 Report has been prepared by 29 authors from ten countries, ten holding medical degrees (MDs), 21 PhDs, and three MsC, MA or MPHs. Among the authors are three former presidents of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, and five full members of BEMS. 4
These are highly respected scientists coming from some of the world’s most respected universities and institutes. 5
The BioInitiative further warns
… that evidence for risks to health has substantially increased since 2007 from electromagnetic fields and wireless technologies (radiofrequency radiation). The Report reviews over 1800 new scientific studies…. Health topics include damage to DNA and genes, effects on memory, learning, behavior, attention, sleep disruption, cancer and neurological diseases like Alzheimer’s disease. New safety standards are urgently needed for protection against EMF and wireless exposures that now appear everywhere in daily life. 6 See more scientific research here.
5G Warnings
With the coming advent of the newest in wireless technology, 5G, numerous researchers, doctors, and professional and activist organizations have been administering health warnings regarding its coming implementation. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
See here the dangers of 5G radiation.
And even recently, there were marches in major cities throughout the world protesting the advent of this technology. 14
Unfortunately, for the majority of the population, these warnings have fallen on deaf ears, with the seemingly widely held view out there believing that 5G is the next best thing since Ben & Jerry’s™ Cherry Garcia™ ice cream.
Of course, the downplaying of the hazards is understandable given the extreme benefits and conveniences all this technology has continuously offered an unsuspecting populace. Unfortunately, these people are also often quick to ridicule and marginalize those who try to warn of these dangers by labeling them as Luddite tinfoil-hat-wearing conspiracy theorists, until, of course, either they or someone close to them suddenly gets sick and they then see a possible connection with these EMF exposures, and then suddenly there is a change of tune, and they are quick to inquire about what they can do to protect themselves: e.g. how to shield their homes and offices, what EMF meters to buy.
In Ripon, California, south of Sacramento, a 5G antenna was removed from a primary school, after some parents there started to suspect that it was linked to a number of cancer cases in the school. 15
The Coronavirus Outbreak
The recent COVID-19 outbreak has stimulated mass fear and mass hysteria across the planet, in spite of the fact that there have only been 93 deaths (at the time of this writing on February 29th, 2020) outside China, with 2835 of the deaths 17 and 99 percent of infections occurring within China. 18
In fact, the highest death rates outside of China have been in places already implementing 5G technology, South Korea and Italy, for example. The exception is Iran, which at present has 978 cases, and 54 deaths, is officially not implementing it, but very well may secretly be trialing it given the reason why
on December 1, 2018, at the request of the US government, Meng Wanzhou — Huawei’s CFO and daughter of its founder — was arrested in Canada on allegations she participated in a conspiracy to defraud banks in connection with Iran sanctions violations, 19
was indeed because Huawei was working to sell their 5G technology to the Iranians. In fact, Iran — in a joint operation between Irancell and Ericsson — had started trialing the technology back in September of 2017. 20 In the article, titled “Irancell, Ericsson Test 5G Systems,” (2017) it is stated that
the technology will be available by 2020 and become globally accessible a year later.
During the event at Irancell headquarters, the company’s CEO Alireza Dezfouli said “We are aiming to keep pace with the international operators. Iran will not be left behind again.”
Furthermore, a number of articles in the media, have stated that Iran has carried out “preparations” and is ready to launch 5G. 21 22 23 Well, preparations usually include trialing. Hence, it is easy to believe that Iran already has the 5G infrastructure set up and they have been secretly trialing it.
Belgium, on the other hand, — which had decided not to even trial 5G, let alone implement it, due to radiation concerns 24 — has had only one case so far of the coronavirus (recovered) and no deaths.
In fact, for the majority, the symptoms of patients outside of China, (especially with those away from the 5G), for the most part, have seemingly been relatively mild, as one would most likely see with a regular cold or flu virus, and with many of those infected not showing any symptoms at all.
Mild Symptoms Outside China
It is stated by Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, (Head of the WHO’s Health Emergencies Program), in the continuously updated Al Jazeera article, “What happens if you catch the new corona virus?” that “some patients do not show any symptoms,” and that
“You have mild cases, which look like the common cold, which have some respiratory symptoms, sore throat, runny nose, fever, all the way through pneumonia. And there can be varying levels of severity of pneumonia all the way through multi-organ failure and death,” she told reporters in Geneva last week.
However, in most cases, symptoms have remained mild.
“We’ve seen some data on about 17,000 cases and overall 82 percent of those are mild, 15 percent of those are severe and 3 percent of those are classified as critical,” said Van Kerkhove. 18
Moreover, in numerous YouTube videos 25 26 27 28 29 we are seeing interviews with patients that have been seemingly showing only mild symptoms.
One example is that of Rebecca Frazier, interviewed numerous times on numerous news programs, after being admitted to a Tokyo Hospital after being found to be infected with the COVID-19 on the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship. In one of the interviews, conducted by the New Zealand news program on the Radio New Zealand (RNZ) network titled “I never really felt unwell,” for example, the interviewer states the following and then goes onto interview Ms. Frazier:
“Incapacitated, needing help to breath, and surrounded by doctors in hazmat suits, is perhaps the go-to image of those infected with coronavirus. Not so for Rebecca Frazier, who has Covid-19 as it is now known. Curiously, she looks just fine. She’s in isolation in a Tokyo hospital after testing positive for the virus, while onboard the Diamond Princess Cruise Ship that is now docked in Yokohama, in lockdown for 14 days…. Rebecca says she’s shocked that she has tested positive for the deadly virus given how fit and well she feels.”
“I just can’t believe it. Just can’t believe this is happening to you. Umm. I… You know, I am not one to freak out….”
“Did you feel unwell? Do you feel unwell?”
“No. I never really felt unwell. I had a little bit of a cough when they told me, and when I got here, I had a little bit of a fever, but all of that has normalized and I have no symptoms….“25
In another YouTube video,29 this one from a Chinese TV network, is a report by a nurse in Wuhan, who contracted the virus, and decided to stay home to recover (which might very well have been what saved her life).
In the video, we see her going about her daily life as if only seemingly bothered by what would only be a normal cold virus.
In a BBC 30 report about Steve Walsh, labeled a “Super Spreader,” a man who was apparently infected by COVID-19 in Singapore and apparently spread it to numerous others at a ski resort in France, we hear one of his neighbors state that
“His wife told me on the phone that really he is not that ill and she thinks it is a complete basically a load of rubbish umm and it’s no worse than flu. Probably not as bad.” (2:20)
So… why is it that, while these people are seemingly only manifesting mild symptoms, many people in China, and especially in the city of Wuhan (and some other provinces), are having such a difficult time with many unfortunately succumbing to the virus, and (for want of a better expression) “dropping like flies”?
At least 10,000 5G Antennas Installed in Wuhan Alone
What has not been apparent in the news reports is the fact that China in its rush to take the lead in the 5G race, had by the end of 2019 (and mostly within the last several months leading up to the COVID-19 outbreak) installed 130,000 5G antennas throughout the country, 31 with at least 10,000 antennas installed in Wuhan alone. 32 (As a comparison, the USA only has approximately 10,000 5G antennas presently installed throughout the whole country.)
Man holding phone up for 5G connection
“Wuhan City, the capital of Hubei, is expected to have 10,000 5G base stations by the end of 2019…” 32
“According to previous reports, the three operators were expecting to operate nearly 130,000 5G base stations by the end of 2019.”
Wuhan: One of the Initial Cities Trialing 5G
In fact, Wuhan was one of the initial 16 cities selected to trial 5G back in 2018.
China Unicom will begin testing 5G network in 16 cities including Beijing, Tianjin, Qingdao, Hangzhou, Nanjing, Wuhan, Guiyang, Chengdu, Shenzhen, Fuzhou, Zhengzhou, and Shenyang.
China Mobile will conduct external field test and set up more than a hundred 5G base stations in each of the following five cities: Hangzhou, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Suzhou, and Wuhan. 34
From the article, “Wuhan 5G Industry Development: Five-Chain Coordination, Three-Wheel Drive,” (武汉5G产业发展：五链统筹 三轮驱动), 35 (written in Chinese) published October 11th, 2019, it becomes clear that Wuhan was in a race with other Chinese cities to position itself at the forefront of 5G technology, and with approximately 10,000 5G antennas, is probably one of — if not the most — 5G-radiated city in China:
At present, Wuhan is seizing major developmental opportunities in 5G commercialization, with the construction of a national first-class 5G network as a guide, with the development of a national first-class 5G industry as the main body….
…Wuhan City has fully implemented the “Wuhan 5G Base Station Planning and Construction Implementation Plan,” with an extraordinary policy effort, to guide and support basic telecommunications companies and China Tower Corporation to accelerate the construction of 5G networks. This year and next, Wuhan will build more than 20,000 5G base stations, form a 5G basic network with leading scale, first-class quality, and strong demonstration to ensure full coverage of the 5G network in the city and be at the leading level among similar cities in the country. 35
Finally, it was stated in an article titled “5G network coming to Wuhan,” (April 16, 2018), that “3,000 macro base stations and 27,000 micro base stations” would soon be constructed, and that by 2020, the “5G network will cover every corner of the city and be available at an affordable price.” 36 This means that there may in fact be a lot more than just 10,000 antennas in Wuhan, though 10,000 alone would make Wuhan one of the most 5G concentrated cities in the world.
5G Systems Deployed in Hospitals
What is also concerning here is that China has, since about November of 2019, been installing 5G systems in its hospitals. 37 38 39 40
“Key Chinese hospitals, leading telecom carriers and Huawei Wednesday launched a project to establish standards for 5G-based networks in hospitals.” 37
“China released a pioneering standard for its 5G hospital networks, following a joint drafting and verification process between the medical and telecommunication industries.” 38
5G Systems Installed at Wuhan Coronavirus Hospitals
And to seemingly add insult to injury here, Huawei was very quick to install 5G systems in the new coronavirus hospitals — Wuhan Volcan Mountain Hospital and Thunder Mountain Hospital — the two hospitals known for only being built in just over a week. 41 425G scientific research
The two articles cited here are ironically titled, (1) “Huawei installs 5G in China Hospital to fight Coronavirus,” and (2) “Huawei builds 5G in Wuhan Hospital, aims to indirectly fight the Coronavirus” as this might very well be the complete opposite of what they are indeed intending to do here. There is also an interesting video on YouTube entitled “Chinese hospitals deploy robots to help medical staff fight coronavirus outbreak,” 43 demonstrating this in action.
Chinese Telecoms Started Offering 5G Commercially in Nov, 2019
The Chinese telecom companies started to offer commercial 5G services to its customers on the first of November last year.
China’s three major wireless carriers— China Mobile, China Unicom , and China Telecom —will begin selling 5G services to consumers on Friday, November 1st in 50 major cities, including Beijing and Shanghai, said Chen Zhaoxiong, vice minister of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology on Thursday October 31st at a Beijing conference….
The Chinese government has made building 5G a national priority, clearing red tape and reducing costs so the three wireless providers introduce the new technology as swiftly as possible. “They’ve made this a national priority. It’s part of the [Communist] Party‘s ability to show that it’s delivering the goods,” said Paul Triolo, head of geo-technology at the Eurasia Group consultancy. “And in the middle of the trade dispute and the actions against Huawei, it’s even more important for China to show that they are continuing to move forward despite all these challenges,” he added….
China’s central government wants 5G coverage extended to cover all of Beijing, Shanghai, Hangzhou and Guangzhou by the end of the year. The country’s largest carrier, China Mobile, which has 900 million cellphone subscribers, says it will be able to offer 5G services in more than 50 cities this year….
Approximately 13,000 5G base stations have been installed in Beijing, the communications administration said this week. About 10,000 are already operating. China already has a total of more than 80,000 5G macro base stations, typically cellular towers with antennas and other hardware that beam wireless signals over wide areas, government officials said. See this article on 5G towers.
They said China will end the year with about 130,000, while Bernstein Research estimates South Korea will be in second place with 75,000, followed by the U.S. with 10,000. Piper Jaffray estimated that of the 600,000 5G base stations expected to be rolled out worldwide next year, half will be in China. 31
This basically means that China had suddenly turned on the 5G switch, just less than two months before the COVID-19 outbreak, suddenly blanketing many cities with this 5G wireless radiation. And as of this writing, South Korea’s numbers of COVID-19 cases are also starting to skyrocket. As we can see from the above article, South Korea has the second highest number of 5G antennas with 75,000. That is a lot for a country its size. Is there a connection? I think there is with at present (Feb. 29, 2020) also the highest number of coronavirus cases (3150) and one of the highest number of death rates (17) outside of China.
Forty Cities Drinking 5G Service
In the online article, “These 40 Cities Will Drink 5G Service,” 44 published June 7th, 2019, it was revealed that it had been decided that 5G would be launched in 40 cities across China in 2019 by China Mobile and China Unicom (with no specific information from China Telecom yet at that time).
Cities on this list included in Zhejiang Province were Hangzhou, Ningbo, and Wenzhou, not to mention places like Beijing, Shanghai, Wuhan, Guangzhou, Suzhou, and Shenzhen. The initial plan it seems, called the “7+33+n” 5G network deployment strategy, was to have full coverage in Beijing, Shanghai, Hangzhou, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Nanjing, and Xiong’an, with hotspot coverage in the other 33 cities, and then customized 5G networks in so-called “n” cities, though this might have very well changed as other cities seemingly also wanted full coverage (note Wuhan’s installation of 10,000 5G antennas).
Top Most Coronavirus-Hit Provinces After Wuhan:
Zhejiang and Guangdong
Interestingly, at one point in this saga, the second most hit (with the COVID-19) provinces were Zhejiang and Guangdong Provinces, (though as of this writing, Zhejiang has now been taken over by Henan). 45 The provinces listed below, in Chinese, and in order of most cases, are (1) Hubei （湖北）, (2) Guangdong （广东）, (3) Henan （河南）, (4) Zhejiang （浙江）, and (5) Hunan （湖南）.
It has been so bad in Zhejiang Province that Japan, on Feb. 12th, even extended its entry restrictions to virus-hit Zhejiang (at the time was third in number of COVID-19 cases).
It includes the cities of Hangzhou and Wenzhou, which have among the country’s highest concentrations of coronavirus cases. Hangzhou hosts the headquarters of Alibaba Group Holding, while Wenzhou is famed as a cradle of small business. 46
On the map (Wikipedia) below 47, Zhejiang Province is the darker red province off to the right and Guangdong Province is the darker red one at the bottom. The darkest red province in the middle is Hubei with Wuhan in its center. Henan Province is above Hubei Province and Hunan Province is below it.
Attribution: Wikimedians / CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0)
These cities (Hangzhou, Wenzhou, and Ningbo) have also been cities selected to trial the 5G in Zhejiang province.
Ookla 5G Maps 48 tracks 5G deployment around the world, the number of telecoms offering 5G service in various cities in China.
In the city of Hangzhou, all three Chinese telecoms are providing 5G service in the city; whereas in Ningbo, only two are, and in Wenzhou, only one (China Mobile) is.
The three cities in Zhejiang Province with the most cases have been Hangzhou (168 cases), Ningbo (156 cases), and Wenzhou (503 cases), 50 which are also curiously the cities selected to trial the 5G. The city proper of Wenzhou itself (though when one includes the outer-lying prefectures the total comes 9 million), for example, with only 200,000 people, has an inordinately high number of people infected with COVID-19, and the city has been on lockdown.
But as you can see from some of the articles selected below that there has been a major push in this city to implement and blanket cover their cities with 5G technology.
In the online article, “China Tower Built 8400 5G Stations in Zhejiang” 51 (Oct. 21st, 2019), it is revealed that 8400 5G base stations have recently been installed in Zhejiang Province, with 4775 (out of an order of 6154) installed in Hangzhou alone, and 3200 of these installed within 100 days (in just a little over three months).
China Tower Built 8400 5G Stations in Zhejiang
According to a person in charge of China Tower (Zhejiang), since this year, it has undertaken more than ten thousand 5G construction demands. At present, 8397 stations have been completed, more than 96% of which were built on the stock station sites. In Hangzhou, since this year, 6154 5G demands have been accepted and 4775 have been completed and delivered, of which 93% are directly met and transformed through stock station sites.
In the downtown of Hangzhou, after receiving the 5G construction demand of three telecom enterprises, China Tower (Zhejiang), with the support of the government, completed 3200 5G base stations in the West Lake scenic area, Olympic Sports Center and other scenes within 100 days, and cooperated with telecom enterprises to complete quick installation and debugging of equipment, based on existing telecom rooms, cabinets, power supporting facilities and 5G antenna added on stock station sites, street lamp poles, buildings, etc. 51
In another online article, published in Chinese, “China Tower installs 8,400 5G antennas in Zhejiang, 96% based on existing sites,” [中国铁塔在浙江建成8400个5G站址，96%基于既有站址], 52 we can see China Tower blanketing Hangzhou with 5G antennas in a very short period of time.
In this article, it is stated that “Zhejiang is one of the earliest provinces in the country to start building 5G networks,” and that “China Tower Zhejiang Company … started the acceleration of 5G construction in the first year of 5G commercialization….” And further that, “more than 10,000 5G construction requirements have been undertaken since this year,” with “8397 sites … completed.”
It becomes clear that the Zhejiang Province, home to the tech giant, Alibaba, is one of the provinces slated to become one of the first to introduce the 5G. In the following article, “Delta region to build world-class information communication hub,” 53 (Updated: 2019-11-01) it is stated that with the commercialization of 5G services on Oct. 31st,
[f]ifty cities were selected to become among the first to access commercial 5G services, including 10 cities in the Yangtze River Delta (YRD) region, half of which are from Zhejiang province – Hangzhou, Ningbo, Wenzhou, Jiaxing, and Shaoxing.
It is further stated that the three telecom companies plus China Tower would be investing in the region a total of 200 billion yuan (USD $28.4 billion) for the 5G infrastructure construction in order to “build it into a world-class information communication hub.”
According to a development plan for the region released in 2016, China Telecom, China Unicom, China Mobile and China Tower are planning to invest more than 200 billion yuan ($28.4 billion) in 5G infrastructure construction in the region by 2021 to help “build it into a world-class information communication hub” promoting the “region’s pilot use of 5G network and applications,” and making “it clear that the YRD region will be the first in China to conduct trial commercial use of 5G services,” while aiming to “realize the coverage of the 5G network throughout the province by 2025.” 53
Coastal City of Wenzhou Worst Hit in Zhejiang Province
In the province of Zhejiang, the cities of Hangzhou, Ningbo, and Wenzhou, have the highest numbers of COVID-19 cases. These are also the main places where 5G has been installed so far in the province.
covid-19
Wenzhou, for a relatively small Chinese city, has the inordinately highest number — at present 503 — of cases in Zhejiang Province, and has been on lockdown 54 since Feb. 2nd when the number of cases there reached 304.
Wenzhou: Internet and 5G Hub
In the past year, there have been numerous conferences in this small city promoting 5G directly or indirectly. 55 56 57
For example, the Conference on the Internet of Things (IoT) for Industry and Energy opened there in September of last year and the Sixth World Internet Conference opened there in October of last year. The Conference on the Internet of Things (IoT) for Industry and Energy exhibited the latest state-of-the-art IoT technologies and 5G applications for big data technologies and IoT platforms. The Sixth World Internet (three-day) Conference brought together over 1,500 attendees from over 70 countries and regions, including Nobel Prize winners, and executives from major tech companies like Qualcomm, Alibaba, and Huawei.
In an article titled, “Experience the construction of 5G base stations under high temperature,” published in Chinese (体验高温下5G基站建设) 58 on Aug. 26, 2019, it is stated that “Wenzhou is one of the first 5G pilot cities of the three major operators, and 5G network coverage is in full swing.”
In another article, “Wenzhou shows big ambition in IoT industry,” 59 (Sept. 10th, 2019), it is further stated:
“Wenzhou is building itself into a pilot city for China’s smart city construction and 5G applications,” Chen said, “Now, there are 13 cloud computing centers, over 500 5G base stations and more than 10,000 narrow-band IoT bases in the city.“
Finally, looking at yet another article published approximately six months later titled “The first case in Zhejiang! S1 line is the first to achieve full coverage of mobile 5G signals,” (Jan. 19th, 2020), (also published in Chinese, 浙江首例！S1线率先实现移动5G信号全覆盖) 60 which revels at the 5G signal penetration along the “Longwan Airport-Wenzhou South High Speed Rail S1 line,” it becomes obvious that Wenzhou has also taken part in the 5G race to plaster its city with 5G electromagnetic waves.
Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) and the Immune System
Wireless radiation from 1G to 5G have all emitted modulated “Radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMFs)” and there are literally thousands of studies showing biological effects from exposures to man-made electromagnetic waves, and out of these, hundreds showing biological effects on the immune system.
To give just one example, research by Kolomytseva, et al. (2002) described in the paper, “Suppression of nonspecific resistance of the body under the effect of extremely high frequency electromagnetic radiation of low intensity,” 61 found that with
whole-body exposure of healthy mice to low-intensity extremely-high-frequency electromagnetic radiation (EHF EMR, 42.0 GHz, 0.15 mW/cm2, 20 min daily)… phagocytic activity of peripheral blood neutrophils was suppressed by about 50% (p < 0.01 as compared with the sham-exposed control) in 2-3 h after the single exposure to EHF EMR…
and that this
… effect persisted for 1 day after the exposure, and then the phagocytic activity of neutrophils returned to the norm within 3 days.
And furthermore,
a significant modification of the leukocyte blood profile in mice exposed to EHF EMR for 5 days was observed after the cessation of exposures: the number of leukocytes increased by 44% (p < 0.05 as compared with sham-exposed animals), mostly due to an increase in the lymphocyte content.
They concluded that,
the results indicated that the whole-body exposure of healthy mice to low-intensity EHF EMR has a profound effect on the indices of nonspecific immunity.
In a paper 62 (written by myself along with Prof. Olle Johansson of the Karolinska Institute) — which I believe offers the most solid hypothesis to date on the main mechanisms by which EMFs do in fact disable the immune system —a number of these related to immune system effects can be found listed in the citations.
Johansson (2012) further details, in Section 8 of the BioInitiative, “Evidence for EMF Effects on the Immune System,” 63 numerous studies demonstrating those effects, especially with regards to how radiofrequency EMFs alter the immune system.
In the previously mentioned Aljazeera article,18 it is stated that a study published in the medical journal, The Lancet, on January 24th, found
what it called a “cytokine storm” in infected patients who were severely ill. The condition is a severe immune reaction in which the body produces immune cells and proteins that can destroy other organs.
Hence, it should be noted here that there are, in fact, numerous research studies showing an EMF effect on cytokines: A PubMed search, for example, produced 119 search results. 64
Back in 1998, a biologist named Roger Coghill conducted an experiment where he “took white blood cells, known as lymphocytes, from a donor,” and kept them alive via the use of nutrients while exposing them to either cell phone radiation or the natural electromagnetic field of the human body. He discovered that of the immune cells exposed to cell phone radiation, only 13% remained undamaged and able to function properly; whereas, of cells exposed only to body’s natural electromagnetic field, 70% remained undamaged and able to function properly. Naturally, while his research did provide insight, he was attacked and criticized by the wireless industry for being “unscientific.”
Dr. Robert O. Becker (1985) wrote of how the immune system is weakened by manmade electromagnetic fields via the induction of “subliminal stress”:
Initially, the stress activates the hormonal and/or immune systems to a higher than normal level, enabling the animal to escape danger and combat disease. If the stress continues, hormone levels and immune reactivity gradually decline to normal. If you stop your experiment at this point, you’re apparently justified in saying, “The animal has adapted; the stress is doing no harm.” Nevertheless, if the stressful conditions persist, hormone and immune levels decline further, well below normal. In medical terms, stress decompensation has set in, and now the animal is now more susceptible to other stressors, including malignant growth and infectious diseases.
… One aspect of the syndrome was very puzzling. When undergoing these hormonal changes, an animal would normally be aware that its body was under attack, yet, as far as we could tell, the rabbits were not. They showed no outward signs of fear, agitation, or illness. Most humans certainly wouldn’t be able to detect a 100-gauss magnetic field, at least not consciously. Only several years after Friedman’s work did anyone find out how this is happening.
In 1976 a group under J. J. Noval at the Naval Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory at Pensacola, Florida, found the slow response in rats from very weak electric fields, as low as five thousandths of a volt per centimeter. They discovered that when such fields vibrated in the ELF range, the increased levels of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine in the brainstem, apparently in a way that activated a distress signal subliminally, without the animal’s becoming aware of it. The scariest part was that the fields Noval used were well within the background levels of a typical office, with its overhead lighting, typewriters, computers, and other equipment. Workers in such an environment are exposed to electric fields between a hundredth and a tenth of a volt per centimeter and magnetic fields between a hundredth and a tenth of a gauss. (pp. 277-278) 2
EMF Weaken immune system
Suffice it to say, while there are multiple mechanisms involved by which EMFs do weaken the immune system, there is no question that EMFs can indeed have an adverse effect on the immune system.
5G Is Much More Powerful and Dangerous Than Its Predecessors
The 5G rollout — either the trialing stage or implementation stage — has already started in most major developed countries of the world, with majority of the rest seemingly preparing for its debut.
The European Commission has asked each member state to select one city to be 5G-ready by 2020 as part of the EU’s 5G Action Plan for a Digital Single Market. The European Commission has asked EU member countries to start trialing 5G in at least one city making it 5G ready by 2020 under its “5G Action Plan for a Digital Single Market.”
Belgium refused — even the trialing phase, not to mention the implementation phase — due to the higher radiation levels that the 5G would bring, which was way above what its radiation standards permitted. Switzerland started with both trials and implementation, and there was word that they were putting a halt to further rollout, due to all the complaints about the health effects it was getting, but are unfortunately seemingly still going ahead with the rollout. Other countries seemingly just lowered their standards probably because they could not resist the next best thing to Ben & Jerry’s Chunky Monkey Ice Cream. And the USA and China have seemingly been in a 5G race to blanket their countries in this 5G radiation (and most likely inadvertently the coronavirus), with China now seemingly winning on both those fronts.
5G has been divided into low, mid, and high bandwidths. The low-to-mid-bandwidth frequencies “are contiguous and range from 600 MHz to 6 GHz,” 66 and have been used for 1G-4G for the past forty years. On the other hand, the higher-frequency millimeter wave bandwidths are new frequencies starting at approximately 24 GHz (in the US anyway), and have not been used for commercial cell phone service in in the USA until recently with the advent of these commercial 5G services.
For the most part, at present, most 5G is now in the low to mid bandwidth range, with limited high millimeter wave coverage, though that will probably change as the technology develops and is implemented. Also, 5G technology is being implemented alongside with and piggybacking on already-in-place 4G technology. The 5G technology brings with it both larger macro-base stations and smaller micro-base stations installed between the larger macro-base stations. And because these micro-base stations are often closer to people’s homes in residential areas, according to Building Biology Certified Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist (EMRS), Oram Miller,
we are now measuring higher RF levels in client’s homes, especially in second story bedrooms (read Lloyd’s article on EMFs in bedrooms), up to tens to hundreds of thousands of microWatts/meter squared (uW/m2) from these new antennas,
whereas,
the building biology profession and EMF experts around the world say 10 micro-Watts per meter squared or less is safe for sleeping areas (actually, 0.1 uW/m2 is our “No Anomaly” level for sleeping areas). Here is a list of EMF Experts.
Furthermore, as we have gone up the spectrum from 1G to 5G, with each new generation there has been increased modulation, and increased modulation means increased biological effects and biological harm for all life on this planet. 5G is no exception. Oram Miller goes onto further explain
All of these advanced technologies push more cell signals into the same airspace at faster speeds with far more modulation than current 4G cell technologies.
And…
This modulation of cell signals transmitted in the low and mid bands from new 5G and 4G LTE-Advanced small cell radios and antennas popping up everywhere probably accounts for the majority of people living near these antennas who report the onset of health symptoms not experienced previously.
Dr. Martin Pall, Ph.D. (Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences, Washington State University), — who brought the world’s attention to the fact that EMFs cause biological harm via the opening up voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCC), allowing for excessive flow of calcium ions inside the cell and the prompting of nitric oxide (N.O.) production via the stimulation of the enzyme nitric oxide synthase to form a host of reactive oxygen species via downstream effects 67 — has warned that the rollout of 5G will have massive deleterious effects on the world’s population, not to mention all life forms. He believes that 5G will be much more dangerous for the following reasons:
The extraordinary high numbers of antennae that are planned.
The very high energy outputs which will be used to ensure penetration.
The extraordinary high pulsation levels.
The apparent high-level interactions of the 5G frequency on charged groups presumably including the voltage sensor charged groups. 68
In a recent paper of his titled “Massive Predicted Effects of 5G,” (Dec. 17, 2019) 69 Pall states that “given the high pulsation level for 5G radiation, even short exposures may well produce severe biological effects,” not to mention the power densities of up to 30 times higher than previous systems of 1G to 4G and with penetration being enhanced via the magnetic component. He is predicting that with the full-fledged turning on of 5G (versus just its trial phase, where there is little communication yet happening with the 5G), that we will be seeing (1) decreased human reproduction, (2) lowered collective brain function, (3) very early-onset Alzheimer’s, (4) increased autism and ADHD, (5) deterioration of the human gene pool, and (6) massive increases in cardiac arrests.
While following the rollout of 5G, he has tracked numerous signs of its biological effects. For example, he has outlined increases in neuropsychiatric effects, cardiac effects, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity, taken from Swiss online articles, 70 71 as what we are already starting to see with the advent of this technology:
• Increases in insomnia, tinnitus, headaches, inability to concentrate, and fatigue.
• Increases in electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS).
• Increases in cardiac arrhythmias.
He reports that while these effects had been reported before with occupational exposure studies and smart meter studies, “the effects appear to be much more severe following [the rollout of] 5G” with “even more severe apparent [yet to be published] 5G neuropsychiatric effects [appearing] in Southern California,” with their own recent massive rollout of 5G.
Furthermore, he states that “we have every reason to believe that any full-fledged 5G system, communicating with the ‘internet of things’ will produce still vastly greater effects than any of these initial findings.” This might very well be what we are seeing in the city of Wenzhou City, Zhejiang Province, in China — which has already implemented this technology along with the 5G — with extraordinary high rates of the coronavirus, and who knows what other increases in health effects (e.g. increases in heart problems, blindness, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, etc.) there have been that have not been made public.
He goes onto further outline — in correlation with 5G testing — UK 5G ambulance service suicides, 72 cases of panic in cattle in the Netherlands, 73 and bizarre, aggressive behavior in cattle and sheep in Germany, 74 birth defects in Germany and France, 75 76 and hundreds of birds dropping from the sky due to sudden cardiac arrest during three days of 5G testing in a park near Rotterdam, 77 and the list goes on and on to also include insect death and increases in fires in South Korea. 78 79
(See also the article on is 5G dangerous?)
Could the 5G Be Making the Coronavirus More Virulent?
When we look at the following video, it becomes apparent that smaller life forms like insects are indeed more sensitive to this wireless microwave radiation, with this clear example coming only from radar:
This picture shows some aphids on the leaf of an orange tree. Shortly after radar was installed at a nearby airport a number of years ago, I noticed that every few seconds, all the aphids would tense up in unison and do sort of a little dance, as you see in the picture. Upon further investigation, I found that the interval of time in between the activity of each dance, coincided exactly with the rotation of the radar rotor device at the airport, which was a distance of approximately fourteen miles.
In the following video, Dr. Dietrich Klinghardt talks about an experiment where mold exposed to EMFs proliferated:
Now I am going to make the link to the electromagnetic fields. An acquaintant physician in Switzerland who is a main mold researcher in Europe made a beautiful experiment. He grew mold cultures under a Faraday cage simply like a silver coat, it looks like a mosquito net, that is made out of silver-coated cloth. [It had] been draped over the mold culture. And he measured how much mycotoxins, how much toxins, are these molds producing on a daily basis. Very easy to do. Then he lifted the mosquito net and exposed the mold culture to the ambient electromagnetic radiation in his laboratory, which was caused by the lights that were on, by the computer in the corner, and especially, and he found out later, the ambient cell phone radiation, from the nearby cell phone tower that was broadcasting cell phone radiation. He found out that the production of biotoxins in this culture went up more than 600 times. Not only that the mold suddenly put out significantly more mycotoxins to protect themselves, but also much more virulent, much more vicious, more poisonous mycotoxins. And I took that experiment as was for me a big lightbulb went on….
So what if the same kind of thing is happening with the 5G radiation and the coronavirus? Pall (2020) lists in a newer version of his paper 80 (previously mentioned) a number of studies which in fact strongly support this theory.
The question that is being raised here is not whether 5G is responsible for the virus, but rather whether 5G radiation, acting via VGCC activation may be exacerbating the viral replication or the spread or lethality of the disease.
Let’s backtrack and look at the recent history of 5G in Wuhan in order to get some perspective on those questions. An Asia Times article, dated Feb.12, 2019 stated that there were 31 different 5G base stations (that is antennae) in Wuhan at the end of 2018.
There were plans developed later such that approximately 10,000 5G antennae would be in place at the end of 2019, with most of those being on 5G LED smart street lamps.
The first such smart street lamp was put in place on May 14, 2019, but large numbers only started being put in place in October, 2019, such that there was a furious pace of such placement in the last 2 ½ months of 2019.
These findings show that the rapid pace of the coronavirus epidemic developed at least roughly as the number of 5G antennae became extraordinarily high. So we have this finding that China’s 1st 5G smart city and smart highway is the epicenter of this epidemic and this finding that the epidemic only became rapidly more severe as the numbers of 5G antennae skyrocketed.
Are these findings coincidental or does 5G have some causal role in exacerbating the coronavirus epidemic? In order to answer that question, we need to determine whether the downstream effects of VGCC activation exacerbate the viral replication, the effects of viral infection, especially those that have roles in the spread of the virus and also the mechanism by which this coronavirus causes death. Accordingly, the replication of the viral RNA is stimulated by oxidative stress: J Mol Biol. 2008 Nov 28;383(5):1081-96. Variable oligomerization modes in coronavirus non-structural protein 9. Ponnusamy R, Moll R, Weimar T, Mesters JR, Hilgenfeld R.
Other aspects of viral replication including those involved in the spread of the virus are stimulated by increased intracellular calcium [Ca2+]i, oxidative stress, NF-kappaB elevation, inflammation and apoptosis, each of which are increased following EMF exposure. The first citation below shows an important role of VGCC activation in stimulating coronavirus infection.
Virology. 2020 Jan 2;539:38-48. Porcine deltacoronavirus (PDCoV) modulates calcium influx to favor viral replication. Bai D, et al.
J Virol. 2011 May;85(9):4234-45. Distinct severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-induced acute lung injury pathways in two different nonhuman primate species. Smits SL, et al.
Cell Calcium. 2018 Nov;75:30-41. NAADP-dependent Ca2+ signaling regulates Middle East respiratory syndrome-coronavirus pseudovirus translocation through the endolysosomal system. Gunaratne GS, et al.
J Virol. 2011 May;85(9):4234-45. Distinct severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-induced acute lung injury pathways in two different nonhuman primate species. Smits SL, et al.
Proteome Sci. 2011 Mar 8;9:11. Proteomic analysis of chicken embryonic trachea and kidney tissues after infection in ovo by avian infectious bronchitis coronavirus. Cao Z, et al.
Res Vet Sci. 2015 Jun;100:12-7. Serum biomarkers of oxidative stress in cats with feline infectious peritonitis. Tecles F, et al.
J Infect Dis. 2008 Mar 15;197(6):812-6. Glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase deficiency enhances human coronavirus infection. Wu YH et al.
J Virol. 1998 Jun;72(6):4918-24. Transmissible gastroenteritis coronavirus induces programmed cell death in infected cells through a caspase-dependent pathway. Eleouet JF, et al.
The predominant cause of death from this coronavirus is pneumonia. Pneumonia is greatly exacerbated by each of those five downstream effects of VGCC activation, excessive intracellular calcium, oxidative stress, NF-kappaB elevation, inflammation and apoptosis. The first of the citations listed below shows that calcium channel blockers, the same type of drugs that block EMF effects, are useful in the treatment of pneumonia. This predicts that EMFs, acting via VGCC activation, will produce increasingly severe pneumonia and therefore 5G radiation as well as other types of EMFs may well increase pneumonia deaths.
Zheng et al. 2016 Preadmission Use of Calcium Channel Blockers and Outcomes After Hospitalization With Pneumonia: A Retrospective Propensity-Matched Cohort Study. Am J Ther. 2017 Jan/Feb;24(1):e30- e38.
Fang et al. 2017 Pneumolysin-Dependent Calpain Activation and Interleukin-1α Secretion in Macrophages Infected with Streptococcus pneumoniae. Infect Immun. 2017 Aug 18;85(9). pii: e00201-17.
Fettel et al. 2019 Sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) induces potent anti-inflammatory effects in vitro and in vivo by S1P receptor 4-mediated suppression of 5-lipoxygenase activity. FASEB J. 2019 Feb;33(2):1711- 1726.
Liu and Shi. 2019 Calcium-activated chloride channel regulator 1 (CLCA1): More than a regulator of chloride transport and mucus production. World Allergy Organ J. 2019 Nov 29;12(11):100077.
Sci Rep. 2018 Oct 18;8(1):15393. Surfactant protein D attenuates acute lung and kidney injuries in pneumonia-induced sepsis through modulating apoptosis, inflammation and NF-κB signaling. Du J, et al.
Curr Neurovasc Res. 2020 Jan 28. MicroRNA (miR)-429 promotes inflammatory injury by targeting kruppel-like factor 4 (KLF4) in neonatal pneumonia. Zhang L, et al.
Life Sci. 2019 Jul 1;228:189-197. Long noncoding RNA SNHG16 targets miR-146a-5p/CCL5 to regulate LPS-induced WI-38 cell apoptosis and inflammation in acute pneumonia. Zhou Z, et al.
These all argue that 5G radiation is likely to greatly exacerbate the spread of the coronavirus and to greatly increase the lethality of the infections produced by it. The good news is that it is likely that those of us that live in areas with no 5G radiation and who avoid other EMFs wherever possible will probably escape much of the impacts of this prospective global pandemic.
It is highly probable that one of the best things Wuhan can do to control the epidemic in the city is to turn off the 4G/5G system.
Captured Agencies and the Hijacking of the Science
And you might ask yourself, “Why haven’t I heard about this problem?” or you might tell yourself that “Certainly the authorities have our best interests at heart when they make these kinds of decisions.”
Well, in a recent book review 81 of the book Triumph of Doubt (by David Michaels, 2020), Kathleen Rest, Executive Director, Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), (February 14, 2020) outlines how deception is used to manufacture doubt and uncertainty in many industries’ public relations playbooks:
• Attack the science. There are lots of tools in this toolbox: commission new “scientific” studies to reanalyze existing data with methodologies biased toward predetermined results; review the literature and risk assessments to question the weight of the evidence; publish these reviews and re-analyses in selected scientific journals; shop for and hire so-called “independent” experts to question the science; provide tasty and contrarian soundbites for the media and public consumption; and more.
• Create and deploy front groups with innocuous-sounding names to undermine science, influence public opinion, and gain access to policy makers while maintaining the illusion of independence.
• Harass and intimidate independent scientists whose research demonstrates or suggests harm. Or alternatively, curry favor with academic institutions and scientists by providing some form of financial support while also varnishing their public interest image.
• Overwhelm regulatory agencies with comments on proposed regulations.
• Use their outsized money, power, and access to influence actions/inactions of elected policymakers and agency officials. (Oh, and there’s also that well-oiled revolving door. Just take a look at how many agency leaders and decision-makers in the Trump administration come straight from the very industries they are now supposed to regulate.)
Another tactic that I have noticed is that these people seem to use is to get their plants on a discussion list to make some completely off-the-wall statements so that they can get the media to cover this to try to make everyone involved look like complete whack jobs, which an unsuspecting public is quick to consume and believe. This is seemingly happening right now with this issue. Learn more about the EMF cover-up.
Certainly, how Western governments and corporations manipulate public opinion is different than how it might be done in China, since in the latter case, there is strict government control (e.g. Internet firewall) over what is permitted and not permitted to be accessed via the Internet, etc. Hence, they may not really have to use the above playbook and this may very well be the reason they have been able to move so quickly to implement this technology. But at what cost?
“Everything must be taken into account. If the fact will not fit the theory — let the theory go…. Real evidence is usually vague and unsatisfactory. It has to be examined — sifted.” — Agatha Christie
As Agatha Christie says, “Everything must be taken into account.” Ignoring — especially willfully ignoring — any very possible causal factors — especially EMF — in my humble opinion, is just not good science, if you can call that science at all.
According to Dr. Martin Pall, Ph.D.,
The failure of the “safety guidelines” to predict biological effects and therefore safety means that these are not safety guidelines. Consequently, any claims of safety made by the multi-trillion euro-telecommunications industry based on these “safety guidelines” are simply fraudulent.
These failures of the “safety guidelines” must be considered in terms of the principle that is at the core of the scientific method. That principle is that when we have a scientific theory and we test predictions of that theory and the theory predictions are shown to be false, then we must throw the theory out. It follows that when we have eight highly repeated findings each of which show that the “safety guidelines” do not predict biological effects and do not, therefore, predict safety, it is a scientific requirement that the “safety guidelines” be thrown out. The failure of ICNIRP, the European Commission and various regulatory agencies to throw out the “safety guidelines” clearly shows that their actions are both unscientific and anti-scientific. 65
“You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant.” — Harlan Ellison
Woman thinking
And anyone who would like some insight into how — what is perceived as the sacred cow of international health organizations — the W.H.O. has been unduly influenced by industry, they need look no further than Swedish oncologist and professor, Dr. Lennart Hardell’s paper, “World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health – a hard nut to crack (Review).” 82
What Can You Do to Protect Yourselves?
Well given that accordingly the EMF effects act via the activation of VGCCs with a resulting increase in calcium ions inside the cell stimulating nitric oxide synthase to produce more nitric oxide leading downstream to the creation of free radicals (aka reactive oxygen species), it is important to, first of all, limit EMF exposures as much as possible. As Oram Miller recommends,
Reduce use, increase distance, and favor hardwired connections whenever and wherever possible. You can put your cell phone in Airplane mode, making sure WiFi and Bluetooth are off while in Airplane mode, and do most every function on your cell phone on a different, hardwired device when inside your house. That includes talking, texting, emailing, audio and video streaming, and using various apps. 66 Learn more about Bluetooth, WiFi and cell phone radiation protection here.
Secondly, hire a Building Biology Certified Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist to help with the measurement and then reduction of EMFs in the home, for example, by shielding your home and sleeping area to block out health-damaging RF, eliminating any wiring errors in the home to reduce magnetic fields, and reducing sources of dirty electricity. Read about EMFs on wiring here.
Thirdly, I would say that implementing what I have dubbed “The Radio-protective Diet and Supplement Program™,” is essential.
There are two main supplements that I have used over the years that have greatly reduced my own sensitivity to electromagnetic fields dramatically and these are (1) magnesium, as it acts as a natural VGCC blocker, in that it blocks calcium from entering the cell, and (2) L-lysine, an essential amino acid, which works to calm down the production of nitric oxide (N.O.), (whereas the amino acid arginine is needed by nitric oxide synthase to stimulate the production of N.O.). Learn more about Electrical sensitivity diagnosis and treatment here.
L-lysine has the added benefit in that it acts in a similar fashion to selective-serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI) in that it binds with the serotonin receptors in the brain to increase serotonin levels. Taking both of these supplements before bed should also help you sleep better.
“The Radio-protective Diet and Supplement Program™,” is essentially (1) immune system boosting, (2) anti-inflammatory, (3) detoxifying, and (4) free-radical quenching. Hence, it consists of foods and supplements that support these processes in the body. Here is an article on EMF Protection and the food you eat.
This would entail taking, for example, denatured organic whey powder to boost glutathione (the body’s super antioxidant) levels, which not only quenches free radicals, but also helps with boosting the immune system and detoxification, and also targeted transfer factors which boost one’s immune system by increasing natural killer cells; anti-inflammatories like ginger and turmeric; detoxifying foods like onions, garlic, and broccoli; and fruits and vegetables high in antioxidants; not to mention foods that replenish hormones and neurotransmitters lost from exposures to EMFs like serotonin, melatonin, dopamine, gamma amino butyric acid (GABA), and phenylethylamine (PEA) which include bananas (tryptophan), pineapple (serotonin), cashew nuts (serotonin), tart cherry juice (melatonin), sprouted rice milk (GABA), and chocolate (PEA).
Another supplement I find essential for boosting the immune system, stimulating detoxification, and healing leaky gut (and probably other leaky barriers) are humic minerals.
There have been a number of posts on social media websites recommending herbs and supplements that are supposed to be effective against the coronavirus. For example, Ty Bolinger lists a number of supplements and herbs one can take in an article he posted on his website, the Truth About Cancer, titled, “Coronavirus: ‘The Good, the Bad, and the Answers.’” 83 And Doris Loh explains why taking Vitamin C will protect and enhance your immune system in two of her articles. 84 85 I know from previous research that both EMFs and viruses deplete Vitamin C reserves, so supplementing with it seems like a very good idea.
Finally, I would say that exposing yourself to beneficial EMFs through Earthing, and also using a PEMF machine. I personally use one that has for me, I feel, (1) stimulated the healing process, (2) reduced inflammation, and (3) boosted my immune system. If you are interested in this last solution, contact me at EMF Refugee.
Conclusion
China is a great country with an amazing populace who have made astounding advancements creating a very sophisticated modern country in the last ten years, surpassing many other modern countries in many ways. However, given the facts that
we have real data that shows indeed that wireless radiation impacts the immune system;
we have numerous patients outside of the 5G zone showing no or only mild symptoms,
there have recently been 10,000 5G antennas installed and turned on in Wuhan, not to mention 130,000 5G antennas installed throughout greater China;
there have recently been 5G systems installed in numerous hospitals in China, not to mention the new COVID-19 hospitals;
we are seeing higher numbers of COVID-19 infections in places like Hangzhou and Wenzhou, not to mention South Korea, etc. where they have also recently installed numerous 5G antennas; and
there has been no testing done to find out the biological implications of exposing life forms to this radiation;
we can conclude that the real problem here may very well in fact be with the 5G electromagnetic radiation weakening people’s immune systems, not to mention possibly making the virus itself more virulent. And if this is true and if China does not change course, 5G might very well become its — and the rest of the world’s Titanic — with the COVID-19 (and others like it) its icebergs.
Maybe this is what people really need to start worrying about and perhaps it is time for the Chinese government, as well as governments throughout the world to seriously investigate and address 5G possible health effects and put a halt to the premature rollout of 5G technology until they can prove that it is safe (which I doubt they can) and until, safer alternatives can be developed.
The government in Belgium never implemented it and there was talk of the government of Switzerland putting a halt on the 5G rollout, 87 but they now seem to be going ahead with it. 88 And it seems like, unless people wake up to this, China will certainly be following a similar path.
I am sorry to have to rain on your electromagnetic parade here, but it might actually very well be your 5G that is contributing to making everybody sick.
“The only people angry at you for speaking the Truth, are those living a lie. Keep on speaking it.”
— Unknown
“All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as self-evident.” — Arthur Schopenhauer
Many thanks to Paul Doyon for this guest post.
Paul Raymond Doyon
Paul Doyon is a researcher, writer, and teacher and educator of 33 years, who inadvertently became involved in researching the EMF issue after becoming sick in 2005, whilst living in the vicinity of several cell phone towers. He has spent 27 years of his adult life living outside his home country of the USA, teaching English as a Foreign Language (EFL) and English as a Second Language (ESL), mostly at the university, college, and in international school levels.
Paul is a Building Biology Practitioner (BBP) and Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist (EMRS) with the International Institute for Building Biology and Ecology(IBE). He is also the founder of the website EMF Refugee.
Too, whenever you file a case, you need to do everything, as if you plan to appeal. Every case goes to appeal, unless it is so shitty a case that it don’t warrant an appeal. Everything you do in your case should prepare for an easy appeal, you have to be diligent, as if you are the one being sued, and you have to do plenty of discovery if you want anything from the opposing party, and the most important thing, is you have to follow the Rules of Civil Procedure, Uniform Superior Court Rules, the Court’s Rules and all Orders.
If any of the above things have not been followed to a “t” then you have made it hard for yourself, and will most likely loose the case. If you have planned to appeal, which should always be done, then it will be easier and less costly to appeal.
NYC Mayor De Blasio tells citizens: We own your bodies, and we can force you to be injected with anything we want
Friday, April 12, 2019 by: Mike Adams
(Natural News) NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio has declared that residents do not own their own bodies. The city of New York can demand that all citizens be injected with literally anything the government declares to be a “vaccine,” even when those vaccines contain aborted human fetal tissue cells, toxic aluminum metals, inflammatory adjuvants and other dangerous, deadly chemicals.
This is the latest attempt by authorities in New York to obliterate human rights and roll out a medical dictatorship where citizens have zero rights to defend their own bodies against risky medial interventions that are demanded at gunpoint.
PJ Media, which has emerged as one of the best independent media websites covering liberty and individual rights, has published an especially noteworthy article on this issue. Authored by Megan Fox, the story is entitled, “Mayor Bill de Blasio’s Mandatory Measles Vaccination Order Faces Legal Challenges.”
We are republishing it here with full credit to the original author and PJ Media website. This in important read. Share everywhere.
Mayor Bill de Blasio’s Mandatory Measles Vaccination Order Faces Legal Challenges
by Megan Fox, PJMedia.com
In an unusual and extreme move, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio declared a state of emergency over a measles outbreak in the Orthodox Jewish community and is demanding forced vaccinations of everyone within four zip codes of the affected areas. Violators face fines up to $1000. This includes babies six months of age, even though the MMR is not recommended for anyone under twelve months of age.
The Children’s Health Defense will be filing a legal challenge to the order, which comes on the heels of a New York Supreme Court ruling that struck down the Rockland County ban on unvaccinated children in public spaces.
Children’s Health Defense (CHD) is supporting a legal challenge to this dangerous, unprecedented overreach. While the City has unquestionable authority to control disease outbreaks, it may not violate the bedrock principle of prior, free and informed consent to all medical interventions, including vaccines. This is a fundamental human right. The City may quarantine, isolate, trace contacts and strongly urge vaccination, but it may not impose such a draconian mandate without demonstrating necessity, reasonableness, proportionality, harm avoidance, non-discrimination, due process and equal protection. The Commissioner has failed to do this; the City’s actions violate New York State law.
CHD board member Mary Holland commented, “I am shocked that Mayor de Blasio would resort to such police state techniques to control an outbreak of measles. I don’t believe the City’s actions will withstand legal scrutiny.” CHD Chairman Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is confident their legal challenge will prevail.
This case goes beyond a dispute over religious freedom. Thanks to the Merck federal whistleblower litigation, we now know that Merck’s MMR should have never been approved, much less mandated. To get its license Merck allegedly ordered its scientists to falsify efficacy data to fraudulently conceal the fact that the mumps component quickly wanes, triggering dangerous outbreaks in older populations where it can cause sterility in men and women. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported 150 outbreaks resulting in 9,200 cases of mumps in fully vaccinated adults, dwarfing the recent measles outbreaks. We are confident that no American court will allow government bureaucrats to force American citizens to take risky pharmaceutical products against their will.
Merck is currently defending itself against claims of falsifying data brought by two former employees.
Medical corporation Merck & Co. will decidedly face the music in the ongoing class action and related anti-trust lawsuit involving its mumps vaccine – a product routinely given to babies and children for generations. The issue, which involves allegations of false compliance with FDA standards for vaccines, prompted a False Claims Act lawsuit: United States v. Merck & Co. This case was commenced by two virologists once employed with Merck, alleges a systematic and long-standing commitment by the company to lying about the efficacy of its mumps vaccination, thereby prompting possible exposure to liability under the federal False Claims Act.
Governor Cuomo voiced concerns about the legality of de Blasio’s emergency order to forcibly vaccinate conscientious objectors. “Look, it’s a serious public health concern, but it’s also a serious First Amendment issue and it is going to be a constitutional, legal question,” Cuomo said in a radio interview on WAMC. “Do we have the right — does society, government have the right to say ‘you must vaccinate your child because I’m afraid your child is going to infect my child, even if you don’t want it done and even if it violates your religious beliefs?”
Some have asked how de Blasio is planning to determine who is or isn’t vaccinated to enforce his order. According to the mayor, they will be using “disease detectives.” de Blasio explained, “It parallels what a police detective does. If someone has symptoms, they will literally interview them to figure out everywhere they’ve been, everyone they might have come in contact with, and then they go reach out to that whole network to make sure people are vaccinated.” It’s unclear whether “make sure people are vaccinated” means “hold them down and inject them against their will.”
Read more stories on liberty and individual rights at PJmedia.com. Stay informed about vaccine dangers and vaccine industry propaganda by reading Vaccines.news.
State Takes Child from Parents for Treating Cancer With Cannabis, Forces Him to Take Chemo
Saturday, December 7, 2019 16:19
Jack Burns, The Free Thought Project
Waking Times
Parents of a 4-year-old Florida boy had their child taken away last month because they sought to treat his cancer in a holistic manner. A judge ruled the couple had placed their son in harm’s way after ceasing chemotherapy treatments for his leukemia.
Taylor Bland-Ball and Joshua McAdams had their parental rights taken away from them following the couple’s decision to seek a second opinion out of state. That decision led to the parents giving their son CBD and THC oil along with traditional chemotherapy treatments.
NBC News reports:
A Hillsborough County judge ordered that 3-year-old Noah McAdams continue to receive chemotherapy treatment at Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital within the next 28 days, NBC affiliate WFLA in Tampa reports.
Try This Secret Invention To Keep Anyone Well-Fed, Warm and Safe During Any Natural Disaster! (VIDEO)
Find Out More >
84,323
Try This Secret Invention To Keep Anyone Well-Fed, Warm and Safe During Any Natural Disaster! (VIDEO)
Bland-Ball responded to the judges decision outside the Florida courtroom. She said, “we’re disappointed with the fact that they are moving forward with chemotherapy considering all the side effects that were brought up in court today, including death.”
It turns out, she’s right. A landmark study published in the United Kingdom detailed just how deadly chemotherapy can be, even within 30 days after its initial use. As TFTP reported, the chemotherapy often turned out to be deadlier than the patients’ cancers. In fact, some hospitals had a higher mortality rate than those in other cities, leading the researchers to question why such mortality discrepancies with chemotherapy existed.
Bland-ball and McAdams wanted to do more for their child and include cannabis as an alternative to chemotherapy and radiation, the universal standard treatments for cancer. It’s unclear precisely which cannabis medicine they wanted to give their son. Currently, the only FDA approved cannabis-based medicine is produced by GW Pharmaceuticals whose researchers are attacking some of the world’s deadliest cancers such as glioblastoma, a brain cancer which is almost always fatal and of which chemotherapy and radiation have little to no effect.
GW Pharmaceuticals’ 1:1 THC/CBD medicine was used in conjunction with a traditional chemotheraphy. The test results, according to GW Pharm hold promise. According to one of their recent studies conducted in the United Kingdom:
The study showed that patients with documented recurrent GBM treated with THC:CBD had an 83 percent one year survival rate compared with 53 percent for patients in the placebo cohort (p=0.042). Median survival for the THC:CBD group was greater than 550 days compared with 369 days in the placebo group.
FINAL WARNING! Try THIS and You Might Never See a Doctor Again! (Must See Doctor Video)
Patients given cannabis lived nearly twice as long as those who were not given cannabis as an alternative treatment. But the choice to give cannabis to Bland-Ball and McAdams’ child was taken from the parents and given to the State of Florida which has usurped not only the parents’ wishes but the current research being conducted using cannabis in conjunction with standard chemotherapy. Florida has now ordered the son to be given chemotherapy completely against the parents’ wishes.
In addition to being used to help kill cancer cells, cannabis also helps to mitigate nausea and pain while taking chemotherapy. Unfortunately, Bland-Ball and McAdams’ child will now have to take his chances with chemotherapy and wonder whether or not it will even work. With legal decisions being made by the state one must logically ask the serious question as to whether or not a day is coming when all decisions about one’s health can be taken away from the citizenry?
As an example of humans losing rights to states, take for example the subject of vaccinations in the State of New York. As TFTP has reported, parents are no longer allowed to even decide when, if, or which vaccines will be given to their children, making such universal declarations akin to 1984, George Orwell’s work on a dystopian future where people give up all rights to the government. The forced vaccination program may be eerily reminiscent to Nazi Germany with the government controlling all procreation/birthing/parenting/child-rearing decisions.
Enough is enough. The Police State in America has to be replaced with logical, common sense approaches to health and wellness. Fascist Big Pharma is now allowing the state to force feed its chemotherapy onto little children whose parents do not want the drug to be given to their kids. Shouldn’t an oncologist refuse to be an agent of the state in this matter? Where are the courageous physicians who will refuse to administer drugs to children whose parents object? Likewise, should parents be allowed to keep their children if they neglect life-saving medical treatment?
About the Author
Jack Burns writes for TheFreeThoughtProject.com, where this article first appeared.
Ex-Lawyer Supposed to Be In Prison for Cheating Clients, But Now He’s Wanted in His Mom’s Murder
by Alberto Luperon | 5:51 pm, February 3rd, 2019
Disbarred lawyer Richard Merritt, 44, was due in prison Friday for swindling his clients. Yet it’s two days later and he’s now wanted for allegedly killing his mother. Cops in Dekalb County, Georgia said that officers responded to a local home on Saturday morning regarding a dead person, according to The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. They found Shirley Merritt was fatally stabbed. Cops blame this on her son.
Cops said Richard Merritt might be driving his mom’s brown 2009 Lexus RX350. It features the Georgia license plate CBV6004.
The suspect shouldn’t even be out, whether or not there was a murder. The suspect was convicted of settling lawsuits without clients’ knowledge, and keeping the cash. He was sentenced last month to 15 years in prison, to be followed by an equally long stint on probation. Prosecutors say he took advantage of the elderly, and those alleging medical malpractice. This scheme affected 17 former clients. He’d lie to them about the settlements, and claim their cases were ongoing, authorities said. Prosecutors claim he forged their signatures and checks, and notary seals.
Merritt surrendered his law license last year. From the Supreme Court of Georgia in a filing dated January 29, 2018:
In his petition, Merritt, who has been a member of the Bar since 2000, admits that in February 2017 he settled a client’s personal injury matter for $75,000, but failed to promptly disburse those funds to his client or her medical providers and failed to render a full accounting of the funds to his client.
The judge in his sentencing gave him time to prepare for prison, and turn himself in by 5 p.m. on February 1. The defendant had to deal with what was described as family medical issues before serving his sentence, according to a Fox 5 Atlanta story.
The problems of Richard Merritt have come to a head with his arrest. This has been long coming has his behavior has been in question for several years.
Georgia: Disbarred Lawyer Richard Merritt Jailed on Theft, Elder Abuse Charges
Attorney Richard Merritt was disbarred Monday for pocketing a client’s $75,000 settlement and jailed Wednesday on multiple felonies.
Richard Vinson Merritt
Former Smyrna attorney Richard V. Merritt, who was disbarred Monday after admitting to settling a client’s suit for $75,000 and then pocketing the money, woke up in the Cobb County Jail Thursday after being arrested on separate felony elder abuse, theft, exploitation and check fraud charges.
The spokesperson for the Cobb County Sheriff’s Office said he had no further information on the charges, which were apparently filed by the Smyrna Police Department. The booking report includes a notation that Merritt is to be held for the Fayette County Sheriff’s Office, where a press liaison said they received a bench warrant for “indirect criminal attempt.”
He provided no further information, and there was no immediate response from Smyrna police.
On Friday, Cobb County District Attorney Vic Reynolds said there was little he could offer concerning Merritt’s case so far.
“We have yet to receive the complete investigative file from the Cobb Sheriff’s Department,” said Reynolds via email. “When we do, our White Collar Unit will begin the process of determining what charges we will proceed to the grand jury with. In addition, our Investigators will begin reviewing the file upon receipt to see if there are any additional victims or charges which need to be pursued.”
Merritt remained in jail on Friday afternoon.
Merritt is the subject of multiple civil suits in Cobb County, including one filed by a woman who claims he forged her name on a $150,000 settlement agreement and check without her knowledge. She claims Merritt never turned over any funds.
He also faces several legal malpractice and fraud lawsuits in Cobb County from clients claiming he agreed to handle their cases and then never filed them and never pursued any actions.
Merritt has represented himself in each of the lawsuits.
The attorney for a plaintiff in one case, Sapp & Moriarty partner Daniel Moriarty—interviewed before word of Merritt’s arrest was known—said he was surprised at the mild tone in the state Supreme Court’s disbarment opinion, which only said Merritt “settled a client’s personal injury matter for $75,000 but failed to promptly disburse those funds to his client or her medical providers and failed to render a full accounting of the funds to his client.”
“That’s a euphemism for stealing money,” said Moriarty. “I talked to an investigator who has seen his bank records and determined that he had stolen hundreds of thousands of dollars. It just blows my mind what he’s gotten away with.”
According the bar complaint reviewed by the Daily Report, Merritt was retained to handle a personal injury matter in December 2016 and settled it last February, cashing the forged check Feb.7. On Feb. 10, he filed a lawsuit “and continued to lead me on until late May 2017 when I learned what he had done,” the confidential complaint said.
“I have never seen a dime of the $75,000,” said Merritt’s former client.
Another civil suit filed in Cobb County State Court last year said Merritt forged a husband and wife’s signature on a settlement and check in a medical malpractice case and never told them.
Another complaint said Merritt accepted a med-mal case and continually told his client that he was investigating it. Merritt sent emails saying “All is well and we are moving forward on your case,” and “No worries I’m on it!”
Then he stopped accepting the woman’s calls, and the filing deadline passed.
In that case, Judge Maria Golick struck Merritt’s answers and ordered a damages-only trial after finding he “willfully failed to respond” to hearing notices. Golick scheduled a show-cause criminal contempt hearing, and the decision is apparently still under advisement, according to court records.
In the case Moriarty is handling, Merritt also allegedly claimed to be conducting discovery and searching for experts, even scheduling bogus depositions for his clients, only to cancel them at the last minute.
Merritt was the principal for the Smyrna-based Merritt Firm, whose offices were the subject of several dispossessory actions between 2015 and 2017, according to court records.
Last August, Merritt sued two attorneys on behalf of spine surgeon and frequent medical expert James Chappuis. At the time, Merritt said he vice president and general counsel of Chappuis’ Orthopaedic & Spine Surgery of Atlanta.
That case settled confidentially shortly after it was filed.
Source: Professional Legal Blog
Doctor Claims Patient, Lawyers Stiffed Him After Winning $700K at Trial
The doctor, who claims he’s owed more than $200,000, also testified as an expert witness at his patient’s trial.
An Atlanta spine surgeon who sometimes works as an expert witness in personal injury cases has sued a former patient and his lawyers, claiming they stiffed him on $200,000 in medical bills after netting a $700,000 jury award.
The complaint filed Monday by Dr. James Chappuis, founder and CEO of Orthopaedic & Spine Surgery of Atlanta, said he’s owed $205,323 for more than two years of treatment provided to Shin Cho. Chappuis also testified as an expert witness at Cho’s trial.
The complaint was filed by the surgery’s vice president and general counsel, Richard Merritt, and named Cho as well as his attorneys in the personal injury action, James Rice Jr. and Thomas Schaefer.
It accuses Cho of using “pressure and misrepresentation” to convince a clinic staffer to accept just $7,500 as full payment of the debt and said the lawyers paid themselves and disbursed Cho’s net award from their trust account despite knowing Chappuis was still owed.
Even the debt Cho purportedly satisfied was “erroneous” and allegedly constituted less than a quarter of the actual sum owed to the doctor, according to the complaint.
Rice denied the suit’s allegations, pointing to a May 31 letter from Chappuis’ practice, saying Cho’s $7,500 payment satisfied his “current outstanding patient balance of $43,871.01.”
“Shortly after they sent that, they contacted us to say there was a ‘bookkeeping error’ and that Mr. Cho owed more than $205,000,” Rice said. “I retained outside counsel to get advice on what to do, and we told their office we were going to disburse the funds in two weeks, and that’s what we did.”
“I also contacted the Georgia bar, and they confirmed that that was the proper way to handle it, so we did all our due diligence before we distributed the money,” Rice said.
Rice said the doctor and his practice were already paid more than $100,000 by Cho’s insurer, and “Mr. Cho candidly feels that he doesn’t owe them anything.”
Schaefer said he was out of town and had not had a chance to review the complaint but was “not really sure why I’ve been named as a party.”
“Our official quote is that we stand by the complaint as drafted,” said Merritt, declining to discuss the case further.
On May 22, Cho was awarded $700,000 for claims that he developed back pain following a minor car wreck in Gwinnett County.
Rice told the Daily Report at the time that Cho drove away from the scene. He argued Cho, who already suffered at least three previous back injuries, was an “eggshell plaintiff” for whom even a low-impact wreck was dangerous.
Last year, Cho signed a “letter of protection” with Chappuis and his practice, agreeing to pay or have his attorneys pay “all outstanding medical bills” from funds accruing from the legal action, the complaint said.
The lawyers had previously worked with Chappuis on other cases and “knew the critical importance of the medical care being provided by [Chappuis], as it related to satisfying the burden of proof in proving causation and damages, and in the effectiveness of Plaintiff Chappuis’ testimony, as both a treating physician and a medical expert,” according to the complaint.
In fact, Rice sent Chappuis a congratulatory text message after the trial, saying the jury “liked you a lot and coming across as objective helped,” while they did not “buy” the defense expert’s “nonsense.”
But on May 31, Cho went to Orthopaedic & Spine Surgery’s main office and “through deliberate pressure and misrepresentation of the facts, convinced a clerical employee to accept $7,500 in satisfaction and payment in full of an alleged $43,871.01, which was erroneous, as the amount due and owing is $205,323.70,” according to the complaint.
The complaint said that, on June 17, Chappuis’ attorney sent a cease-and-desist letter to Rice “specifically instructing him not to disburse any funds” until he and his practice had been paid. On June 30 a satisfaction of judgment was filed with the court, but Rice and Schaefer “intentionally disregarded their obligation to compensate” the plaintiffs.
The suit, filed Aug. 21, names Cho, Rice, Schaefer and the lawyers’ practices as defendants, and includes counts for fraud, negligent misrepresentation and breach of contract.
Rice said it is “unfortunate that the plaintiffs have chosen to bring both my firm and Mr. Shaefer’s firm into a matter that is moot,” and is also moot regarding Cho.
“To say the least, the lawsuit is disappointing, but in any event we will vigorously defend it, including seeking fees and costs,” Rice said.
Source: Daily Report
Name Of The Attorney: Attorney Richard Merritt
Name Of The Law Firm: Cobb County District Attorney Vic Reynolds
State: Georgia
xyz_fbap: 1
Wednesday on his nationally syndicated radio show, conservative talker Rush Limbaugh slammed Department of Justice special counsel Robert Mueller for his statement regarding whether or not President Donald Trump had committed obstruction of justice during his investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
Limbaugh called such a statement an “abomination” of the U.S. justice system.
Partial transcript as follows:
LIMBAUGH: You know, this is going to be very interesting because I went back during the break, I went back to the archives out there, and I found the attorney general on two separate occasions — they were both in the press conference — when he announced that Mueller’s report was in and that he had read the report and gave his four-page summary, it had some questions out there. The media asked questions. Of course, Mueller didn’t deign to take any questions. And we know why. Mueller doesn’t want any questions about the stuff he ignored.
Anyway. This is going to be a big bone of contention because Mueller made it plain today — in fact, I’ve got three Mueller sound bites. I’ve been looking for every reason in the world not to use ’em ’cause they just tick me off. This is going to be a big bone of contention because of what Barr has said on two separate occasions. I’ll get to what Barr has said after I play for you Mr. Integrity, Mr. Boy Scout, Mr. Honorable, Mr. Impeccable, Mr. They don’t come any better than this, Robert J. Mueller III.
MUELLER: As set forth in the report after that investigation, if we had had confidence that the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime. Beyond department policy we regarded by principles of fairness, it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the actual charge. So that was Justice Department policy, those were the principles under which we operated, and from them we concluded that we would not reach a determination one way or the other about whether the president committed a crime. That is the office’s final position, and we will not comment on any other conclusions or hypotheticals about the president.
LIMBAUGH: Now, he actually was more emphatic than that, even, on the Justice Department guidelines. By the way, Office of Legal Counsel is the lawyers for the lawyers. You know, DOJ is the Department of Justice, but even they have lawyers who tell the other lawyers what the law is and what procedures are, and it’s the Office of Legal Counsel that determines what the DOJ can charge and not charge. They have determined since 1979 that you cannot indict a sitting president.
And Mueller made it clear over and over again today that that’s the reason they didn’t pursue the president is because of those guidelines. Can’t indict a sitting president, so why do it? That’s why I was screaming when he said this. “What the hell was this for then?” If from the very beginning you were operating under guidelines that say you can’t accuse him, you can’t charge him, you can’t indict him, then what the hell has been going on here?
Well, Attorney General Barr on two separate occasions has said that Robert Mueller told him three different times Mueller specifically was asked by Barr, “Is your reason for not charging Trump anything to do with the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines?” And Barr says that Mueller said three times, “No, that has nothing to do with it.” Barr is on record on two occasions saying that Mueller told him three times the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines have nothing to do with his decision not to indict the president or not to link the president to crimes.
And today Mueller goes out there and says the only reason we didn’t — he implied — the only reason we didn’t is because of those guidelines. And then what else he said here? You know, I promised I was gonna drop this, but I played this sound bite and I get revved up again. “As set forth in the report after the investigation, if we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.”
Do you realize what an abomination of the justice system that is? I say this without any partisanship or favoritism toward Trump here at all. This just turns our system of justice on its head. It really does, folks. If we had confidence the president clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so.
How about this? “If we had confidence the president clearly did commit a crime, we would have said so.” That’s the way it’s supposed to be. “If we had evidence the president committed a crime, we would have damn well said so.” It’s not, “If we had confidence the president did not commit a crime, we would have said so.” That’s not what the job is. And then he goes on to say we couldn’t have indicted him anyway because of Justice Department guidelines.
But then this next: “We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.” Well, go tell that to Jerry Nadler and Elizabeth Warren and the rest, ’cause they sure as hell think that you have. “We did not make a determination as to whether the president did commit a crime.”
Yes, you have! You have done everything you can to imply that he did and that you just couldn’t find it! That’s what makes me so livid. This guy in his righteousness sitting here saying that “We did not make a determination as to whether the president committed a crime.”
“Beyond department policy, which is the Office of Legal Counsel guidelines, we were guided by the principles of fairness.” Ha. What an absolute crock. There hasn’t been anything fair about this from the moment it began! “It would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the charge.”
That didn’t stop you from charging the Russians! They’re not gonna get their day in court because you can’t get them extradited, and you knew they weren’t gonna come face your charges. That’s why you could charge ’em with anything. You could charge them with blowing up human feces in San Francisco, and they wouldn’t come face the charges because Russia wouldn’t indict ’em.
So you charged those Russians knowing full well they would never have a chance to refute and to prove their innocence. So what the hell do you care, Mr. Mueller, about somebody having a chance to prove their innocence? You clearly, by innuendo, wanted to destroy these Russian groups and give them no chance whatsoever to answer your charges. And yet that fairness is what prevents you from charging the president. “So that was Justice Department policy. Those were the principles under which we operated.” Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Take a look here what has actually happened in this so-called investigation. James Comey, July 5th, 2016, press conference, lists all the crimes Hillary Clinton committed, lists all the crimes that they know she did! And then said, “But we’re not charging her because we don’t think she intended to do any of this.”
Now, we move to the Trump investigation, “We can’t find a damn thing the guy did, but we are certain he intended to.” What the hell is this, folks? They exonerate Hillary because they think she didn’t intend to do what she did. They can’t find that Trump did anything, but they think he intended to do what he didn’t do, and so we need to impeach him.
If this is the best Washington has, if this is the top of the heap when it comes to integrity and honor and decency and all that, then we have run out of decency and honor in Washington, D.C. This is such a crock, I can’t even begin to aptly, accurately describe the anger, the rage, and the emotions here that I am feeling and not get profane in doing so.
Events are rapidly coalescing to the inevitable conclusion that America must either rise up and defend itself or fall to the lawless, lunatic Leftists and globalists who seek to destroy it from within.
Soon, it will be time for President Trump to take decisive action to eliminate the domestic enemies of America (see full list below) and restore the rule of law to this sovereign nation. Although I don’t have any special inside information about Trump’s plans, an analysis of accelerating events points to an historic showdown as pro-American forces face off against anti-American traitors throughout every level of government and society.
With deranged, lawless Democrats now demanding the impeachment of Attorney General William Barr for completely fabricated reasons — i.e. they don’t like the fact that he won’t go along with the Russia collusion hoax that was fabricated by the treasonous deep state — we are getting closer each day to the need for military arrests of those lawmakers and domestic terrorist organizations (see list below) who are actively conspiring to defeat America as founded and turn this country over to globalists to be looted, dismantled and erased from history.
President Trump must know that We the People are ready and willing to defend this nation against domestic enemies
The President needs to know that We the People wholly support his efforts to drain the swamp and “lock them up.” We are law-abiding patriots and defenders of the both First and Second Amendments, and we are ready to back President Trump’s decisive commands with city-by-city, county-by-county defenses to identify and arrest all enemies of America who are attempting to destroy this nation from within.
Support our mission and enhance your own self-reliance: The laboratory-verified Organic Emergency Survival Bucket provides certified organic, high-nutrition storable food for emergency preparedness. Completely free of corn syrup, MSG, GMOs and other food toxins. Ultra-clean solution for years of food security. Learn more at the Health Ranger Store.
To be clear, yes, I’m talking about armed, law-abiding citizens all across America who are willing to defend America from the traitors who are trying to destroy it.
From idiotic lunatics who would push America into an all-out economic collapse (Ocasio-Cortez) to high-level treasonous criminals who armed America’s enemies with nuclear weapons and leaked U.S. military secrets to China and Iran (Barack Obama), all those who threaten the United States of America must be identified, arrested and removed from power as part of the process of restoring the rule of law in America.
I don’t have any special inside information of what Trump is planning, and I don’t speak for Trump in any way. But some of the actions that Trump could take to restore the rule of law in America and eliminate the sabotage actions of the domestic enemies currently operating in America include the following:
Deploy the military police nationwide to arrest and detain the CEOs of all tech companies and financial institutions that are systematically de-platforming conservatives, Trump supporters and Christians.
Every CEO of every tech company (Google, Twitter, etc.) or financial institution (Chase, Mastercard, GoFundMe, etc.) that has de-platformed users for being conservatives must be charged and prosecuted for willfully denying Americans their basic civil rights to engage in speech and commerce.
The domain names of all such tech companies and financial companies should be seized by the State Dept. and held in escrow until such time that the corporations sign consent decrees that guarantee the freedom of speech and freedom of commerce for all Americans, without interference, shadowbanning, de-platforming or algorithmic censorship.
RICO Act racketeering laws can be used to level felony criminal charges against all those engaged in these activities.
Every fake news media organization that actively participated in the sourcing and publishing of fabricated “leaks” what were intended to further the political coup effort against President Trump should have its conspirators arrested and removed from public influence. CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post and Buzzfeed, among others, have collapsed into “journo-terrorism” hubs where they attempt to terrorize the American public with fabricated news hoaxes with the aim of destabilizing the Trump administration. These activities are not expressions of a “free press” but rather active efforts to commit sedition and treason as part of a coordinated, deep state political coup to overthrow the results of the 2016 election and nullify the will of the voters. The left-wing media has essentially merged with the deep state and now functions as the propaganda extension of the very treasonous groups that are attempting to overthrow America’s democracy.
Every member of Congress, in both the House and Senate, who has actively participated in furthering the Russia collusion hoax and attempted coup against the United States of America should be arrested by military police and charged with sedition, then removed from public office and held to face military trials. Sen. John McCain should be charged posthumously for his role in the “Trump dossier” which was used to obtain an illegal FISA warrant application to spy on Trump campaign and administration personnel (in total violation of U.S. law).
As part of the cleanup operation to eliminate domestic terrorist groups that are operating inside the United States, Antifa must be designated a domestic terrorism organization, and all those who collude with Antifa to carry out acts of violence against conservative Americans must be arrested and charged with terror-related acts of conspiracy. This will include a very large number of college and university professors who exploit their positions of academic power to recruit and deploy domestic terrorist groups against the United States government.
The mayors of “sanctuary cities” and the governors of “sanctuary states” must be declared to be engaged in an active insurrection against the United States of America, then arrested and subjected to military tribunals for their active roles in undermining the nation through willful complicity with criminal felons and terror-linked groups.
All governors who signed laws authorizing the voting of illegal aliens must be arrested and charged with conspiracy to commit voter fraud. A national voter ID law must be put into place and fully enforced. Until California or any state agrees to enforce voter ID laws, that state’s members of Congress must be suspended and prevented from participating in federal legislation in any way whatsoever. The message to California? If you don’t enforce voter ID laws, you will lose your Senators, members of Congress and your Electoral College votes. You cannot participate in democracy if you aren’t willing to follow the basic rules of democracy.
Activate American patriots to defend the national borders. Militia groups must be called up by the President to defend America’s territories against foreign invaders. Those attempting to illegally enter the United States via border crossings must be ordered to turn around and go home. Those caught inside the border must be arrested and immediately deported to their home countries. The message must be clear: Immigrants are only welcomed in the United States through legal processes, not illegal border crossings. If you want to become an American, wait in line like everybody else who immigrated legally.
By now, President Trump knows that the American people are ready and willing to activate their Second Amendment responsibility nationwide, to protect and defend the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic. There are millions of military veterans and both active duty and former law enforcement Americans who are ready and willing to enforce the rule of law and, at the direction of the Commander in Chief, do their part to identify and eliminate the threat of “enemies within.”
Most real Americans have reached the point where they now realize their country will be completely overrun and destroyed if something isn’t done to halt the enemies within. Time is growing short. The will of the American people to defend their nation is stronger than ever, but most Americans will not act unless they are given authorization by the President.
That authorization will not come before the 2020 election, but once Trump wins a second term, there’s nothing holding back a full-fledged defense of America and the complete rooting out and elimination of America’s domestic enemies.
I have no doubt that President Trump already knows the American people are with him and are ready to defend his presidency and defend this nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Get prepared while you can, since the Democrats are desperately trying to disarm the American people before the “big showdown” takes place. I am also directing you to this very important tactical analysis of how a civil war might go down and why the treasonous Left will “suffer a brutal loss” as power, water and food supply lines to their cities are cut off by pro-America forces who are defending this nation against traitors and terrorists. That article is based on this article by Matt Bracken at AmericanPartisan.org. It’s also a very important read.
Edmund Duffy’s five-decade legal career, during which he rose to prominence as the former heard of the China practice at Skadden, officially ended 02/08/2018, when he was automatically disbarred after he pleaded guilty to possession of child pornography.
A Suffolk County District Court Judge was suspended from the bench after he was arrested and charged with burglary. He was caught with women’s underwear that he allegedly stole from a private residence.
Evan Greebel, a former partner at Kaye Scholer and Katten Muchin Rosenman, was sent to prison for working with disgraced pharmaceutical executive Martin Shkreli to defraud investors.
Keila Ravelo was sentenced to five years for conspiring to defraud her former law firms and clients out of $7.8 Million, using bogus litigation vendors. Prosecutors said that the former Hunton & Williams and Willkie Farr & Gallagher partner used the money to fuel a lavish lifestyle.
Prominent M&A partner Frank Aquila deleted his Twitter account after tellling White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders she should “Rot in Hell You Bitch” for defending Sen. Lindsey Graham amid the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on sexual assault allegations against Brett Kavanaugh.
Manhattan attorney Aaron Schlossberg’s rant against employees speaking Spanish at a Mexican Restaurant provoked a firestorm on social media.
Another viral video captured a second New York City lawyer who directed racially charged comments at bystanders.
“Egragious and outragesou” conduct by ex-Mintz Levin associate Anthony Jacob Zappin during his pro se legal war with his former wife, also an attorney, led to his disbarment.
New York’s high court unanimously said that Civil Court Judge Terrence O’Connor’s “intemparate” and “inappropriate” behavior in the courtroom were bad enough, but his decision to not cooperate with an investigation into his actions also contributed to his removal from the bench.
One of the biggest bluffs used by claimants in foreclosure and eviction proceedings is the request for judicial notice. If unopposed, this results in myths being propagated as facts. Just because a document exists or has been uploaded to SEC.GOV or any other site doesn’t mean the source or the content is credible or reliable.
If I manage to record a deed purporting to transfer title that doesn’t mean that title is transferred nor that my ownership is to be presumed. The same is true if I upload the same fabricated deed to SEC.gov or any other site on the internet.
Judicial notice is erroneously applied as a vehicle for shifting the burden of proof. The basic rule of evidence is simple: the proponent of evidence must prove the truth, credibility and reliability of that evidence, even if it is admitted into evidence. Otherwise the evidence is admitted with zero weight.
==============================
Let us help you plan for trial and draft your foreclosure defense strategy, discovery requests and defense narrative: 202-838-6345. Ask for a Consult or check us out on www.lendinglies.com.
I provide advice and consultation to many people and lawyers so they can spot the key required elements of a scam — in and out of court. If you have a deal you want skimmed for red flags order the Consult and fill out the REGISTRATION FORM.
A few hundred dollars well spent is worth a lifetime of financial ruin.
PLEASE FILL OUT AND SUBMIT OUR FREE REGISTRATION FORM WITHOUT ANY OBLIGATION. OUR PRIVACY POLICY IS THAT WE DON’T USE THE FORM EXCEPT TO SPEAK WITH YOU OR PERFORM WORK FOR YOU. THE INFORMATION ON THE FORMS ARE NOT SOLD NOR LICENSED IN ANY MANNER, SHAPE OR FORM. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Get a Consult and TERA (Title & Encumbrances Analysis and & Report) 202-838-6345 or 954-451-1230. The TERA replaces and greatly enhances the former COTA (Chain of Title Analysis, including a one page summary of Title History and Gaps).
THIS ARTICLE IS NOT A LEGAL OPINION UPON WHICH YOU CAN RELY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE. HIRE A LAWYER.
==========================
Most states essentially have the same statute in their laws of evidence, like this one from Florida:
90.202 Matters which may be judicially noticed.—A court may take judicial notice of the following matters, to the extent that they are not embraced within s. 90.201:
(1) Special, local, and private acts and resolutions of the Congress of the United States and of the Florida Legislature.
(2) Decisional, constitutional, and public statutory law of every other state, territory, and jurisdiction of the United States.
(3) Contents of the Federal Register.
(4) Laws of foreign nations and of an organization of nations.
(5) Official actions of the legislative, executive, and judicial departments of the United States and of any state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States.
(6) Records of any court of this state or of any court of record of the United States or of any state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States.
(7) Rules of court of any court of this state or of any court of record of the United States or of any other state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States.
(8) Provisions of all municipal and county charters and charter amendments of this state, provided they are available in printed copies or as certified copies.
(9) Rules promulgated by governmental agencies of this state which are published in the Florida Administrative Code or in bound written copies.
(10) Duly enacted ordinances and resolutions of municipalities and counties located in Florida, provided such ordinances and resolutions are available in printed copies or as certified copies.
(11) Facts that are not subject to dispute because they are generally known within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. (e.s.)
(12) Facts that are not subject to dispute because they are capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot be questioned. (e.s.)
(13) Official seals of governmental agencies and departments of the United States and of any state, territory, or jurisdiction of the United States.
A quick review of this statute, essentially the same as all others, reveals that it is not intended to be used as proof of contested facts. The fact that a document obviously exists may not be subject to contest unless the objection is that the document was prepared expressly for trial and not as part of whatever transaction is being contested.
Courts often overstep by becoming the lawyer for the claimant in foreclosure or eviction. As an example of the court stepping into the shoes of the claimant, there is the issue of judicial notice. You should research this. Because judicial notice is intended to be used as follows:
For judicial economy — i.e., acceptance of facts that are virtually incontrovertible and not requiring proof. VERSUS your objections to the content of those documents. The requirement of absolute credibility is essential for judicial notice. There is no prejudice to any party by requiring actual proof of the documents and its contents. Judicial economy does not trump the rules of evidence which are designed to ferret out the truth not to assume facts that are untrue or that could easily be untrue because they came from an interested party.
For documents, the only application of the judicial notice doctrine is that the documents exist and are maintained on a completely trusted site and not that what is written on them is true.
In the case of government documents prepared by government with no interest in making any claims or defending any claims but simply in the ordinary course of record keeping, the record is subject to judicial notice and the content is generally presumed to be true unless disproven by the the opposing party.
Judicial notice is completely inappropriate where the documents were prepared by parties with an interest in the outcome of litigation and claims and are not inspected, reviewed or scrutinized as to accuracy.
Verifying facial validity of a document is NOT the same as verifying the statements contained on the document.
For documents the source must be an independent third party source with no interest in the outcome. So if a fabricated assignment of mortgage is recorded in the county records, then the the existence of the document may be judicially noticed without any presumptions of the veracity or sufficiency of the statements contained in the assignment.
Failure to object to the introduction of the document MIGHT be grounds for admission of both the document and its contents. The ability of the opposing party to present evidence that the document had been fabricated and that the statements contained within it are untrue or misleading is not barred by failure to object.
The fact that it is admitted in evidence does not mean that should be given great weight by the trial court. Any evidence submitted by a party who has a direct interest in the outcome of litigation is to be viewed skeptically and requiring corroborative proof.
Judicial notice is NOT appropriate for the PSA or anything else if the request for notice directs the court’s attention to SEC.GOV. This is an effort at misdirection.
SEC.GOV is merely a repository for uploading documents with no more official capacity than box.com or dropbox.com. The fact that a document is there is NOT an indication that the document is an official document. The SEC has not reviewed it or approved it in any way, manner shape or form.
BEST Evidence: Only the original document produced in court would be sufficient evidence of the document’s existence and then only if it was complete and signed — which means that the mortgage loan schedule is attached as the original mortgage loan schedule attached the trust instrument, the prospectus and the servicing agreements when they were originally executed.
It is a common ploy to upload documents to SEC.Gov and then request judicial notice. This is wrong.
The Council on Foreign Relations delivered an Orwellian presentation recently that unsurprisingly went unnoticed in the mainstream media, in which CFR’s Richard Stengel forwarded the notion that governments “have to” direct “propaganda” at their own domestic populations.
The Council is recognized as one of the United States’ oldest and most establishment think tanks of the American power-elite, and it often sets the agenda on important policy questions—or, as former senior editor at the Washington Post, Richard Harwood, in a column entitled “Ruling Class Journalists,” approvingly described the Council as, “the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States.”
Harwood admiringly wrote: “The membership of these journalists in the Council, however they may think of themselves, is an acknowledgment of their active and important role in public affairs and of their ascension into the American ruling class. They do not merely analyze and interpret foreign policy for the United States; they help make it…. They are part of that establishment whether they like it or not, sharing most of its values and worldviews.”
CFR is a key cog in the hub of Washington think-tanks promoting endless war. As former Army Major Todd Pierce described, think-tanks act as “primary provocateurs” using “‘psychological suggestiveness’ to create a false narrative of danger from some foreign entity with the objective being to create paranoia within the U.S. population that it is under imminent threat of attack or takeover.”
In late 2018, WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange publicized the extensive sway the Council on Foreign relations carried over U.S. mass media by Tweeting a graphic created by Swiss Propaganda Research (SPR), a research and information project on geopolitical propaganda in Swiss media, which illustrated the heavy influence CFR exercises over the media narrative delivered to the American public, i.e. domestic propaganda.
Council on Foreign Relations links to major media holdings
Full graphic here: https://t.co/lyMPz4ME2Z pic.twitter.com/mmTNdQa1F9
— #FreeAssange! (tweets by campaign)⌛ (@JulianAssange) January 28, 2018
The illustration of the Council’s deeply entrenched media presence is based on official membership rosters compiled by SPR, revealing the interconnectedness of CFR’s extensive mass media influence network and its main international affiliate groups—the Bilderberg Group (covering mainly the U.S. and Europe) and the Trilateral Commission (covering North America, Europe and East Asia).
According to the report from Swiss Propaganda Research:
Largely unbeknownst to the general public, many media executives and top journalists of almost all major US news outlets have long been members of the influential Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).
Established in 1921 as a private, bipartisan organization to “awaken America to its worldwide responsibilities”, the CFR and its close to 5000 elite members have for decades shaped U.S. foreign policy and public discourse about it. As one Council member famously explained, the goal has indeed been to establish a global Empire, albeit a “benevolent” one.
Stengel, a former editor of TIME magazine, told the audience at a CFR event in late April called Political Disruptions: Combating Disinformation and Fake News that governments “have to” direct “propaganda” toward their own populations.
At a Council on Foreign Relations forum about "fake news," former Editor at Time Magazine Richard Stengel directly states that he supports the use of propaganda on American citizens – then shuts the session down when challenged about how propaganda is used against the third world pic.twitter.com/ClAT5POv7G
— William Craddick (@williamcraddick) May 11, 2018
In the full video of the CFR event shown below, Stengel openly argues in favor of propaganda against U.S. citizens starting at the 1:15:26 mark in the footage.
Full video of the forum – efforts to control the flow of information and dictate to the public how to interpret facts should be taken seriouslyhttps://t.co/dKVG6dHBSN
— William Craddick (@williamcraddick) May 11, 2018
Stengel, who is a former high-level U.S. government official, head of the office for Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs at the State Department from 2013 to 2016, and a regular pundit on MSNBC, explained:
Basically, every country creates their own narrative story and, you know, my old job at the State Department was what people used to joke as the ‘chief propagandist’ job. We haven’t talked about propaganda… I’m not against propaganda. Every country does it, and they have to do it to their own population, and I don’t necessarily think it’s that awful.
Zero Hedge reported that Stengel’s personal bio site notes that he “helped create and oversee” the Global Engagement Center at the State Department whose official mission is to “counter propaganda and disinformation from international terrorist organizations and foreign countries” (with a “special focus on Russia”).
Perhaps most ominous of all is the fact that a man who publicly says that he is “not against propaganda” on the U.S. government’s “own population“ was recently named a “distinguished fellow” as part of the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab (DFRLab).
Yes, the same Atlantic Council that espouses a strongly anti-Russian agenda that is funded by Ukrainian billionaire Victor Pinchuk, who also happened to donate at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation. Pinchuk just so happens to be the CTO and co-founder of CrowdStrike—the company used by the DNC to inspect their servers allegedly hacked by Russia, after refusing the FBI access to the same servers.
Obviously, it seems to be very peculiar behavior by the DNC to refuse the FBI access to their servers, and instead rely on a private company—unless they had an ulterior motive. Consequently, the assessment by CrowdStrike was used as a basis for what eventually resulted in the appointment of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.
Ironically, just two weeks ago the DFRLab announced that its team has partnered with Facebook to “monitor disinformation“ and protect elections. The DFRLab defined the new initiative as follows:
The Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab today announced a partnership with Facebook to independently monitor disinformation and other vulnerabilities in elections around the world. The effort is part of an initiative to help provide credible research about the role of social media in elections, as well as democracy more generally.
The Digital Forensic Research Lab is launching a partnership with Facebook to support the world’s largest community in its efforts to strengthen democracy…
As if on cue, and with an utterly Orwellian feel, Facebook announced on June 2, 2018, that the user-generated “trending news” section will be replaced by a “breaking news” section—which will be comprised of 80 publications selected by Facebook—that will feed approved content to users.
Facebook will essentially have complete control of the topics and narratives that are fed to their users in a clear act of social engineering, which will give the social media giant—and their political/ideological allies—the ability to directly manipulate people’s perceptions of any event.
During the 2016 election, leaked internal documents from Facebook revealed that the editors in charge of the company’s “Trending News” section repeatedly discriminated against conservative articles, while promoting progressive content, which resulted in the threat of an investigation from the Senate commerce committee.
The new changes were explained in a Friday announcement:
Breaking News Label: A test we’re running with 80 publishers across North America, South America, Europe, India and Australia lets publishers put a “breaking news” indicator on their posts in News Feed. We’re also testing breaking news notifications.
Today In: We’re testing a dedicated section on Facebook called Today In that connects people to the latest breaking and important news from local publishers in their city, as well as updates from local officials and organizations.
News Video in Watch: We will soon have a dedicated section on Facebook Watch in the US where people can view live coverage, daily news briefings and weekly deep dives that are exclusive to Watch.
So, when CFR is publicly advocating for the societal benefits of domestic propaganda, and Facebook is jettisoning an already meager user-generated “Trending News” section and aligning itself with an anti-Russian, Clinton-connected thinktank, Americans should be keenly aware that they are being actively propagandized, and they should work to intentionally diversify their news sources as an omnipotent mass propaganda regime is being covertly implemented.
6/22/18 REUTERS LEGAL 21:56:15
REUTERS LEGAL
June 22, 2018
JPMorgan to pay $4.6 mln to settle Ponzi scheme lawsuit
Dena Aubin
(Reuters) – JPMorgan Chase has agreed to pay $4.6 million to resolve a proposed class action accusing it of aiding a Ponzi scheme at Caribbean-based Millennium Bank, which authorities say defrauded hundreds of investors with bogus certificates of deposits.
Disclosed in a Thursday filing in Boston federal court, the agreement ends a five-year legal fight by investors who lost money in the scheme, run by convicted Canadian banker William Wise. The investors alleged that Chase and its predecessor Washington Mutual let Wise steal millions of dollars of investors’ money from accounts at the banks despite numerous signs he was running a fraud.
The deal requires the approval of U.S. Magistrate Judge Judith Dein, who is overseeing the case.
Chase spokeswoman Elizabeth Seymour said the bank is “pleased to have resolved this legacy matter.”
Millennium had originally opened the accounts at Washington Mutual Bank, and Chase inherited the accounts when it bought Washington Mutual’s assets during the 2008 financial crisis.
In court filings, Chase said investors failed to show that it knew about the fraud or substantially assisted in it.
The investors are represented by lawyers at Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton and the Law Offices of Keith Miller.
”It’s been years of hard-fought litigation but we are very pleased with this result,” Tal Lifshitz, a lawyer for the investors, said in an email.
The 2012 lawsuit accused Chase of failing to promptly notify authorities or close accounts for Millennium Bank at its California branches after allegedly learning of the illegal scheme.
In Thursday’s filing, lawyers for the investors said the settlement will give significant relief to an estimated 150 to 200 class members who lost money on the Millennium scheme. The investors will not get all their money back, but they faced significant expense if they had continued to litigate, the lawyers said, urging preliminary court approval of the deal.
Wise was sentenced to 22 years in prison in 2015 after pleading guilty to conspiracy, fraud and money laundering in connection with the scheme.
The scheme was shut down and Millennium, based in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, was put into receivership in 2009 after the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission won a restraining order and a freeze of all assets of the bank, Wise and his co-conspirators, in Texas federal court. The SEC said Wise and several co-conspirators raised at least $68 million, targeting mostly U.S. investors, by misappropriating money that they had promised to invest in high-interest certificates of deposit.
The investors’ lawsuit said Washington Mutual received alerts of suspicious activity in the Millennium accounts and investigated them as early as 2006 but failed to stop the suspicious activity or protect investors.
When Chase took over the accounts, it also took over the Millennium investigative files and reviewed the accounts, but it too failed to promptly notify law enforcement authorities or close the accounts, the lawsuit said.
Dein in 2016 had dismissed part of the lawsuit, finding that Chase was not liable for Washington Mutual’s conduct before Chase acquired its assets. She said investors could pursue claims that Chase allowed Wise to defraud additional investors after it acquired the accounts.
The case is Mansor et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, U.S. District Court, Massachusetts District, No. 12-10544.
For the plaintiffs: Harley Tropin and Tal Lifshitz at Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton and Keith Miller at Law Offices of Keith Miller
For the defendant: Beth Boland and Rachel Blise at Foley & Lardner
Wells Fargo Employees Are Said to Improperly Alter Documents
By Hannah Levitt
May 17, 2018, 10:06 AM EDT
Updated on May 17, 2018, 2:57 PM EDT
Wells Fargo & Co. found that employees in its wholesale unit added information to internal customer records without the clients’ knowledge, according to a person briefed on the matter.
The bank discovered the improper activity and reported it to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the matter hadn’t been publicly disclosed. The employees altered the documents in 2017 and earlier this year as they sought to satisfy regulatory demands related to anti-money-laundering controls, according to the Wall Street Journal, which reported the issue earlier Thursday.
Wells Fargo has struggled to move past a wave of scandals, which led to a Federal Reserve ban on increasing assets until the lender fixes missteps. The bank’s first-quarter results were marred by a charge of $800 million tied to a settlement with U.S. regulators. Earlier this month, the bank rolled out a new marketing campaign built around its efforts to regain customers’ trust.
Bryan Hubbard, an OCC spokesman, declined to comment. Wells Fargo spokesman Alan Elias said in an emailed statement that the bank can’t comment on regulatory matters, but that it takes “swift action to correct” any behavior that violates the firm’s values.
“This matter involves documents used for internal purposes,” Elias said. “No customers were negatively impacted, no data left the company, and no products or services were sold as a result.”
The bank’s shares dropped 1.6 percent at 2:40 p.m. in New York trading, the biggest decline in the 24-company KBW Bank Index.
Same Old Story: Paper Trail vs, Money Trail (Freddie Mac)
Posted on May 15, 2018 by Neil Garfield
Payment by third parties may not reduce the debt but it does increase the number of obligees (creditors). Hence in every one of these foreclosures, except for a minuscule portion, indispensable parties were left out and third parties were in reality getting the proceeds of liquidation from foreclosure sales.
The explanations of securitization contained on the websites of the government Sponsored Entities (GSE’s) clearly demonstrate what I have been writing for 11 years and reveal a pattern of illusion and deception.
The most important thing about a financial transaction is the money. In every document filed in support of the illusion of securitization, it steadfastly holds firm to discussion of paper instruments and not a word about the actual location of the money or the actual identity of the obligee of that money debt.
Each explanation avoids the issue of where the money goes and how it was “processed” (i.e., stolen, according to me and hundreds of other scholars.)
It underscores the fact that the obligee (“debt owner” or “holder in due course” is never present in any legal proceeding or actual transaction or transfer of of the debt. This leaves us with only one conclusion. The debt never moved, which is to say that the obligee was always the same, albeit unaware of their status.
Knowing this will help you get traction in the courtroom but alleging it creates a burden of proof for you to prove something that you know is true but can only be confirmed with access to the books, records an accounts of the parties claiming such transactions ands transfers occurred.
GET A CONSULT
GO TO LENDINGLIES to order forms and services. Our forensic report is called “TERA“— “Title and Encumbrance Report and Analysis.” I personally review each of them for edits and comments before they are released.
Let us help you plan your answers, affirmative defenses, discovery requests and defense narrative:
954-451-1230 or 202-838-6345. Ask for a Consult. You will make things a lot easier on us and yourself if you fill out the registration form. It’s free without any obligation. No advertisements, no restrictions.
Purchase audio seminar now — Neil Garfield’s Mastering Discovery and Evidence in Foreclosure Defense including 3.5 hours of lecture, questions and answers, plus course materials that include PowerPoint Presentations.
THIS ARTICLE IS NOT A LEGAL OPINION UPON WHICH YOU CAN RELY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE. HIRE A LAWYER.
For one such example see Freddie Mac Securitization Explanation
And the following diagram:
Freddie Mac Diagram of Securitization
What you won’t find anywhere in any diagram supposedly depicting securitization:
Money going to an originator who then lends the money to the borrower.
Money going to a named REMIC “Trust” for the purpose of purchasing loans or anything else.
Money going to the alleged unnamed beneficiaries of a named REMIC “Trust.”
Money going to the alleged unnamed investors who allegedly purchased “certificates” allegedly issued by or on behalf of a named REMIC “Trust.”
Money going to the originator for sale of the debt, note and mortgage package.
Money going to originator for endorsement of note to alleged transferee.
Money going to originator for assignment of mortgage.
Money going to the named foreclosing party upon liquidation of foreclosed property.
Money going to the homeowner as royalty for use of his/her/their identity forming the basis of value in issuance of derivatives, hedge products and contract, insurance products and synthetic derivatives.
Money being credited to the obligee’s loan receivable account reducing the amount of indebtedness (yes, really). This is because the obligee has no idea where the money is coming from or why it is being paid. But one thing is sure — the obligee is receiving money in all circumstances.
Payment by third parties may not reduce the debt but it does increase the number of obligees (creditors). Hence in every one of these foreclosures, except for a minuscule portion, indispensable parties were left out and third parties were in reality getting the proceeds of liquidation from foreclosure sales.
Spread the word
The following Georgia attorneys were disciplined and/or disbarred for the month Of March, 2018:
March 5, 2018
S18Y0348. IN THE MATTER OF SAM LOUIS LEVINE
Sam L. Levine
S18Y0350. IN THE MATTER OF CHRISTOPHER AARON CORLEY
S18Y0383. IN THE MATTER OF ANDRE KEITH SANDERS
S18Y0559. IN THE MATTER OF WALTER LINTON MOORE
Februry 19, 2018:
S18Y0315. IN THE MATTER OF NATALIE DAWN MAYS
S18Y0434. IN THE MATTER OF CHERYL JOYCE BRAZIEL
S18Y0511. IN THE MATTER OF DONALD EDWARD SMART
February 5, 2018:
S18Y0484. IN THE MATTER OF ADAM LORENZO SMITH
Adam L. Smith
January 29, 2018:
S17Y1329. IN THE MATTER OF RICKY W. MORRIS, JR.
S17Y1918. IN THE MATTER OF CLARENCE R. JOHNSON, JR.
S17Y2016. IN THE MATTER OF CAMERON SHAHAB
S18Y0142. IN THE MATTER OF ROBERT JUTZI HOWELL
S18Y0256. IN THE MATTER OF LARRY BUSH HILL
S18Y0264. IN THE MATTER OF CHRISTOPHER MARK MILLER
S18Y0269. IN THE MATTER OF LORNE HOWARD CRAGG
S18Y0387. IN THE MATTER OF RICHARD V. MERRITT
Rich Merritt
If you want to know more, go to Supreme Court of Georgia, 2018 Opinion sand Summaries
The number on the left hand side above, is the case number for the attorney. The Attorney discipline is at the end of each section. If you click the case number, you can read the Order,
Wells Fargo draws bipartisan anger from Congress
Regulators fined Wells Fargo in September 2016 for repeatedly creating fake customer accounts to juice the bank’s books. The fine was big — $185 million — but the allegations were shocking.
On Friday night, Wells Fargo was hit with one of the harshest punishments ever handed down by the Federal Reserve. Wells Fargo, one of the nation’s largest banks, won’t be allowed to expand its business until it convinces the Fed it has cleaned up its act. The bank agreed to replace four members of its board of directors.
The Fed cited Wells Fargo’s “pervasive and persistent misconduct.” The past 17 months have brought one bad headline after another. The bank’s culture of misconduct extended well beyond the original revelations.
Wells Fargo was dragged before Congress, put under the microscope by government officials, and embarrassed before its customers. A new CEO and management team were brought in, and the old regime lost millions of dollars in docked pay.
2016
September 8: Fake account scandal breaks wide open. Federal regulators reveal Wells Fargo employees secretly created millions of unauthorized bank and credit card accounts without their customers knowing it. The bank is hit with a $185 million fine. Wells Fargo says 5,300 employees were fired for related reasons.
September 14: A government official tells CNN the Department of Justice has issued subpoenas in a probe related to the fake account scandal.
September 27: Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf forfeits pay. Stumpf says he will give up much of his 2016 salary, including a bonus and $41 million in stock awards. The first major executive leaves the company over the scandal. Carrie Tolstedt, who headed the division that created the fake accounts, steps down and forfeits some pay.
September 28: Wells Fargo is accused of illegally repossessing service members’ cars. The company agrees to pay $24 million to settle charges. The DOJ claims the bank took 413 cars without a court order, which violates federal law. The company apologizes and commits to refunds.
September 29: Wells Fargo promises to abandon unrealistic sales goals. Wells Fargo employees blamed their bosses for effectively encouraging fake accounts. Before lawmakers on Capitol Hill, CEO John Stumpf is accused of running “a criminal enterprise.”
October 5: California’s attorney general opens an investigation into possible identity fraud related to the fake accounts scandal.
October 12: CEO John Stumpf steps down. The company announces he will retire effective immediately.
November 3: SEC probe revealed. A new public filing from the bank discloses that the Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating the bank for issues related to the creation of as many as 2 million fake accounts.
December 13: Wells Fargo is punished by federal regulators for actions unrelated to the fake accounts. The bank is dinged for failing to comply with certain provisions of Dodd-Frank, the post-2008 law meant to better regulate big banks and protect consumers.
2017
January 23: Wells Fargo acknowledges potential worker retaliation. The bank says there are signs it retaliated against workers who tried to blow the whistle on the fake accounts.
February 20: Four senior bank employees are fired. The employees either worked or used to work in Wells Fargo’s community banking division, which is at the center of the fake account scandal.
March 27: Federal agency accuses Wells Fargo of “egregious,” “discriminatory and illegal” practices. In an unusual move, a top federal banking regulator severely downgrades Wells Fargo’s community lending rating. The decision stems from factors beyond the fake account scandal.
March 27: Wells Fargo settles class action suit. The preliminary deal promises $110 million for wronged consumers.
April 10: Former executives are asked for money back. The bank claws back $75 million from two former executives for their roles in the fake accounts scandal, including another $28 million from former CEO John Stumpf. A new report from independent directors on the Wells Fargo board reveals the bank prepared an internal report in 2004 about practices that may encourage employees to create fake accounts.
April 21: The bank’s cost of a settlement goes up. The settlement in the class action suit is increased to $142 million.
June 14: New allegations about mortgages are leveled. In a new lawsuit, Wells Fargo is accused of modifying mortgages without authorization from the customers. That means some customers could have ended up paying the bank more than they owed. It’s unclear how many customers were affected. Wells Fargo says it “strongly denies” the claims.
July 27: New allegations about auto insurance are revealed. The bank admits it charged at least 570,000 customers for auto insurance they did not need. Wells Fargo says an internal review found about 20,000 customers may have defaulted on their car loans for related reasons.
August 4: Wells Fargo is sued for allegedly ripping off small businesses. A lawsuit accuses Wells Fargo of overcharging small businesses for credit card transactions by using a “deceptive” 63-page contract to confuse them.
August 31: More fake accounts are discovered. Wells Fargo says it has found 1.4 million additional phony accounts. This brings the total number of fake accounts to 3.5 million.
October 3: Wells Fargo says it wrongly fined mortgage clients. Wells Fargo admits that 110,000 mortgage holders were fined for missing a deadline — even though the delays were the company’s fault. The company pledges to refund the customers.
October 16: Regulators say Wells Fargo sold dangerous investments it didn’t understand. Regulators order the bank to pay back $3.4 million to brokerage customers because advisers recommended products that were “highly likely to lose value over time.” Wells Fargo does not admit to nor deny the charges.
November 13: Wells Fargo admits it illegally repossessed more service members’ cars. The company says it found that it had taken vehicles from another 450 service members. Wells Fargo agrees to pay an additional $5.4 million, according to the Justice Department. The company promises refunds.
2018
February 2: The Federal Reserve punishes Wells Fargo. In an unprecedented move, the Fed says the bank won’t be allowed to grow its assets until the bank cleans up its act. The bank also agrees to overhaul its board of directors.
–CNNMoney’s Donna Borak, Danielle Wiener-Bronner and Jill Disis contributed to this report.
By R. Robin McDonald | January 26, 2018 at 06:28 PM
Federal Jury Finds Atlanta Lawyer Engaged in Racketeering Enterprise
Millard Farmer, who made his name as an aggressive death penalty combatant across the South, was found by a preponderance of the evidence to have violated Georgia’s racketeering law with legal tactics.
By R. Robin McDonald | January 26, 2018 at 06:28 PM
Millard Farmer Millard Farmer (Photo: John Disney / ALM)
After a weeklong civil trial, a federal jury in Newnan on Friday found that Atlanta attorney Millard Farmer and his law practice engaged in a racketeering enterprise in violation of Georgia law.
The jury in the civil case determined by a preponderance of evidence that Farmer, as part of the racketeering enterprise, engaged in attempted theft by extortion, attempted bribery, intimidation of a court officer, influencing witnesses, interstate travel in aid of racketeering and interference with custody, according to the verdict.
The jury cleared Farmer of allegations that he violated federal racketeering laws, engaged in kidnapping for extortion, committed wire fraud or filed false reports of child abuse in furtherance of an extortion scheme, according to the verdict form.
It also awarded plaintiff John Murphy, a former Columbus mortage banker and financial planner, compensatory and treble punitive damages totaling $242,835.
The three-year-old civil case, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, stems from a protracted child custody battle in which Farmer represented Murphy’s former wife. The suit claims Farmer’s lawyering perverted the legal process and crossed the line into organized criminal behavior in an effort to extort payments from Murphy and his current wife—Renee Haugerud, the founder and chief financial officer of a New York hedge fund—and force the couple to relinquish custody of Murphy’s two sons from his previous marriage.
“This was not a case about money,” said Murphy’s attorney Buddy Parker of Maloy Jenkins Parker after the jury returned its verdict. “This was case about having Millard Farmer held responsible for the criminal conduct he committed.”
Farmer, he said, “claimed all along that what he did was lawful lawyering defending a client.” But Parker said he told the jury that Farmer’s litigation tactics amounted to “terroristic lawyering” designed to “exert as much financial pain and emotional pain” as possible over a custody modification petition that ultimately took four-and-a-half years to resolve.
Farmer, who is in his 70s, built his reputation as a death penalty combatant who at one time was allied with and partially funded by the Southern Poverty Law Center to fight capital punishment across the South. Farmer developed an aggressive tactic he dubbed “conflictineering”—the creation or use of an event that would “expose the hypocrisy or immorality of a person involved in a dispute.”
Farmer represented himself during the litigation. His cellphone was not accepting calls, nor could he be reached for comment. He previously told The Daily Report that, despite the allegations, no crime was committed, so there could be no racketeering enterprise.
The jury verdict included findings that Farmer:
Attempted to bribe Coweta Superior Court Judge Quillian Baldwin by suing his court reporter and then offering to dismiss the suit if Baldwin recused from the litigation and made his recusal retroactive to predate his 2012 ruling giving custody of the two boys to their father.
Intimidated Baldwin’s court reporter by contacting her lawyer, saying he would dismiss the suit against her if she persuaded the judge to recuse retroactive to the custody ruling.
Tampered with witnesses and court-appointed personnel by making inflammatory accusations intended to damage the professional reputations of two court-appointed guardians ad litem and three court-appointed psychologists, the judge, and Haugerud, John Murphy’s current wife, either with litigation, threats to sue or complaints to their respective licensing or ethics boards.
Attempted to extort funds from Murphy and his wife by allegedly engaging in efforts to impair their credit and professional reputations through the dissemination of information accusing them of criminal offenses, and making false statements over interstate wires to the media.
Where is the prejudice in requiring the foreclosing party to prove its case with facts raather than presumptions?
There are two big takeaways: (1) Courts are getting more curious about what really happened in the mortgage meltdown and (2) this is one more example of how the TBTF banks are not entitled to any legal presumptions regarding their documents.
What the banks have done is (1) create self-serving documents and then (2) fabricate other documents that rely upon the facts stated or implied in prior fabricated documents. The “greater weight” (piles of false documents) of the evidence falsely leads judges to presume that all that paper must mean something even when it is all trash.
Like other objections or motions in limine practicitioners should strive for a ruling that the foreclosing party must actually prove the facts that they want to be presumed. That includes the funding of the loan, the payment for the loan, and whether any so-called “transfers” were anything more than some words scratched on a piece of paper. They must prove facts not receive the benefit of a legal presumption or factual assumption.
Transfer documents (e.g., assignment of mortgage) and endorsements imply that a purchase took place. Whether such a purchase took place or not, the documents read the same. The error is in assuming the transaction took place when the source of the document has at least questionable credibility. Credibility questions arise whether it is Wells Fargo in creating fake financial accounts and then charging fees for them, Citi fabricating signatures and notarization, BofA or US Bank appearing as the injured party, or Chase claiming to own WAMU loans that not even WAMU had on its books. It’s obvious that the players are
Credibility questions arise whether it is Wells Fargo in creating fake financial accounts and then charging fees for them, Citi fabricating signatures and notarization, BofA or US Bank appearing as the injured party, or Chase claiming to own WAMU loans that not even WAMU had on its books. It’s obvious that the players are allin on the same “game,” to wit: keeping ivnestors and homeowners in the dark while the banks trade “paper.”
That includes the funding of the loan, the payment for the loan, and whether any so-called “transfers” were anything more than some words scratched on a piece of paper. They must prove facts not presume them. Transfer documents and endorsements imply that a purchase took place
Transfer documents and endorsements imply that a purchase took place because it is obvious that nobody goes around giving mortgage loans away. The “presumption” that the foreclosing parties want to use is that there must have been a purchase transaction in real life — facts — as opposed to the presumption that a transaction occurred in which one party purchased a loan from another party.
The presumption to the contrary in the context of hundreds of thousands (perhaps millions) of cases in which documents were fabricated, forged, robo-signed, and falsely notarized leads the courts to a false conclusion and the denial of the homeowner’s basic defense: this foreclosing party has no right, title or interest in my loan and doesn’t represent anyone who does have a right, title or interest in the debt, note or mortgage.
It is wrong for a court to ignore the 50 state settlement, the consent orders and the many cases in which borrowers were successful in undercutting the claim that the foreclosing party had legal standing.
Consider this: if the foreclosing parties really were acting legally, why wouldn’t they want to prove it? That would certainly discredit borrower defenses and send a message to foreclosure defense lawyers that these loans are real and the transfers were in fact purchases. Where is the prejudice in requiring the foreclosing party to prove its case with facts raather than presumptions?
Every day it seems, I read something about Judges in this Country, or someone contacts me about them, or I experience them first hand, or perhaps, one of the attorneys that I have worked with feels their wrath.
The judges hate pro se litigants. The judges hate foreclosure defense lawsuits. The judges hate almost everything and/or everyone, except their fellow judges, or people they knew while they were attorneys, or maybe their own families. It has come to the point, that I told someone the other day, we need to get rid of all govt., and all judges, and start anew.
I’m serious. Most people don’t encounter the crimes that the judges are committing. Or so I thought. I have read some things lately, where more and more people are noticing that unless you are a bank, an attorney on the judge’s good side, or a multi-billion dollar corporation, there is no justice for you in the US.
Read on, and see some of what I am talking about. I have added in parts of articles supporting what I am claiming. There will be links to the articles, so that you can see for yourself, where the information came from:
Corrupt justice: what happens when judges’ bias taints a case?
By Peter S. Green and John Mazor
Sunday 18 October 2015 08.00 EDT
Divorced mother Margaret Besen tells her five-year struggle to get justice, just one story in the hundreds of judicial transgressions across the US revealed in a Guardian and Contently Foundation for Investigative Reporting collaboration
Judge William Kent’s preliminary ruling seemed like a first step toward compromise. Margaret and Stuart Besen, who agreed their marriage was beyond repair, would remain in their suburban Suffolk County house, living in separate rooms – and keeping away from each other – while sharing custody until a resolution could be reached.
But within weeks, the situation deteriorated. Stuart Besen, a politically connected attorney for the town of Huntington, had an anger problem, Margaret told authorities. The couple’s screaming matches left Margaret feeling intimidated and their children – a daughter, 11, and son, 7 – terrified, she said. So in August of that year she obtained an order of protection prohibiting Stuart from harassing her. Three weeks later, Stuart entered Margaret’s bedroom and hovered over her as she slept, she told police. They arrested him for violating the order, reporting that Stuart had stared down at Margaret with his arms folded on three consecutive nights. She got temporary possession of the family home.
In the years that followed, Besen’s hopes for an equitable settlement dwindled as she battled a series of harsh and hard-to-explain decisions against her. Though she could never prove anything, she suspected that the scales had tipped for reasons unrelated to the evidence in her case. If true, Besen faced what experts say is one of the most troubling threats to our nation’s system of justice: judges, who, through incompetence, bias or outright corruption, prevent the wronged from getting a fair hearing in our courts.
“The decorum and bias and the perfectly unethical behavior of the judges is really rampant,” said Amanda Lundergan, a defense attorney in Royal Palm Beach, Florida, who confronted a nest of judicial conflicts in her state’s rapid-fire foreclosure rulings – dubbed the “rocket-docket” – following the housing market collapse. “It’s judicial bullying.”
Judges in local, state and federal courts across the country routinely hide their connections to litigants and their lawyers. These links can be social – they may have been law school classmates or share common friends – political, financial or ideological. In some instances the two may have mutual investment interests. They might be in-laws. Occasionally they are literally in bed together. While it’s unavoidable that such relationships will occur, when they do create a perception of bias, a judge is duty-bound to at the very least disclose that information, and if it is creates an actual bias, allow a different judge to take over.
All too often, however, the conflicted jurist says nothing and proceeds to rule in favor of the connected party, while the loser goes off without realizing an undisclosed bias doomed her case.
Hundreds of judicial transgressions have been uncovered during the last decade, with results that cost the defeated litigants their home, business, custody, health or freedom.
But court critics say that one reason judicial violations are common is because they frequently go unpunished. When litigants ask a judge to back away because of a conflict, they risk being told no, then face possible retaliation, so many don’t bother. If a litigant or an attorney files a complaint with an oversight body, there’s only about a 10% chance that state court authorities will properly investigate the allegation, according to a Contently.org analysis of data from 12 states.
Photograph: Contently.org
The analysis shows that a dozen of these commissions collectively dismissed out of hand 90% of the complaints filed during the last five years, tossing 33,613 of 37,216 grievances without conducting any substantive inquiry. When they did take a look – 3,693 times between 2010 and 2014 – investigators found wrongdoing almost half the time, issuing disciplinary actions in 1,751 cases, about 47%.
The actions taken ranged from a letter of warning to censure, a formal sanction that indicates a judge is guilty of misconduct but does not merit suspension or removal.
Actually removing a judge was a rarity. Just 19 jurists in 12 states were ordered off the bench for malfeasance, which is about three per decade for each state. And even that result is becoming less common, with only one removal in 2014 and three in 2013 among all 12 states.
The states examined – California, Texas, New York, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Wisconsin, Indiana, Minnesota, Colorado, Washington, Georgia and South Carolina – were chosen because they comprise a representative sample from different populations and areas of the country and because they had matching data for the years 2010 through 2014.
Judicial discipline at the federal level is almost non-existent. A Contently.org examination of the most recent five years of complaint data shows that 5,228 grievances were lodged against federal jurists between 2010 and 2014, including 2,561 that specifically alleged bias or conflict of interest. But only three judges were disciplined during those years and each got the mildest rebuke on the books: censure or reprimand. None was suspended or removed.
Margaret won a court order of protection barring Stuart from contact with her children for a year. But when Kent issued his final decree less than six weeks later, he awarded Stuart full custody, while Margaret was allowed only supervised visits. And he ordered Margaret to pay back half the cost of her nursing degree and to sell her diamond engagement ring and split the proceeds with Stuart. The judge also reversed the support arrangements. While Stuart would pay $1,500 a month in maintenance to Margaret, she now owed Stuart $153.90 a week for the children, even though she was earning about $13,000 a year as a part-time aide in an assisted-living facility.
Margaret began to look into her husband’s dealings and discovered, through searching public records, that he and judge Kent had possible connections. In 2010, Stuart was appointed as the Suffolk County representative on a statewide commission for vetting local judicial candidates. That same year, an organization based at Stuart Besen’s Garden City law office, the Long Island Coalition for Responsible Government, donated $7,500 to candidate Richard Ambro, who got elected and became one of Kent’s fellow Supreme Court judges in Suffolk’s 10th district. In his role as Huntington’s town lawyer, Besen argued cases before these very judges. He’d entered a circle of judicial insiders.
“I’m in the middle of a large group of people who’ve got money and influence and who are all connected,” said Margaret Besen. “I’m not being afforded an opportunity to get a fair shake.”
Above: Margaret Besen stands in front of the former Besen family home, now unoccupied in Commack, Long Island. Photograph: Alan Chin
Margaret had no way of knowing whether the connections she uncovered played any role in how Kent ruled in her case. But her concern deepened when she made an additional discovery about her house. Kent had ordered the Besen home, the most valuable marital asset, to be sold and the proceeds divided, putting Margaret in line to receive possibly hundreds of thousands of dollars. Then she found an online listing offering the property for sale – with the judge’s wife, Patricia Kent, as broker. The home, which was listed for $749,999 with Patricia Kent’s photo and contact information on Realty Connect USA, is currently more than $15,000 in arrears on its property taxes and no longer appears to be actively offered. Margaret was evicted from the house in 2013 and lives in a modest apartment a few miles away. She has yet to receive a penny for her interest in the property.
Scott L Cummings, a professor of legal ethics at UCLA law school, said the case raised “significant ethical red flags”, because of the judge’s wife’s alleged involvement in offering the Besen family home for sale. “Not knowing the details of how his spouse might have been assigned as broker, the idea that a judge might benefit financially from the sale of a property in dispute in a pending matter seems to raise a serious question of impartiality.”
Ronald Rotunda, a professor at Chapman University law school in Orange, California, said: “What judge Kent did here seems odd. The husband makes over a half million a year, she makes $13,000 a year, and the judge orders her to pay child support (which is tax free to him and not deductible for her).”
But a culture of judicial impunity extends far beyond Long Island’s county courts. Indeed, even the US supreme court has been tarnished on this issue.
Justice Steven Breyer owned $215,000 in health-care stocks when deciding on the legality of the Affordable Care Act in 2012. Justice Samuel Alito’s portfolio included $2,000 in stock in The Walt Disney Co. in 2008, the year the court heard Disney, FCC v. Fox Television Stations. And perhaps most famously, justice Antonin Scalia has participated in the Bush v. Gore case, even though his son Eugene’s law firm represented one of the parties. In another case, Scalia remained in the panel despite having gone on a duck hunting trip with former Vice-President Dick Cheney while he was being sued to reveal the details of secret meetings he held with oil company executives in the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
The online vitriol directed at unscrupulous judges, which began in the mid- 2000s, has built to a howling digital crescendo. Websites including The Robe Probe, The Judiciary Report and The Robing Room, which rate judges the way Yelp rates restaurants, are rife with railing as embittered, mostly anonymous plaintiffs rip into judicial decisions they feel were biased or corrupt.
In an appeal of a case in West Virginia court, A.T. Massey Coal Co. CEO Don Blankenship spent $3m to elect Brent Benjamin, who ultimately provided the swing vote that overturned a $50m judgment against his company. Benjamin rebuffed repeated demands that the newly elected justice recuse himself because of his obvious conflict.
The US Supreme Court ruled that Benjamin’s bias was so extreme that his failure to step aside violated Caperton’s right to due process under the Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment. The case, which spawned Grisham’s 2008 best-seller, “The Appeal,” underscored the kind of underhanded dealing that has stained the judiciary.
A further nudge for reform came last year when the Center for Public Integrity published a report on financial conflicts of interest. Among its findings: on 26 occasions in the preceding three years, federal appellate judges ruled on cases involving companies in which they owned stock or where they had a financial tie to an attorney appearing before them.
A further nudge for reform came last year when the Center for Public Integrity published a report on financial conflicts of interest. Among its findings: on 26 occasions in the preceding three years, federal appellate judges ruled on cases involving companies in which they owned stock or where they had a financial tie to an attorney appearing before them.
It also created a grading system to gauge how diligent each state was in collecting personal financial information from its judges, including stock ownership and outside sources of income, and how accessible that data was to the public. The center said that 42 states, plus the District of Columbia, failed its test. Six others earned a D grade, while two – California and Maryland – got Cs. California’s score, 77, the highest of any state, was seven points below the federal government’s grade of 84.
The report highlighted the type of conflict that can be most readily identified and that doing so requires full disclosure from the judges. Stock ownership, even if minimal, should automatically disqualify a judge from hearing a case, many experts believe. “If a judge owns a single share in a company involved in a case, he should recuse himself instantly,” says Rotunda, a leading law scholar.
It’s been more than two years since Margaret Besen has seen her children, who are now 12 and 16. There’s no money to pay the court supervisor, so they can’t visit. Nor does Besen have the funds to continue fighting. Kent retired shortly after making his decision.
“The hardest thing in my life is that I can’t be with my children and I can’t have an impact on my children’s upbringing,” Besen said over coffee at a Long Island diner. “A lot of people do not have any idea how the judicial system works or doesn’t work until you’re in it. We think we’re in a democratic society. We think we’re run by rules. But they are not being upheld by the court at all.”
In recent years, America’s corporations have created a private system for handling disputes that benefits them greatly while denying consumers their day in court.
Worse, according to a recent series in The Times, that system has become vast and more entrenched as companies increasingly require customers, employees, investors, patients and other consumers to agree in advance to arbitrate any disputes that arise in their dealings with a company, rather than sue in a court of law.
Such forced-arbitration clauses, found in the fine print of contracts, also typically bar aggrieved parties from pressing their claims as a group in a class action, often the only practical way for individuals to challenge corporations. In addition, corporations effectively control the arbitration process, including the selection of the arbitrator and the rules of evidence, a stacked deck if ever there was one.
As if that is not troubling enough, it is extremely difficult to avoid or get out of forced-arbitration clauses and class-action bans, particularly since they were upheld by two misguided Supreme Court decisions in 2011 and in 2013.
Photo
Richard Cordray, director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, center, with colleagues at a hearing in Denver last week.CreditBrennan Linsley/Associated Press
From 2010 to 2014, corporations prevailed in four out of five cases where they asked federal judges to dismiss class-action lawsuits and compel arbitration, according to The Times’s articles. People who were blocked from going to court as a group usually dropped their claims entirely, in part because class actions are often the only affordable way to file lawsuits. If successful, they can deter future corporate wrongdoing because even small payouts, multiplied over all similarly mistreated customers, can be very large.
Indeed, faced with arbitration, it appears that most people do not pursue remedies to their grievances at all. Verizon, with more than 125 million subscribers, faced 65 consumer arbitrations between 2010 and 2014, The Times’s report found. Sprint, with more than 57 million subscribers, faced six. Time Warner Cable, with 15 million subscribers, faced seven.
Even more disturbing, the shift away from the civil justice system has gone beyond disputes about money. Nursing homes, obstetrics practices and private schools increasingly use forced-arbitration clauses to shield themselves from being taken to court over alleged discrimination, elder abuse, fraud, hate crimes, medical malpractice and wrongful death.
For the most part, Congress has looked the other way. Federal regulators, however, are starting to fight back. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is expected to propose a rule soon to forbid arbitration clauses that ban class actions in cases involving financial services and products. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which is expected to issue updated nursing home regulations next year, is considering a ban on forced arbitration clauses in nursing home contracts.
Reversing the broader trend of forced arbitration, however, will require public outcry loud and long enough to stir the White House and Congress to action. Many people interviewed in The Times’s series did not realize that their right to sue had been lost until they needed it. A common refrain was the disbelief that this could happen in America. But it is happening, and it needs to stop.
‘Iqbal’ Brings Seven Years of Bad Luck for Plaintiffs
OPINION: The heightened pleading standard established in 2009 is based on faulty propositions.
Arthur H. Bryant, The National Law Journal
May 23, 2016
The seventh anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2009 decision in Ashcroft v. Iqbal was May 18. It’s a date that should live in infamy.
A 5-4 decision, Iqbal ignored reality — and the fact that truth is stranger than fiction. It flouted the process for amending the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. And it particularly limited access to justice for civil rights, employment discrimination and individual plaintiffs.
Seventy years before Iqbal, in 1938, the Federal Rules were adopted to get rid of “fact” pleading, which the rule-makers thought “led to wasteful disputes about distinctions that … were arbitrary or metaphysical, too often cutting off adjudication on the merits.” Under the new Rule 8, to start a lawsuit, the plaintiff had to file a complaint with “a short and plain statement of the claim showing the pleader is entitled to relief.”
As the court later explained in Conley v. Gibson, the complaint did not have to “set out the facts in detail.” It just had to give the defendant “fair notice of what the plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” A motion to dismiss would only be granted if “it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.” Then, the plaintiff could take discovery, to find out what the defendant and other relevant people knew and when they knew it. After that, the court would determine whether there was sufficient proof to require a trial.
In Iqbal, the court rejected a complaint alleging that high-level U.S. officials had a Pakistani Muslim and thousands of other Arab men illegally arrested and detained after the 9/11 attacks because of “their race, religion, and national origin … and not because of any evidence” of their “involvement in supporting terrorist activity.”
To do so, the court changed the rules. It held that, from now on, to “survive a motion to dismiss, a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.” Dismissal no longer turned on whether the complaint provided “fair notice” to the defendant; it turned on whether the claim was “plausible on its face.” How were judges to determine that? By drawing on their “judicial experience and common sense.”
Motions to dismiss were immediately filed throughout the federal courts. Judges’ and lawyers’ workloads increased enormously. The lower courts and lawyers are still struggling to figure out how the new system is supposed to work — and, if they can, make it fair.
For three reasons, however, it’s become increasingly clear that Iqbal was a mistake.
First, whatever one thinks about the allegations in the case, the Iqbal pleading standard is based on a proposition — allegations probably aren’t true if they’re not plausible on their face — that is false. Reality keeps teaching us that. None of us, including federal judges using their “judicial experience and common sense,” would have believed that any of the following was plausible a few years ago:
• Donald Trump would be the presumptive Republican Party nominee for president of the United States of America.
• A prominent candidate for president would propose banning all Muslims from entering America or call women “fat pigs,” “dogs” and “disgusting animals.”
• Same-sex marriage would be legal nationwide.
• The U.S. government would obtain and be able to search virtually all Americans’ phone records.
• Olympic champion Bruce Jenner would become a woman, Caitlyn Jenner.
• Federal, state and local governments would battle over what kind of bathroom people such as Caitlyn Jenner could use.
Similar implausible things happen every day.
Second, Iqbal effectively rewrote the Federal Rules without following the legally established rules for amending them. Under the Rules Enabling Act, before rules are changed, detailed procedures must be followed involving the Advisory Committees to the U.S. Judicial Conference’s Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure; the Standing Committee itself; notice to and comment from lawyers, judges and the public; the U.S. Judicial Conference; the Supreme Court; and Congress — so the changes are fully considered and fair.
In 2002, the court unanimously rejected a company’s plea for a heightened pleading standard in employment discrimination cases, saying that result “must be obtained by the process of amending the Federal Rules, and not judicial interpretation.” It should have said that in Iqbal, too.
Third, Iqbal is especially harmful to civil rights, employment discrimination and individual plaintiffs. Last year, the most comprehensive study of Iqbal’s effects, “Measuring the Impact of Plausibility Pleading,” was published in the Virginia Law Review. It found that Iqbal increased dismissals of most cases by 10 percent, but employment discrimination and civil rights cases much more (16 percent and 19 percent, respectively). Cases filed by individuals were also dismissed far more often (18 percent), but not cases filed by corporations.
In theory, this could mean that only bad cases were dismissed more promptly. But, if that were true, a higher percentage of the cases remaining in court would succeed. They didn’t. These plaintiffs were just disproportionately denied a chance to prove their claims.
The high court should reverse the Iqbal decision. Whether cases proceed should turn on the facts and the law, not on whether judges think the allegations are plausible.
Arthur H. Bryant is the chairman of Public Justice, a national public interest law firm dedicated to advancing and preserving access to justice. His practice focuses on consumers’ rights, workers’ rights, civil rights, environmental protection, and corporate and government accountability.
The BlackRobed Mafia 
