"Big Pharma companies have a total and complete exemption from lawsuits as a result of any and all injury and death that result from taking their experimental injection. This has led many vaccine injured to believe that they have no recourse to civil "
Hi Kirsch,
This is literally Constitutionally unlawful, as per the Seventh amendment th…
"Big Pharma companies have a total and complete exemption from lawsuits as a result of any and all injury and death that result from taking their experimental injection. This has led many vaccine injured to believe that they have no recourse to civil "
Hi Kirsch,
This is literally Constitutionally unlawful, as per the Seventh amendment the Constitution states civil lawsuits must preserve the right of trial by jury. The current system uses "special masters" which are not Constitutionally valid.
I drafted a set of proposals on how a lawsuit could nullify legal immunity, but Children's Health Defense oddly seemed uninterested in striking at the heart of the legal fallacy. I know no State governor nor politician will be interested in spearheading this because they've all signed on. I've never taken the shot, so I personally don't have grounds to contest the legality of the ruling.
I documented the various legal issues with the "immunity to liability" law here (available in .odt and .pdf format):
If you were able to fight the case all the way to the Supreme Court and have them strike down civil lawsuit immunity it would deal the biggest death blow to corrupt pharmaceutical companies in centuries.
there is and always has been a statute on the Federal books about mandating EUA!! The shots and the masks were always EUA(NEVER FULL APPROVAL!! FDA LIED!) So that is 1 way but also with all the new information coming out against Pfizer from FOIA, it definitely looks like MEDICAL FRAUD!!! Pfizer knew when it released the vaccine that there were 1291 severe reactions that they saw and they never , NEVER told anyone!!! That sounds like FRAUD to me, they knowingly and willingly let it come out!!! LOOK IT P! IT IS ALL THERE FOR THE WINNNG!!!
I’m interested in this topic too. I’ve had conversations with a town police officer and county sheriff in recent weeks, and both told me they’ve been instructed, by the state Attorney General and county District Attorneys, not to pursue investigating reports of criminal acts related to Covid-19 mitigations. They said verbally instructed (I asked if they’d received written instructions and they said no.) So, now I’m trying to use FOIA tools to find out if there have been written instructions distributed among prosecutors, police, sheriffs and judges in the last two years.
Merger of public health and law enforcement is a thing that Todd Callender has been talking about a lot — legally executed through 2002 Homeland Security Act, 2004 Project Bioshield Act, 2005 PREP Act, and 2006 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act.
Also relevant is Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts opinion, in an early Constitutional case (South Bay Pentecostal v. Newsom, May 2020)
that the judicial branch may not provide constitutional review of governmental executive and legislative acts during a declared emergency. Roberts claimed it was because judges are appointed, and so farther from the electorate than legislators and executives.
But more likely, the source of his opinion was a section in the PREP Act of 2005 (42 USC247d-6d(b)(7) that “no court of the United States, or of any State, shall have subject matter jurisdiction to review, whether by mandamus or otherwise, any action of the Secretary” of Health and Human Services, under a “declaration” made by the Secretary. So Congress essentially granted US-HHS Secretary dictatorial powers that are triggered as soon as the Secretary declares a public health emergency, and at the same time, Congress rendered itself and all US courts impotent to depose the HHS dictator once he or she has claimed that ruling power.
"Big Pharma companies have a total and complete exemption from lawsuits as a result of any and all injury and death that result from taking their experimental injection. This has led many vaccine injured to believe that they have no recourse to civil "
Hi Kirsch,
This is literally Constitutionally unlawful, as per the Seventh amendment the Constitution states civil lawsuits must preserve the right of trial by jury. The current system uses "special masters" which are not Constitutionally valid.
I drafted a set of proposals on how a lawsuit could nullify legal immunity, but Children's Health Defense oddly seemed uninterested in striking at the heart of the legal fallacy. I know no State governor nor politician will be interested in spearheading this because they've all signed on. I've never taken the shot, so I personally don't have grounds to contest the legality of the ruling.
I documented the various legal issues with the "immunity to liability" law here (available in .odt and .pdf format):
https://gitlab.com/TheUnderdog/general-research/-/tree/main/ViolatesDueProcess
If you were able to fight the case all the way to the Supreme Court and have them strike down civil lawsuit immunity it would deal the biggest death blow to corrupt pharmaceutical companies in centuries.
there is and always has been a statute on the Federal books about mandating EUA!! The shots and the masks were always EUA(NEVER FULL APPROVAL!! FDA LIED!) So that is 1 way but also with all the new information coming out against Pfizer from FOIA, it definitely looks like MEDICAL FRAUD!!! Pfizer knew when it released the vaccine that there were 1291 severe reactions that they saw and they never , NEVER told anyone!!! That sounds like FRAUD to me, they knowingly and willingly let it come out!!! LOOK IT P! IT IS ALL THERE FOR THE WINNNG!!!
I’m interested in this topic too. I’ve had conversations with a town police officer and county sheriff in recent weeks, and both told me they’ve been instructed, by the state Attorney General and county District Attorneys, not to pursue investigating reports of criminal acts related to Covid-19 mitigations. They said verbally instructed (I asked if they’d received written instructions and they said no.) So, now I’m trying to use FOIA tools to find out if there have been written instructions distributed among prosecutors, police, sheriffs and judges in the last two years.
Merger of public health and law enforcement is a thing that Todd Callender has been talking about a lot — legally executed through 2002 Homeland Security Act, 2004 Project Bioshield Act, 2005 PREP Act, and 2006 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act.
Also relevant is Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts opinion, in an early Constitutional case (South Bay Pentecostal v. Newsom, May 2020)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/19A1044
that the judicial branch may not provide constitutional review of governmental executive and legislative acts during a declared emergency. Roberts claimed it was because judges are appointed, and so farther from the electorate than legislators and executives.
But more likely, the source of his opinion was a section in the PREP Act of 2005 (42 USC247d-6d(b)(7) that “no court of the United States, or of any State, shall have subject matter jurisdiction to review, whether by mandamus or otherwise, any action of the Secretary” of Health and Human Services, under a “declaration” made by the Secretary. So Congress essentially granted US-HHS Secretary dictatorial powers that are triggered as soon as the Secretary declares a public health emergency, and at the same time, Congress rendered itself and all US courts impotent to depose the HHS dictator once he or she has claimed that ruling power.