Promoting the clot shot is probably worse than Biden's border crimes. Both Biden and Trump are on the same page granting mainstream "science" a monopoly. Jon Rappoport has gotten to the crux of the matter in his most recent substack discussing the way in which the Suoreme Court appears to be leaning in terms of free speech vs. the medical cartel.
Here is how the Supreme Court could derail the biggest free speech case in US history
JON RAPPOPORT
MAR 19, 2024
∙ PAID
Gateway Pundit:
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Murthy v. Missouri, which concerns communications between federal government officials and social media companies on their content moderation policies and whether this amounts to government suppression or speech censorship. Missouri, Louisiana, and five individuals filed suit arguing that the federal government violated their First Amendment speech rights by influencing social media companies to censor their posts related to the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2020 elections.1
I can think of a dozen ways the Court could justify ruling for the government in this case.
But lurking in the background is the MEDICAL JUSTIFICATION.
The Court could decide free speech opposing SCIENCE is just too egregious and must be censored and squashed, “in order to save lives.”
Meaning: In order to protect what the government SAYS SCIENCE IS.
This latter notion wouldn’t be stated explicitly in the Court’s decision, of course. It would hover in the Justices’ minds like a holy of holies.
SCIENCE.
“No one should be able to attack science under the umbrella of the 1st Amendment.”
Opening the door to criticism of science from all comers would be tantamount to admitting that official science is not the final word.
What are state medical boards saying every day? “We decide what science is. If a doctor contradicts us, we will yank his license. We will use that power to silence him.”2
In its final judgment, the Court could rule that COVID was such a huge emergency and threat, the 1st Amendment could be temporality suspended or “softened.”
But again, what the Justices would really be thinking is: “We can’t allow a free-for-all open field where anyone can attack ‘established science’.”
This was exactly the position of the Vatican during the period when it held enormous political power. Just substitute “our version of the Word of God” for science.
Why do you think I’ve been writing about the medical cartel and the medical police state for the past 35 years? Because it has monopolistic power. Because it can kill and maim with impunity. Because the government supports the cartel.
And now we have this crucial case before the Supreme Court.
This is the modern version of a King about to tell a private citizen the Vatican has the right to treat him as a heretic.
If indeed the Court rules that way, consider how government censorship will be stepped up and expanded. And how criticism of MEDICAL will be treated.
Today, as I write this, I’m looking at a photo of several doctors—free speech advocates—outside the Supreme Court. They’re all grinning, as if they’re guests on a popular talk show.
My impression is, they feel secure in their careers and academic positions, no matter how the Supremes rule—so why wouldn’t they be happy?
Not a good sign. Not a good sign at all.
My impression is: confident lions, who are really lambs heading to the slaughter.
Do they really understand what the Justices are mulling about MEDICAL and SCIENCE in their unspoken thoughts?
I don’t trust any of the lawyers, backed up by “good doctors,” who are arguing for free speech in this case.
Because SOMEONE has to crack the eggs in the Justices’ minds and forcefully show them that science isn’t one thing, it isn’t unipolar, it isn’t official, it isn’t final, it isn’t the PROPERTY of any government or professional group.
That’s a very tall order. That’s a very high mountain to climb.
In the Justices’ minds, it’s higher than Democrat or Republican.
It’s higher than the Constitution itself.
Finally, the Justices are also gripped by the fatuous modern idea that INFORMATION, more valuable than gold or diamonds, is a sacred Trust.
And the only people who can be vested to control it should work for the government.
An extremely powerful and cogent argument has to be made against THAT.
On our side, do we have the very best people making that argument?
I doubt it.
We’re in deep waters. Don’t jump ship. We need all hands on deck. Now, and going forward.
With all the historical track record of the accepted "standard medical treatments" of past times that was later found to be completely wrong (blood-letting supposedly killed George Washington, early XRay machines caused horrible burns and radiation poisoning, shock treatments, lobotomies, spray your baby with DDT, the 1950-60s Thalidomide deformaties, the 90s Fen-Phen craze, and CONSTANT recalls of "FDA-approved" drugs that have killed and maimed and caused cancer in 100s of 1000s re: Vioxx, Oxycontin, J&J Baby Powder, etc, etc) it's difficult for me to believe the SC would take this "what the govt says IS SCIENCE so Don't Question It!" track. But at this point, nothing would surprise me.😒 🤷♀️
Loved the Fatty Arbuckle silent movie--and the very appropo tune that someone cooked up to speak the truth about "trusting the science" was "spot on". I'll be that woman at the end--kicking the doctor/policeman/scientist in the shins!!
Thank you so much. I have 50+ songs on the Scamdemic that I've written since March 2020. Here is my first one: THE VIRUS IS MY GOD. The “virus” is claimed to have invaded a town in the old west and soon worshiped as a new idol among the populace: Watch the music video here: https://turfseer.substack.com/p/the-virus-is-my-god.
I enjoyed reading this Rappaport piece. Cracking the eggs in the Justices’ minds could be like the uncracked eggs in Trump’s mind regarding his belief in the “clot shots”. This is correct, the idea about what SCIENCE really is! Thank you. Biden knows that what he’s doing is harmful to the USA whereas the egg is uncracked with Trump. Possibly?!
They both believe they are saving humanity by promoting the clot shots. It's what is known as modern day idolatry (i.e, the belief in novel pathogenic viruses).
There may be reasons he is taking this stance. Imagine if he constantly came out against the vaccines. It is likely to be a very bad decision for him, jeopardizing his chances of making it back into office. Then where would we be?
The left are already accusing him of crimes re: the vax.
This is why he lost in 2020. He was outplayed by the medical cartel. If he was smart he would have used his bully pulpit to convince people that they were being conned. But you know he's not very smart!
He did not mandate it. Every person had a decision to make whether to take it or not. I did not. It was my choice. You need to stop being a victim and take responsibility for the choices you decided…. Granted, they were hard but not impossible.
Yes unjust but just as unjust with Trump praising the clot shots as he did last week. And please don't tell me he was "misled."
In your mind, how does this compare with the Biden border crimes? Just wondering …
Promoting the clot shot is probably worse than Biden's border crimes. Both Biden and Trump are on the same page granting mainstream "science" a monopoly. Jon Rappoport has gotten to the crux of the matter in his most recent substack discussing the way in which the Suoreme Court appears to be leaning in terms of free speech vs. the medical cartel.
Here is how the Supreme Court could derail the biggest free speech case in US history
JON RAPPOPORT
MAR 19, 2024
∙ PAID
Gateway Pundit:
The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Murthy v. Missouri, which concerns communications between federal government officials and social media companies on their content moderation policies and whether this amounts to government suppression or speech censorship. Missouri, Louisiana, and five individuals filed suit arguing that the federal government violated their First Amendment speech rights by influencing social media companies to censor their posts related to the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2020 elections.1
I can think of a dozen ways the Court could justify ruling for the government in this case.
But lurking in the background is the MEDICAL JUSTIFICATION.
The Court could decide free speech opposing SCIENCE is just too egregious and must be censored and squashed, “in order to save lives.”
Meaning: In order to protect what the government SAYS SCIENCE IS.
This latter notion wouldn’t be stated explicitly in the Court’s decision, of course. It would hover in the Justices’ minds like a holy of holies.
SCIENCE.
“No one should be able to attack science under the umbrella of the 1st Amendment.”
Opening the door to criticism of science from all comers would be tantamount to admitting that official science is not the final word.
What are state medical boards saying every day? “We decide what science is. If a doctor contradicts us, we will yank his license. We will use that power to silence him.”2
In its final judgment, the Court could rule that COVID was such a huge emergency and threat, the 1st Amendment could be temporality suspended or “softened.”
But again, what the Justices would really be thinking is: “We can’t allow a free-for-all open field where anyone can attack ‘established science’.”
This was exactly the position of the Vatican during the period when it held enormous political power. Just substitute “our version of the Word of God” for science.
Why do you think I’ve been writing about the medical cartel and the medical police state for the past 35 years? Because it has monopolistic power. Because it can kill and maim with impunity. Because the government supports the cartel.
And now we have this crucial case before the Supreme Court.
This is the modern version of a King about to tell a private citizen the Vatican has the right to treat him as a heretic.
If indeed the Court rules that way, consider how government censorship will be stepped up and expanded. And how criticism of MEDICAL will be treated.
Today, as I write this, I’m looking at a photo of several doctors—free speech advocates—outside the Supreme Court. They’re all grinning, as if they’re guests on a popular talk show.
My impression is, they feel secure in their careers and academic positions, no matter how the Supremes rule—so why wouldn’t they be happy?
Not a good sign. Not a good sign at all.
My impression is: confident lions, who are really lambs heading to the slaughter.
Do they really understand what the Justices are mulling about MEDICAL and SCIENCE in their unspoken thoughts?
I don’t trust any of the lawyers, backed up by “good doctors,” who are arguing for free speech in this case.
Because SOMEONE has to crack the eggs in the Justices’ minds and forcefully show them that science isn’t one thing, it isn’t unipolar, it isn’t official, it isn’t final, it isn’t the PROPERTY of any government or professional group.
That’s a very tall order. That’s a very high mountain to climb.
In the Justices’ minds, it’s higher than Democrat or Republican.
It’s higher than the Constitution itself.
Finally, the Justices are also gripped by the fatuous modern idea that INFORMATION, more valuable than gold or diamonds, is a sacred Trust.
And the only people who can be vested to control it should work for the government.
An extremely powerful and cogent argument has to be made against THAT.
On our side, do we have the very best people making that argument?
I doubt it.
We’re in deep waters. Don’t jump ship. We need all hands on deck. Now, and going forward.
Without let-up.
-- Jon Rappoport
https://jonrappoport.substack.com/p/scotus-could-derail-biggest-free-speech-case
With all the historical track record of the accepted "standard medical treatments" of past times that was later found to be completely wrong (blood-letting supposedly killed George Washington, early XRay machines caused horrible burns and radiation poisoning, shock treatments, lobotomies, spray your baby with DDT, the 1950-60s Thalidomide deformaties, the 90s Fen-Phen craze, and CONSTANT recalls of "FDA-approved" drugs that have killed and maimed and caused cancer in 100s of 1000s re: Vioxx, Oxycontin, J&J Baby Powder, etc, etc) it's difficult for me to believe the SC would take this "what the govt says IS SCIENCE so Don't Question It!" track. But at this point, nothing would surprise me.😒 🤷♀️
Unfortunately the degree of brainwashing and conformity has reached its apotheosis in these dark times. Thank you for your sagacious comment.
Songs of Medical Hubris
Are they any good physicians left? Or have they all gone the way of the “bad cop”? Listen to Turfseer’s country music hit GOOD COP BAD COP. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/good-cop-bad-cop
A Canadian Nurse is fired for refusing to take the jab. Listen to Turfseer’s protest song A GOOD NURSE: https://turfseer.substack.com/p/a-good-nurse
Hubris infects the medical profession. Watch MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY DISEASE. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/my-way-or-the-highway-disease
DR. GASLIGHT. A doctor causes his patient to question her own sanity. Listen to Turfseer’s new song. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/dr-gaslight
A song about the first major victim of Medical Tyranny. Watch THE BALLAD OF TYPHOID MARY. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/the-ballad-of-typhoid-mary
“Doctor” Fatty Arbuckle and Buster Keaton have joined forces to remind us “Trust the Science.” Watch TRUST THE SCIENCE RAG here: https://turfseer.substack.com/p/trust-the-science-rag
Subscribe to Turfseer's Newsletter. Songs, music videos and much more.
Loved the Fatty Arbuckle silent movie--and the very appropo tune that someone cooked up to speak the truth about "trusting the science" was "spot on". I'll be that woman at the end--kicking the doctor/policeman/scientist in the shins!!
Thank you so much. I have 50+ songs on the Scamdemic that I've written since March 2020. Here is my first one: THE VIRUS IS MY GOD. The “virus” is claimed to have invaded a town in the old west and soon worshiped as a new idol among the populace: Watch the music video here: https://turfseer.substack.com/p/the-virus-is-my-god.
And my latest: WELCOME TO DISEASE X. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/welcome-to-disease-x. Be afraid. Be VERY afraid.
You're VERY creative and resourceful, Turf--KUDOS!
If you're ever in NYC I would be honored to take you out for lunch or dinner!
How very kind of you, Turfseer--likewise...if you're every near Lancaster, PA, let me know and we can connect in person.
I enjoyed reading this Rappaport piece. Cracking the eggs in the Justices’ minds could be like the uncracked eggs in Trump’s mind regarding his belief in the “clot shots”. This is correct, the idea about what SCIENCE really is! Thank you. Biden knows that what he’s doing is harmful to the USA whereas the egg is uncracked with Trump. Possibly?!
They both believe they are saving humanity by promoting the clot shots. It's what is known as modern day idolatry (i.e, the belief in novel pathogenic viruses).
“Doctor” Fatty Arbuckle and his “patient” Buster Keaton join forces to remind us “Trust the Science.” Watch the hit music video TRUST THE SCIENCE RAG here: https://turfseer.substack.com/p/trust-the-science-rag
Most enjoyable! Are you the talented key tickler and singer, Turfseer? Magnificent!
The composer: music and lyrics. I hire people mainly on fiverr to do the music.
There may be reasons he is taking this stance. Imagine if he constantly came out against the vaccines. It is likely to be a very bad decision for him, jeopardizing his chances of making it back into office. Then where would we be?
The left are already accusing him of crimes re: the vax.
This is why he lost in 2020. He was outplayed by the medical cartel. If he was smart he would have used his bully pulpit to convince people that they were being conned. But you know he's not very smart!
No Turfseer, Trump won. We the people lost in 2020. Our vote, our voice, our right to the peaceful exchange of power.
TDS is strong in this one… and not very bright.
To me this is the more important than all of Trumps cases combined.
He did not mandate it. Every person had a decision to make whether to take it or not. I did not. It was my choice. You need to stop being a victim and take responsibility for the choices you decided…. Granted, they were hard but not impossible.
And despicable Biden initially said it would be be voluntary, before he decided to make it as mandatory as he could legally do, through OSHA.
Okay he did not mandate it which is better than Biden. But he still promotes it and for that there's no excuse.