☕️ PUZZLING ☙ Thursday, March 23, 2023 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠
Australia reverses on boosters; the great Stanford law school rebellion; DA Alvin scrambles to indict Trump; Israel pans anti-Christian bill; and we check in on the animals.
Good morning, C&C, and Happy Thursday! Your roundup today includes: Australia reverses course on boosters; the bizarre, sordid tale of Stanford’s woke law school rebellion last week; New York DA scrambles to get Trump indictment; Israel freezes anti-Christian bill; and you won’t believe the latest delusional young lady who is VERY confused about her identity.
🗞 *THE C&C ARMY POST* 🗞
🪖 Many of you have already noticed, and many will soon see on various media outlets that one of my clients, a well-known courageous covid doc, was informed two days ago that a national medical licensing board (NOT the Florida medical board) revoked his long-standing specialty certification — just for “spreading misinformation,” and not because of any issue related to patient care, for which he’s never had a complaint.
Per my normal custom, I won’t be discussing the details of his case on this Substack, since I don’t want to become PART of the case and possibly influence it negatively. I will however post links to media and news pieces about the developing case when they appear.
But — you can count on the fact he will receive a vigorous defense.
🗞💬 *WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY* 💬🗞
🦘 We got some hopeful news for our Australian friends yesterday, when news broke of the ATAGI’s new, updated 2023 covid guidelines. ATAGI is the Australian Government’s Covid Technical Advisory Group on Immunization, which has become a household word in Australia, although it’s a word usually accompanied by other household words that you can’t say in front of the children.
Anyway, forget about booster mandates! Nevermind! At this point in 2023, ATAGI only recommends covid shots for two groups: people aged 65+ and people 18 and over who are at-risk. The new guidelines actually recommend AGAINST covid shots for healthy kids under 18, or even for at-risk kids under five — the opposite of U.S. FDA recommendations.
And I was gobsmacked to see this next section in the ATAGI’s latest guidelines, which actually used the word “risks” in the section headline, and acknowledged myocarditis and pericarditis — another breakthrough! — and, though I searched everywhere, I could not find the words “very rare” or any other reassuring technical mumbo-jumbo suggesting it’s almost impossible to be injured by the shots.
You have to dig down into the linked 13-page provider information sheet to find the usual reassuring gobbledegook, and even there, ATAGI only says that the benefit outweighs the “rare risk.” Not “very rare.” Neither does it quantify the risk, which a well-respected Canadian study calculated to be 1 in 5,000.
I have a question: who should get to decide whether a particular risk is justified by a benefit? The government? Or the person taking the risk?
This is a gigantic U-turn for the Australian government. Oh, they’ll gaslight everyone by claiming they ALWAYS acknowledged the risk of myocarditis, but the truth is the authorities promised OVER AND OVER this was the “safest vaccine ever made in human history.” The fact that the Australian government has retreated from almost all recommendations and is now recommending AGAINST jabbing healthy kids is huge news.
Think about it like this: Imagine a giant puzzle. The pieces that keep falling into place on the board are slowly revealing the truth. Every little piece that falls adds a little more, making it easier to find the next piece, and at some point nobody will be able to deny what the picture shows.
We never get any pieces that don’t fit.
In other words, none of the slowly-developing stories make the shots look better. We never find out anything GOOD about the injections. We never see headlines like, “Study Shows Jabs Cure Baldness!,” or “Celebrities Cite Jabs for New Bursts of Creative Energy and Relief for Aching Joints.”
The best they can do is play dumb for as long as they can. THEY might not be helping, but WE are sorting the pieces every single day, and we are relentless.
🔥 A very curious but ultimately uplifting story has been playing out in the cold marble halls of Stanford Law School. National Review ran the story with the slightly-exaggerated headline, “Stanford Law School Sends Entire Class to Detention.”
Here’s the background. Last week, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Kyle Duncan went to Stanford to give a dry little legal talk to a tiny remnant of sanity at the school, in the form of a sparse Federalist Society outpost having a handful of intellectually-starved conservative law students. But the majority of liberal students couldn’t stand the idea of Judge Duncan, a Constitutional originalist, being anywhere near them, much less actually opening his mouth and emitting dangerous, fascistic, triggering, and microaggressive CONSERVATIVE IDEAS on THEIR campus.
So an angry band of queers, cross-dressers, and generally unattractive and anti-social liberals crashed the otherwise dry legal talk, generally wreaked havoc, and savagely shouted down the saucy, appointed-for-life judge, who — to his great credit — did his best to shout right back over them. But he was outnumbered by the natives.
It was the classic heckler’s veto.
The story might have been otherwise unremarkable, just another campus conservative speaker shouted down by intellectual infants (albeit a very powerful and highly-respected speaker) but there was a twist, an escalation. About midpoint during the fracas, a bloblike Stanford professor oozed up and took the podium. Everyone sane expected her to quell the nascent rebellion, but instead, she shockingly read a PRE-PREPARED, six-minute “statement” denouncing the judge and supporting the obstreperous, bizarrely-attired and mostly-masked day-school student dropouts.
The defiant professor was Stanford’s DEI administrator (of course), Tirien Steinbach, if that’s her real name. It turned out before the talk she’d sent an email to students giving lip service to freedom of speech but soberly informing the coddled youngsters that the judge’s “presence on campus represents a significant hit to [LGBTQ+ students’] sense of belonging.”
A HIT. In other words, violence.
According to students who were there, five other law-school administrators also attended the talk but did absolutely nothing to halt the chaos. Worse than useless.
Judge Duncan responded by leaving, appropriately angry, and then penning a pretty spicy screed about how Stanford law-school standards have fallen below the Pillars of the Earth, passed Hades going around 90 m.p.h., and are now spiraling out of control in orbit around a gigantic black hole of bat feces somewhere in space. (Or words to that effect.)
The judge’s sharp criticism of Stanford compelled the law school’s Dean, Jennifer Martinez, to transmit a formal written apology expressing the school’s regret about Judge Duncan’s ill-treatment on campus:
That should have been that. But on Monday, hundreds of Stanford student activists, which National Review described as an “eerie horde,” lined the hallways outside her Constitutional-law classroom to protest Dean Martinez’s apology. They also masked her whiteboard with marxist prattle:
In public statements this week, Stanford’s queer law students — apparently a majority of students overall — made three demands of Dean Martinez: (1) she must rescind her formal apology to Judge Duncan, (2) restrict what speakers the Federalist Society is allowed to invite to campus and define what topics may be discussed, and (3) expel the Federalist Society’s board members for inviting Judge Duncan in the first place.
Dean Martinez considered their demands and responded yesterday. She did not capitulate. DEI administrator Steinbach (who joined the student protest) has been placed on administrative leave. Dean Martinez then published a ten-page memorandum addressed to the entire student body which used small words to explain what “freedom of speech” means, and required all Stanford law students to attend a full day of remedial constitutional training.
According to Dean Martinez’s statement, the new training is to include instruction on how the heckler’s veto is totally illegitimate, and how students must tolerate and reckon with opposing viewpoints — both as an inherent virtue, and also because students will become appallingly poor lawyers unless they develop this basic mental discipline.
If anybody at Stanford thinks that the LGBTQ+ army will quietly submit to constitutional re-education, they haven’t been paying attention. That training session is going to be LIT. Will there be armed guards to keep the peace? Will disruptive students be expelled or pampered?
The whole thing is a perfectly disastrous look for Stanford, which after all is training up the next generation of federal judges and Supreme Court appointees.
I can’t wait to watch how the Stanford officials grapple with the mess they’ve made with their own diversity and inclusion policies.
🔥 The Wall Street Journal ran a story yesterday headlined, “Grand Jury Weighing Donald Trump Hush-Money Payment Scheduled to Return Thursday.”
The Grand Jury was originally scheduled to meet yesterday to finalize deliberations over Trump’s indictment. But grotesque Soros-funded District Attorney Alvin Bragg called off yesterday’s meeting for an undisclosed reason, and reset the panel for today.
According to undisclosed sources (a leaker), Trump’s legal team offered a witness on Monday who discredited one of the DA’s main witnesses. So the Journal is speculating that DA Bragg scrambled to find another witness for today, to rebut Trump’s witness’ testimony.
The Grand Jury will conclude when prosecutors present formal charges and ask the jury for an indictment. It could happen today, or not. Nobody knows.
🔥 The Jerusalem Post ran a story yesterday headlined, “Netanyahu: Knesset Will Not Advance Anti-Christian Laws.”
A controversial bill filed early this week by ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel’s Knesset (their Congress) would have made it illegal for Christians in that country to tell Jews about the Gospel: that Jesus came to Earth, lived a sinless life, and allowed Himself to be executed to save the souls of anyone who would trust in Him.
Jewish newspapers immediately ran with the controversy:
But yesterday, Prime Minister Netanyahu appeared to quell the controversy by tweeting that he would NOT advance the troubling law.
As Haaretz’s article noted (above), banning Christian evangelism would’ve been a pretty bad look right when Israel needs all the help it can get. Ironically, most American jews liberally oppose Israel’s self-defense, and so American Christians have become Israel’s most important allies. Evangelistic Christians are some of the beleaguered country’s strongest supporters because they believe the Bible promised that those who bless Israel will be blessed, and those who curse Israel will likewise be cursed.
There’s a lot happening in Israel just now, and it’s happening fast. I keep trying to pen a comprehensive update but things on the ground are just changing too fast. Stay tuned.
🔥 Yesterday, Libs of TikTok brought us this next confused young lady, who is doing her best to come to terms with the fact that she really is a hawk, trapped inside a human body:
We can give liberals all the credit for “empowering” our young people to view themselves as animals. Most liberals think animals are morally superior to human beings, which requires belief in another insane delusion, that animals even HAVE morals in the first place.
I will admit that our family cat, “Kitty,” doesn’t ever drive an SUV or turn the thermostat up over 68. But you should see sometime how badly she tortures the neighborhood’s garden lizards, which — while I am quite fond of the furry little pest — is exactly what she would do to me, if she could somehow pull it off.
Sometimes I catch Kitty staring at me, salivating and obviously wishing I were garden-lizard sized. Then I give her a treat. It’s not going to happen, Kitty.
At least she doesn’t think she’s a hawk.
Have a terrific Thursday, and I’ll see you back here tomorrow for another informative installment of Coffee & Covid.
Join C&C in moving the needle and changing minds. I could use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/-learn-how-to-get-involved-
Twitter: @jchilders98.
Truth Social: @jchilders98.
MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.
C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com
Emailed Daily Newsletter: https://www.coffeeandcovid.com
I am both over 65 and immune suppressed. My WBC count is below normal due to current chemotherapy . Can anyone explain how, if my WBC cannot respond to combat any pathogen, what utility would getting the injection have? I cannot make antibodies to anything.
I have seen advice that says immunocompromised just need more boosters. Tell me the science that works here.
I cannot believe Stanford hasn't bowed to the mob (yet). It's almost like a twinkle of hope.