☕️ WAITING FOR GODOT ☙ Saturday, June 22, 2024 ☙ C&C NEWS 🦠

The Supremes still hoarding top decisions; shocking engine fire epidemic; extreme weather mini-roundup; chemtrail scientist calls for geoengineering limits; jab study shatters infant schedule; more.

Good morning, C&C, it’s Saturday! Welcome to the Weekend Edition. Your essential news roundup this morning includes: the Supreme Court disappointed yesterday, continuing to hoard its biggest decisions; hysteria over the Trump Immunity Decision; examining the other big cases still pending; Boeing engine-fire story opens Pandora’s engine-fire box; extreme weather mini roundup—US representative signals chemtrail conspiracy, more hailish news, and Guardian article de-conspiracies the chemtrail theory but is the story even bigger?; and courageous new study shows jab risks for infants and maybe, just maybe, signals a new era in vaxx scrutiny.

🗞💬 WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY 💬🗞

👨‍⚖️ COURTWATCH: The Supreme Court concluded its week with a cliffhanger episode that was nearly as aggravating as the way the Sopranos’ final episode cut to black in the middle of spaghetti dinner. Moving with the speed and alacrity of a centenarian tortoise, with 20 case decisions to go, and only a week left, the Court parsimoniously provided only five of the least interesting decisions yesterday. It leaves us hanging with 15 of the biggest still in the queue. I hope the Supremes are enjoying themselves.

The truth is, the Justices know full well that everyone is waiting to pounce on their Trump Immunity Decision. One paper called the expected order “certainly one of the most highly anticipated decisions in U.S. history.”

The Court knows its decision, unless they pull a rabbit-suit-wearing Alvin Bragg out of a hat — good luck — will trigger a nuclear fireball of polemic controversy, no matter what they do. Or, perish the thought, what they don’t do.

How much immunity should Presidents get? It’s an insanely difficult question, fraught with future consequence. But after closely observing the farcical fractured fairy tale of Fani “Gimme a G” Willis and the Love Bunnies, and having endured Stalinesque Judge Engoran’s appalling Soviet show trial, I’m leaning toward maximum immunity.

It has become painfully obvious to the feeblest intelligence that Presidents can’t get a fair trial. Or, at least half the country will never believe it was a fair trial, which is like spraying hydrochloric acid all over the Nation’s trust in our legal system.

Lost trust is only one issue. All the problems with blithely pretending partisan politics can be set aside and Presidents can magically get a fair trial using the ordinary jury system could fill a hardbound, two-volume edition of How To Start A Civil War for Dummies, Parts I and II.

As the clock runs out on this blockbuster issue, Democrats are coming unglued. The headlines over the last couple weeks were stuffed with the seminal democrat issue of packing the Supreme Court — a thinly veiled threat to punish the Court if it dares immunize President Trump.

And, after yesterday’s non-event, the suspense is cracking democrats’ brains. E.g., the Daily Beast:

Or, the New York Times (op-ed):

The reason the democrats are so het up is simple. If the Court were going to make a simple, straightforward ruling allowing the Trump trials to keep trundling down the Manhattan tracks toward the jailhouse, it seems like there would be no reason for the Court to take so long to rule. That’s a giant assumption with no basis in reality, since there could be lots of other explanations for the delay. But this is where we are.

On top of that, democrats are also anxious to end Trump’s appeals, so the former President can be sentenced to jail before November. The longer it takes for the decision to come out, the less time there will be to speed-walk Trump’s conviction through the New York Court system.

Unlike the end of the Sopranos, which remains a baffling mystery, we’ll soon know whether Tony ever finished his chicken cacciatore or ate an assassin’s bullet. Assuming the Court makes a real ruling, the world will be forever changed, one way or the other, whether it’s lead or chicken. But at least we won’t be left staring dumbfounded at the TV screen. Probably.

And so, gnawing its fingernails, the Nation waits to watch the blockbuster final episode of The Trumps.

👨‍⚖️👨‍⚖️ President Trump’s immunity problem isn’t the only high-stakes, historic Supreme Court game in town. Yesterday, the Associated Press ran a story headlined, What’s left for the Supreme Court to decide? Here’s the list.

Consider the jaw-dropping implications of this awe-inspiring list of the Court’s remaining big issue cases:

• The Trump Immunity Decision, discussed above.

• The Fischer case on whether January 6th defendants were creatively over-charged under an irrelevant document-shredding law.

• The DOJ’s challenge to an Idaho anti-abortion law limiting emergency abortions.

• A case on whether banning bums from sleeping on San Fransisco’s streets constitutes “cruel and unusual punishment,” absent sufficient free government housing.

• A potentially historic decision pruning back the Chevron doctrine, limiting Executive Branch agency powers to interpret ambiguous laws without judicial oversight.

• A challenge to Florida and Texas laws banning social media companies from censoring political opinions.

• The “Twitter Files” case, on whether the federal government illegally coerced social media platforms to censor conservative viewpoints.

• A case on whether the Sackler family can get personal legal releases in the Purdue Pharma opioid settlement.

• A case on whether SEC financial crime charges deserve a jury trial in a courtroom, or serious convictions can be solely by agency action.

All these controversial decisions are expected next week. You can see why the Court is holding its cards close and doling out its orders with glacial slowness. The implications are potentially monumental, primed to reshape the legal and political landscape for a generation. It’s no understatement to say the country could look significantly different by this time next week.

So, get ready.

✈️✈️ This next story began innocently enough, with a Jerusalem Post article about an awkward Houston-Miami flight headlined, “Boeing plane bursts in flames only minutes after takeoff.”

I was planning to make some jokes about the good news, which is that you want your engine fire early in the flight, after the beverage service but before you get over the Gulf of Mexico. Or maybe make a crack about remembering to pack your marshmallow sticks when traveling on a Boeing. Something like that.

But then I discovered all these other headlines from just the last few weeks. Astonishingly, each of these headlines is about a different flight:

May 28th, Chicago to Seattle (Airbus):

June 7th, Toronto to Paris (Boeing) (Video Clip.):

June 18th, Sao Paulo, Brazil (Airbus):

June 19th, Queenstown to Melbourne (Boeing):

And, June 20th, Hyderabad, India to Kuala Lumpur (Boeing) (Video Clip):

There were even more examples, going back to at least January. For some reason, none of the stories referred to each other. You’d think the media would be trumpeting the epidemic of engine fires by now.

More and more, it seems like our new-and-improved corporate media smothers real problems but promotes the fake ones.

I’m just a lawyer, not an airplane engineer. But it sure seems like there are a lot of engine fires lately over a pretty short period of time. Like, more than there should be. Maybe some of our C&C flight crew can weigh in. Are Boeing and Airbus sabotaging each other? Is this somehow part of the Proxy War? Do engine fires happen more often than we think? Inquiring minds want to know.

🌡️🌡️ For your weekend extreme weather mini-roundup, we begin with Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY), who was idly cloud-gazing yesterday, minding his own business, when he felt compelled to tweet this curious observation:

Clouds sure take some funny shapes! These days. I’m old enough to remember back when they were shaped like elephants, sharks, dinosaurs, and roses. Good times.

Moving next to weird, ‘extreme hail’ weather news, Yahoo News ran a story yesterday headlined, “Strange 'Hail Flow' in Nebraska Goes Viral.” It’s alive!

CLIP: Weird, blob-like hail “lava flow” in Scottsbluff, Nebraska (1:09).

Whatever that is, I’m just glad it wasn’t in my yard.

Next, what the hail? I never even considered this awful risk arising from gorilla hail. I bet these passengers had a memorable travel experience:

Who knows? I’m sure this kind of weather happens all the time, but I’ve never seen hail lava or airplane hail-abuse before.

Finally, yesterday the UK Guardian confirmed another conspiracy theory when it ran its incendiary headline, “Climate engineering off US coast could increase heatwaves in Europe, study finds.” Uh oh.

The story tracked a study published just yesterday in the Journal Nature (Climate Change), titled  “Diminished efficacy of regional marine cloud brightening in a warmer world - Nature Climate Change. The study’s researchers were thec same unlucky crew blasting some kind of salt into the air right off San Fransisco, before alarmed local officials got wind of the ‘experiment’ and pulled the plug.

Essentially, the scientists, having been caught with their salt-stained fingers in the weather modification jar, have concluded never mind:

Marine cloud brightening (MCB) is a geoengineering proposal to cool atmospheric temperatures and reduce climate change impacts. Under present-day conditions, we find MCB reduces the relative risk of dangerous summer heat exposure by 55% and 16%, respectively. However, the same interventions under mid-century warming minimally reduce or even increase heat stress in the Western United States and across the world.

Our result demonstrates a risk in assuming that interventions effective under certain conditions will remain effective as the climate continues to change.

The Guardian article also mentioned, offhand, that oh yeah, Australian scientists have also been using “marine cloud brightening strategies” for at least four years now, cooling the Great Barrier Reef to reduce coral bleaching.

But they would never ever do it near you.

The gist — try to follow the logic here — was the researchers said their “models” showed that weather modification in one part of the world might cool that part, but it could also heat up a different part of the world, like Europe, which let’s be honest, who cares.

But — now they were caught red-handed, or white-handed, whichever — the lead scientist is now suddenly calling for government regulation of weather modification, which until ten seconds ago was just a fake news conspiracy theory on TikTok:

Jessica Wan, part of the research team led by UC San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography, said, “It shows that marine cloud brightening can be very effective for the US west coast if done now, but it may be ineffective there in the future and could cause heatwaves in Europe.”

She said the results should prompt policymakers to establish governance structures and transparency guidelines, not just on a global level but regionally.

“There is really no solar geoengineering governance right now. That is scary. Science and policy need to be developed together,” she said. “We don’t want to be in a situation where one region is forced to do geoengineering to combat what another part of the world has done to respond to droughts and heatwaves.”

It’s not chemtrails, dummy, it’s solar geoengineering. Which is totally different.

So, basically, the study admitted that scientists have learned how, in theory, to create a heat wave in Europe by spraying chemicals into the air in San Fransisco. Heat waves can cause wildfires, which can cause destabilization. What else did the scientists learn? What didn’t make it into the published study?

In the Guardian’s article, as in every other article following the unexpected disclosure of the San Fransisco project, salt-blinded journalists failed to ask the most important question that every single reader wants to know: Where else in the world are they testing weather modification technologies by spraying chemicals into the air?

Besides chemtrails and salt sprayers, what other kinds of ‘solar geoengineering’ are going on?

Finally, are they doing it right now, over Gainesville?

The Guardian informed us that the entire weather modification field is completely unregulated, so you can’t say it is illegal. Bill Gates, or Bill Johnson for that matter, or anybody, can rent a boat or plane and spray whatever they want into the skies, pursuing whatever reckless experiment they can dream up trying to score a massive government climate change contract.

How many teams are doing it right now?

Some states, like Tennessee, have started banning geoengineering experiments, causing corporate media reporters and social media bots to laugh like adderall-fueled hyenas about all the stupid hicks and their ridiculous chemtrail conspiracy theories.

Like this uproarious headline from the very same UK Guardian that is now calling for regulations, but way back two months ago:

Coincidentally — I’m just pointing this out for context, don’t cancel me — chemtrail-denying corporate media is owned by the very same oligarchs and billionaires who are probably funding most of the weather modification projects in hopes of earning multi-billion-dollar government contracts. A weird coincidence!

Public-private partnerships, and so forth.

On that note, the salty experiment where the weather-modifying scientists were unexpectedly nabbed was being run on the flight deck of a decommissioned aircraft carrier, the U.S.S. Hornet, docked in Alameda in San Francisco Bay.

In other words, to whatever extent, the geoengineering researchers were working with the U.S. military.

No corporate media reporter has yet made the military connection. But you can be 100% sure our geopolitical enemies noticed. And unlike reporters, our enemies have probably looked into who the researchers are, who funded them, and what other stuff they are working on.

In other words, the new study may be a limited hangout aimed at pacifying enemies about what we were getting up to on that aircraft carrier in San Fransisco. It’s too risky, so we’re shutting it down. Trust us.

And for the social media censors: I’m definitely not theorizing about any conspiracies. I’m not suggesting that the San Fransisco experiment was actually a military trial of a weather weapon that can be deployed from the decks of aircraft carriers or anything like that. What a ridiculous idea.

💉💉 Speaking of ridiculous ideas, this week the International Journal of  Vaccine Theory, Practice, and Research sprayed a truth weapon into big pharma’s rosy skies, in the form of a new study by Children’s Health Defense researchers (Robert Kennedy’s outfit) titled, “Adverse Outcomes Are Increased with Exposure to Added Combinations of Infant Vaccines.” Not just a little increase in adverse outcomes. A lot.

It’s critical to first understand that vaccine makers are not required to test for interactions with other vaccines, or test for problems associated with combined simultaneous injections of multiple vaccines. So, this study did the work that neither pharma nor the FDA have ever done, but should have, using easily available information.

Well, the information is easily available, that is, if you can find a cooperative government somewhere.  In this case, the researchers did find a cooperative government willing to share its priceless Medicaid data: Florida.  I do not know what led to Florida cooperating with Children’s Health Defense researchers, but I suspect our terrific Surgeon General Joe Ladapo was involved.

Using decades of data from Florida’s Medicaid database, the CHD researchers evaluated adverse events arising among 1.5 million combinations of six vaccines injected into infants between July 1, 1991, and May 31, 2011.

Let’s start with the study’s awful but deplorably predictable conclusion: “Chiefly, the greater the number of vaccines in the combination yields an exponentially greater number of disease diagnoses.”

In English: the more vaccines they gave infants at the same time, the worse the infants did.

Among other wretched findings, the researchers observed that infants who got six early vaccines were three thousand percent more likely to be diagnosed with "other diseases of the trachea and bronchus" within 30 days after vaccination, compared to infants who only got the three basic vaccines (DTaP+IPV+HIB).

The researchers tracked three categories of enhanced risk: developmental problems, additional infections, and respiratory complications.

The highest developmental risk was for "failure to thrive," which six-shot infants were +366% more likely to experience. The highest infections risk (of many) was for leukocytosis (high white blood cell count). Infants who got the HepB-Rota vaccine on top of the three basic ones were a whopping ten thousand times more likely to have leukocytosis. And under respiratory problems, infants who got all three extra vaccines were also three thousand times more likely to be diagnosed with "other diseases of the trachea and bronchus" within 30 days after the jabs.

This is all very interesting, but don’t jump to conclusions. Remember what they always tell us: correlation isn’t causation. All those extra sicknesses could have caused the vaccinations. It could go either way. You never know.

You’d have to be a pretty sick person to help pharma hide this kind of information. But it’s been hidden for a long time. The data is all right there, in the state insurance databases. They have the records when doctors submit claims for the initial vaccinations. They also have the records when doctors later submit claims for treating the same patients’ adverse events.

But patient-level data has always been guarded — for “privacy” — more diligently than the gold bullion in Fort Knox.

In a sane world, this study would blow the lid right off the infant vaccine business. Scientists would spring into action, trying to recreate these results in the other forty-nine states. But this is not a sane world; this is 2024 Clown World.

So, this study represents more progress, another scientific nail driven into the vaccine industrial complex’s mouldy coffin. But it shows that the dam is leaking badly. Big pharma’s vaccine dam could break any minute now.

Finally, this study could not have been done, much less published, four years ago. It’s serious progress.

Have a wonderful weekend! I’ll meet you back here on Monday morning, for another terrific C&C essential news roundup, delivered to your inbox with snarky panache.

We can’t do it without you. Consider joining with C&C to help move the nation’s needle and change minds.  I could use your help getting the truth out and spreading optimism and hope, if you can:  ☕ Learn How to Get Involved 🦠

How to Donate to Coffee & Covid

Twitter: jchilders98.

Truth Social: jchilders98.

MeWe: mewe.com/i/coffee_and_covid.

Telegram: t.me/coffeecovidnews

C&C Swag! www.shopcoffeeandcovid.com

#Covid/DailyUpdate/June