Go Fund Me Takes Down Fundraising Campaign for Litigation Over Vaccine Mandate

We previously discussed how GoFundMe has joined social media sites in censoring opposing viewpoints on subjects from critical race theory to vaccines to election fraud. The site once offered a neutral site for those seeking to support others with similar views or interests. The company now insists that it will only allow people to gather on the site if it believes their views are true and correct. However, it was still surprising to see the site take down a fundraising account for litigation against vaccine mandates. The effort of former nurse Jennifer Bridges was simply to get such matters before the courts, which can be the ultimate authority on what is “misinformation.” GoFundMe however blocked people from contributing to the litigation.

Bridges is a former registered nurse at Houston Methodist hospital who was fired after refusing to comply with the hospital’s vaccine requirement. She raised more than $180,000 for her lawsuit before being shutdown under the company’s “misinformation” policy. Heidi Hagberg, a spokesperson for GoFundMe, said in a statement to Business Insider that “when our team initially reviewed the fundraiser, it was within our terms of service as the funds were for legal fees to fight vaccine mandates. The fundraiser has since been updated to include misinformation which violates our terms of service.”

What is striking about this latest ban is that the courts are the place for such claims to be weighed in a neutral and dispassionate forum. “Misinformation” can be addressed by judges after both sides are allowed to present evidence. Bridges’ lawsuit was dismissed in June, Bridges’ attorneys appealed the decision. We should all favor such reviews. Indeed, if GoFundMe believes that Bridges is wrong, it should invite further judicial review to established a clear record on such issues.

GoFundMe admits to have taken down “hundreds” of fundraisers that included statements of “misinformation related to vaccines.”

I do not agree with the arguments against the vaccine. I and my family are vaccinated. However, I am equally concerned with avoiding the growing virus of censorship. In the last few years, we have seen an increasing call for private censorship from Democratic politicians and liberal commentators. Faculty and editors are now actively supporting modern versions of book-burning with blacklists and bans for those with opposing political views. The most chilling aspect of this story is how many on the left applaud such censorship. A new poll shows roughly half of the public supporting not just corporate censorship but government censorship of anything deemed “misinformation.”

Free speech can be its own disinfectant for bad speech. GoFundMe is a private company and can impose such rules on users. However, it is an act of censorship and it is a denial of free speech by a corporation. In this case, the company is preventing its site from being used to raise money to allow courts to review the factual and legal basis for these claims — a curious effort for a company that claims to be fighting “misinformation.”

 

 

358 thoughts on “Go Fund Me Takes Down Fundraising Campaign for Litigation Over Vaccine Mandate”

  1. “Election fraud and vote corruption began in 1863 when black freed slaves were not summarily deported as illegal aliens, subsequent to the issuance of the emancipation proclamation, as immigration law required citizens to be “…free white person(s)…,” per the Naturalization Act of 1802, which was in full force and effect, but antithetically and illegally provided citizenship, including the “right” to vote.”

    George, unfortunately I apparently summarized too much of a very long article which was removed and caused the removal of your statement as well. It was discussing the potential lawlessness in Wisconsin that can turn out to be larger than the irregularities seen elsewhere.

    I am, however, curious as to your answer. What is your basis of law for the requirement of “free white persons”? Also, why do you call freed slaves, illegal aliens? Apparently they were legal when they were slaves so I don’t see how that change in status suddenly made them illegal aliens.

    1. Allan, if you hadn’t noticed, George is a white nationalist. He has stated multiple times that Barack Obama, despite having been born in the US to an American mother, was not legally eligible to be President and that Kamala Harris, despite having been born in the US, is not eligible to be VP — denying that either are natural born citizens. He’s said that he wishes that all Black Americans — whether newly freed slaves or free Black people already living in the northern states — had been sent to Africa after the Civil War.

      He is also a misogynist who has said repeatedly that women should not have been granted the right to vote.

      It’s telling that you treat a misogynist white nationalist more respectfully than you treat liberals.

      1. Once again ATS, you don’t understand what you are reading. I am not treating him better or worse than another. He made a statement that didn’t seem to conform with what I know, so I asked him a question. He didn’t answer. That is preferable to the slop you provide.

        1. Allan, are you blind to the irony of your claiming “I am not treating him better or worse than another” while also calling someone “ATS” and referring to “the slop you provide”?

          You insult the majority of liberals you respond to. I’ve never seen you insult George, even though he’s a misogynistic white nationalist. You treat him better than you treat liberals, even if you cannot admit it.

          1. Anonymous the Stupid, I had no reason to insult or praise George. You are a different story. You deserve scorn.

            George has his beliefs. One doesn’t have to agree with him. On occasion, I question him on them, and I have shown him where he is wrong at other times. He thanks Stupid people like you for reading what he says. He is straightforward and not deceptive like you are, so one knows exactly where he stands. I don’t like many things others say, including some of the things said by Professor Turley, but I don’t insult the Professor. I accept Turley’s opinions, based on his life experiences.

            You deserve everything you get because of your awful habits, including lying and deception.

            1. I don’t lie or deceive, Allan, though that won’t prevent you from lying and claiming otherwise. You deserve the scorn you heap on others.

    1. Young asks:

      “High Crimes and Misdemeanors?” About Joe Biden.

      Just to prove that I am impartial and independent, I say investigate and prosecute Biden if there is evidence of corruption.

      Just don’t be surprised if Leftists scream “Witch-hunt!” and
      “Hoax!”

      It will be impossible for Trumpists to condemn such Leftist accusations given the track record of Trumpists using the same bad faith tactics.

      1. Yes, absolutely, if the DOJ has evidence that Biden committed a crime, it should be investigated.

        And I wish that Congress would pass legislation overruling the Office of Legal Counsel and making it clear that a President can be indicted while in office, with the statute of limitations tolling until he’s out of office.

        1. Anonymous says:

          “And I wish that Congress would pass legislation overruling the Office of Legal Counsel and making it clear that a President can be indicted while in office, with the statute of limitations tolling until he’s out of office.”

          Yes!

        2. Yes, absolutely, if the DOJ has evidence that Biden committed a crime, it should be investigated.

          But for the Fact that Garland is nothing but a raw politician. A leftist. We also know the culture of the DoJ is leftist, by the lack of whistle blowers, silent during all the corruption surrounding the hoax that is the Russia fiasco.

          Just like the DoJ somehow decided the decision to charge Clinton’s wife with crimes, somehow rested with the Director of the FBI, we already know The Biden Crime family has gotten a pass to this point, and the DoJ will continue to turn a blind eye to the known corruption of the Bidens. What with the FBI busy harassing Parents that attend their local school board meetings, demanding answers from their elected representatives.

  2. In another thread I was asking Enigma in Black why he is still chewing on the dead old bone of slavery in America more than 150 years ago when, if he is truly concerned about slavery, he could be fighting the real thing in Africa where it is still going on.

    He mumbled some nonsense excuses but I suspect the real reason is that our old slavery issue still pays bucks whereas he couldn’t milk much out of real slavery in Africa.

    Like Willie Sutton, he goes where the money is.

    Now a real ex-slave has come forward to say about the same thing:

    “Former African slave criticizes Black Lives Matter, says ‘slavery still exists in Africa today’

    https://www.christianpost.com/news/former-slave-blasts-blm-says-slavery-still-exists-in-africa.html

    C’mon man! Put your money where your mouth is. At least criticize African slavery. You haven’t even done that yet. American slavery is dead and gone. African slavery is alive and well.

    Do it, or don’t tell us one more darned thing about your ‘principles;.

    1. I criticize all slavery, including the slavery that still exists in the US, both legally (in forced prison labor) and illegally (human trafficking). Unfortunately, slavery in the US still affects estimated hundreds of thousands of people.

      How about you, Young, will you join me in condemning all slavery?

      1. Slavery “legally (in forced prison labor) ”

        +++

        Years ago in Phoenix sheriff Arapaio had a chain gang [they weren’t really chained] that worked along the side of road picking up trash and doing other things. Even women were doing it.

        People like you stepped in to help those abused unfortunates and demanded that the chain gangs stop.

        Guess who protested?

        The prisoners who got to get outside and do work.

        It was much preferred to sitting in jail. They liked it. They told the weenie do-gooders to mind their own business.

        That’s the core problem with leftists: they just don’t know how to mind their own darned business…Karens and Busybodies and Library Ladies, all of them.

        Enjoy your marginally effective vaccine and hope it isn’t a time bomb; you can’t get it out.

            1. For a lawyer, you seem to place little weight in the Constitution’s definition of slavery.

              The 13th Amendment, section 1: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” Legal slavery — forced labor — still exists in the US, whether you can admit it or not.

              You haven’t even condemned the illegal human trafficking in the US.

              You haven’t condemned slavery on any continent other than Africa, despite the existence of slavery on all continents and many islands.

              I condemn all slavery. If you cannot bring yourself to do so, then shame on you.

              I’ll modify what you said about Enigma, so it applies to you: “He mumbled some nonsense excuses but I suspect the real reason is that Young won’t condemn all slavery is that slavery in Africa serves his argument whereas he can’t milk much rhetorically out of real slavery in the US and elsewhere.”

              1. Work on it. Slavery involves ownership of a human being as a chattel with all that goes with it.

                Involuntary servitude as part of punishment for a crime does not not imply ownership of a person as a chattel. It is punishment, society’s retribution for wrongdoing. It is an entirely distinct legal framework. A prisoner is not property but a ward of the state.

                S. Meyer and Estovir are right about you. And that isn’t good.

                1. You seem to want to restrict the use of “slavery” to chattel slavery with a designated owner. But that isn’t the only form of slavery that exists. Debt bondage, forced labor, human trafficking, and some other categories are de facto slavery, and are recognized as such. The Constitution clearly doesn’t limit “slavery” to chattel slavery. The 13th Amendment does not make it legal for the state to own someone as punishment for a crime for which they’ve been convicted, so if “slavery” meant only chattel slavery, the 13th Amendment would instead have said “Slavery shall not exist within the United States, and involuntary servitude shall not exist within the United States except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted.”

                  Whether you can admit it or not, the Constitution explicitly allows slavery as a form of legal punishment, and the Supreme Court doesn’t make the clean distinction you’re drawing. For example, Justice McReynolds, writing for the Court in Butler v. Perry, stated that “the term ‘involuntary servitude’ was intended to cover those forms of compulsory labor akin to African slavery.”

                  You still haven’t condemned all the other slavery that exists in the world, including the human trafficking in the US.

                  I doubt that any of you care what I think of you, and I don’t care what you think of me.

                  1. Do you know the difference between akin to and the same as?

                    Do you see that the Reynolds quote refers to compulsory labor rather than the legal status of the individual involved?

                    Do you understand the difference between being put on an auction block to be sold as a chattel and being convicted of a crime and sentenced?

                    Do you know the difference between being a possession and being a ward?

                    None of those, I think.

                    You haven’t the mental tools to understand the issue you are weaving around and you have snared yourself.

                    1. Young your chasing your tail. No sense in attempting good faith discussion with Humpty Dumpty.

                      “When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’ ’The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’

                      He will switch between, Webster, Blacks law dictionary, local colloquial phrasing, and specialty lexicons, depending on the lie he is trying to keep alive. Often in the same post.

                      But do carry on. I often pause to watch a cat play with a mouse. Knowing the superior is in full control

                    2. As I said: you seem to want to restrict the use of “slavery” to chattel slavery with a designated owner. But that isn’t the only form of slavery that exists. Debt bondage, forced labor, human trafficking, and some other categories are de facto slavery, and are recognized as such.

                      And you STILL haven’t brought yourself to condemn all of the slavery that exists in the world.

                      What a hypocrite you are to criticize Enigma for not condemning slavery in Africa when you also cannot bring yourself to condemn slavery elsewhere.

                    3. Anonymous at 10:18: “And you STILL haven’t brought yourself to condemn all of the slavery that exists in the world.”

                      Hear ye, hear ye, to one and all, thus spaketh as forthwith:

                      “We condemn the slavery of demons in the head of Anonymous who refuses to set them free”

                2. “It is punishment . . .”

                  Imagine that — when convicted of a crime, you lose rights. And part of your punishment is to (gasp) work — both of which concepts have only been around since forever.

                  However, when one is (as a habit) intellectually dishonest, one feels free to play games with words (such as “slavery”).

                  1. I don’t have to imagine that I have condemned all slavery in the world, and not one of you is willing to join me in doing so.

                    1. “. . . willing to join me . . .”

                      Joining you for anything would be like joining Jeffrey Dahmer for dinner.

                  2. “one feels free to play games with words (such as “slavery”).”

                    Sam, he is unable to create complex arguments that make sense. It sounds like he is following a script that only takes him so far and then when he is on his own the appearance of intellect plummets. Deception and lying is the only way out for ATS.

          1. Your rhetoric demeans all those that suffer in slavery. You should be ashamed, but lack the ability to understand what slavery is.

          2. I actually believe that all of us are inherently innocent when we enter this life, however: actions have consequences. You are the critical thinking equivalent of pot gummies, ‘Anonymous’. I find it extremely difficult to believe you aren’t under 35, and if you are – dang that was an impressive tower you grew up in. Naturally ‘grew up’ is a colloquialism.

        1. Enjoy your marginally effective vaccine and hope it isn’t a time bomb; you can’t get it out.

          Too funny. The vaccine is likely marginally effective but far more effective than you engaging Anonymous trolls who comment only to get a rise out of you. So get the vaccine already and ignore the Anonymous trolls. Better to acquire a marginally effective vaccine than feed pathogenic trolls.

          🙂

          1. “than feed pathogenic trolls.“

            Estovir, when you go to a zoo with your kids, don’t you feed the animals? 🙂

          2. Estovir,

            Thanks for the thought. I had one close friend, a physician, who died of Covid. I had one relative who was ill with an autoimmune disease die suddenly after the vaccination and know of a friend of friends who was healthy but died shortly after the vax. Most of our friends are physicians and most have been vaccinated but a number are avoiding it for various reasons. It is not an easy, nor obvious, decision.

          3. I like what Young (and others) do. He extracts the venom from poisonous insects, and turns it into anti-venom.

      2. But you havens problem with the slavery brought over our southern border by the cartels.

        You are such a hypocrite.

    2. At least criticize African slavery.

      The Atlantic Slave Trade was a business outgrowth from the practice of Africans enslaving Africans. African slave owners supplied Portuguese, Spaniards and other Europeans settlers slaves, because it made business sense to supply slaves to Europeans seeking slaves for their expeditions. Additionally, the Trans-Saharan Slave Trade (practiced enthusiastically within Africa) pre-dated both the Atlantic Slave Trade & Indian Ocean Slave Trade.

      Fage, J. (1969). Slavery and the Slave Trade in the Context of West African History. The Journal of African History, 10(3), 393-404. doi: 10.1017/S0021853700036343

      Kehinde M. (2013) Trans-Saharan Slave Trade. In: Bean F., Brown S. (eds) Encyclopedia of Migration. Springer, Dordrecht. doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6179-7_30-1

      Fage J (1969) Slavery and the slave trade in the context of West African History. J Afr Hist 10(3):393–404

      Law R (1967) The Garamantes and trans-Saharan enterprise in classical times. J Afr Hist V111(2):181–200

      McDougall E (1992) Salt, Saharans, and the trans-Saharan trade: nineteenth century developments. In: Savage E (ed) The human commodity: perspectives on the trans-Saharan slave trade. Frank Cass, London, pp 61–88

      Savage E (ed) (1992) The human commodity: perspectives on the trans-Saharan slave trade. Frank Cass, London

      Patrick Manning, Slavery and African Life: Occidental, Oriental, and African Slave Trades (Cambridge 1990)

      Paul E. Lovejoy, Transformations in Slavery: A History of Slavery in Africa (Cambridge 2000)

      1. Thomas Sowell on Democrats being more dangerous to the black community than slavery ever was.

        If we wanted to be serious about evidence, we might compare where blacks stood a hundred years after the end of slavery with where they stood after 30 years of the liberal welfare state. In other words, we could compare hard evidence on “the legacy of slavery” with hard evidence on the legacy of liberals.

        Despite the grand myth that black economic progress began or accelerated with the passage of the civil rights laws and “war on poverty” programs of the 1960s, the cold fact is that the poverty rate among blacks fell from 87 percent in 1940 to 47 percent by 1960. This was before any of those programs began.

        Over the next 20 years, the poverty rate among blacks fell another 18 percentage points, compared to the 40-point drop in the previous 20 years. This was the continuation of a previous economic trend, at a slower rate of progress, not the economic grand deliverance proclaimed by liberals and self-serving black “leaders.”

        …..

        Nearly a hundred years of the supposed “legacy of slavery” found most black children [78%] being raised in two-parent families in 1960. But thirty years after the liberal welfare state found the great majority of black children being raised by a single parent [66%]. Public housing projects in the first half of the 20th century were clean, safe places, where people slept outside on hot summer nights, when they were too poor to afford air conditioning. That was before admissions standards for public housing projects were lowered or abandoned, in the euphoria of liberal non-judgmental notions. And it was before the toxic message of victimhood was spread by liberals. We all know what hell holes public housing has become in our times. The same toxic message produced similar social results among lower-income people in England, despite an absence of a “legacy of slavery” there.

        If we are to go by evidence of social retrogression, liberals have wreaked more havoc on blacks than the supposed “legacy of slavery” they talk about.

        Thomas Sowell

      2. Estovir–

        Very true. Africans were eager and greedy participants in the slave trade.

        Other Africans were their main cash crop.

        I think that when England was preparing to abolish the slave trade a delegation of Africans arrived in London to beg them to keep the trade going.

        Now the cash crop for that population in the US is victimhood. They never shut up about ancestors they never met and never mention the black men that sold them as chattel in the first place.

        I could favor reparation for every black person who steps up and shows when his life as a slave began and for how long, and what hours he worked less costs for food and lodging.

        I don’t think the line will be very long.

  3. “…OR TO THE PEOPLE.”

    Please cite the Constitution wherein the executive and/or legislative branches are provided any power to mandate any aspect or fashion of healthcare.

    The Constitution provides maximal rights, freedoms, privileges and immunities to citizens, while it severely limits and restricts government.

    Just imagine, the Supreme Court is compelled by the Constitution to swear an oath to support the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution.

    In stead, it supports the dominion of the “Swamp” of the global communist Deep Deep State.
    ________________________________________________________________________

    9th Amendment

    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
    _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

    10th Amendment

    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

  4. An anti-Semite says:

    “JeffSilberman, are jew an idiot?”

    Darren,

    You consider this “civil?”

    1. Looks pretty free to me!

      “Your mother wears combat boots,” seems rude and unconstitutional to me, but that would be arbitrary.
      _________________________________________________________________________________

      1st Amendment

      Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

  5. Iceland, Sweden, and Finland just banned the Moderna vaccine due to increased risk of cardiac inflammation, especially in young men.

    Vaccines are crucial weapons in the war against pandemics. I’m glad I was vaccinated, because I’m high risk. HOWEVER, the problem, as I see it, with the current vaccine is that it produces spike protein. This protein attaches to the ACE receptors in our major organs, just like it would if it was part of the SARS-CoV2 virus. Our immune system attacks and clears it, just like it would if it were part of a virus. The difference is that it’s a finite amount of spike protein, and it’s not attached to a replicating virus that invades our cells.

    Our bodies still experience inflammation of our organs as it basically scrapes off that velcro-like spike protein, only we don’t have as much inflammation as we would if it were a rapidly replicating virus. Some people will suffer adverse events due to that inflammation, such as myocarditis and pericarditis. Early studies show a slightly higher risk of myocarditis in Moderna recipients than Pfizer.

    https://www.wionews.com/world/iceland-suspends-use-of-modernas-covid-vaccine-due-to-heart-inflammation-fears-419324

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/08/19/moderna-vaccine-myocarditis/

    This side effect is rare, but myocarditis does affect young males more than any other. This is why some young people and parents are concerned about our state or federal government or employer forcing the vaccine. For instance, the state of CA has mandated the covid vaccine for schools.

    Without being psychic, all people have are data on their risk factors, and data on the vaccine side effects, in order to do a risk/benefit analysis. If they don’t get the vaccine, and get a bad, potentially fatal case of Covid, they’ll wish they got vaccinated. If they get vaccinated, and they, or their kids, suffer serious complications such as myocarditis, then they’ll wish they hadn’t gotten vaccinated. So it’s a statistical numbers game of which decision they are more likely to regret.

    We are already just about at the point where everyone who voluntarily wants to get vaccinated has done so. The problem I have is with forcing people to get vaccinated against their will, threatening their jobs, their school enrollment, and even their ability to fly on a plane.

    There is a tongue in cheek statement going around how Southwest Airline is inexplicably subjected to severe weather that is not grounding other planes at such a rate.

    We get vaccinated in order to protect ourselves from the contagion we will come into contact in the world.

    Vaccine mandates do not take into account the naturally acquired immunity that is equal to or greater than vaccination, according to the data that I have read. It also produces a memory for more binding sites than the spike protein alone would generate. If the goal is herd immunity, then ALL forms of immunity should be calculated.

    For those of you who are vaccinated, and cannot understand why anyone would refuse, keep in mine that one day, there will be a vaccine or some other mandate that you fervently do not want to comply with. You will have thrown away your right to say no by that point.

    There are certainly arguments to be made that some employers want to require vaccination because their employees will come into contact with medically vulnerable patients, such as premies or the elderly whose immune system might not respond well to vaccines, or they’re too young to get vaccinated, or they can’t get vaccinated due to medical conditions such as cancer.

    The debate needs to take place, with both sides presenting valid arguments. But these talks have to occur without recrimination or harassment. People need to feel free to speak their minds.

    This is not about whether or not you agree with the vaccine, or want to get vaccinated yourself; this is about whether or not a government or employer or school can force you to get vaccinated against your will.

    1. “Iceland, Sweden, and Finland just banned the Moderna vaccine due to increased risk of cardiac inflammation, especially in young men.”

      Will the Biden Administration now take steps to encourage the cancelling of the countries of Iceland, Sweden and Finland? Will they be expelled from the United Nations?

      1. This is a big deal. Wow. Thanks for the heads up. I got vaccinated in January with no issues, then my household months later, again no issues. I also got my flu vaccine two weeks ago.

        In the end, people should consider getting vaccinated after having an intimate discussion with their physician. If they opt out, others who come into contact with them have an immune system for a reason. Stop acting like the slightest virion will be the death of you. Otherwise you really have no business touching surfaces, door knobs, stair rails, grocery produce, items on grocery shelves, elevator buttons, clothing racks, and on and on and on. Get real folks. Stop spreading panic porn.

        For those seeking to learn about the immune system, I recommend the following link, based on Janeway Immunobiology textbook. Janeway is the best immunology textbook available on the market for learners at the college, graduate and medical school level. Get informed. Be educated. Start today.

        https://my.rocketmix.com/coursedetails.aspx?cid=3128&guest=1

        1. “Stop acting like the slightest virion will be the death of you.”

          How can the left take control without creating an artificial crisis? That is what is being done. This virus is not costing the number of life-years that many on this blog think. It is mostly killing the older and the sick. When the more aged and the sick get the common flu, they die from that as well. The excessive pressures used to force vaccination are crazy. It should be voluntary. I do not believe that many young people have died from this virus, and I think that the percentage of young people dying from the flu might be greater.

          Some might think I am against the vaccine. That would be a foolish conclusion as I have had both shots plus the flu shot. The left is unable to think deeply, if at all.

          Covid is a lesser danger than the rabid left.

    2. “Iceland, Sweden, and Finland just banned the Moderna vaccine due to increased risk of cardiac inflammation, especially in young men.”

      They haven’t banned it. They’re recommending that men under 30 get the Pfizer vaccine instead. No change for other people.

      “this is about whether or not a government or employer or school can force you to get vaccinated against your will.”

      They can’t. But you have to accept the consequences of your choice, which may include things like not being eligible for public school or some jobs, as is already the case with other vaccination.

      1. What about the “my body, my choice” that government has been trumpeting for decades when it comes to abortion? Why does it only apply to murdering innocent defenseless babies with no say?

            1. From Canterbury:

              “For the tools enabling resolution of the issues [informed consent] on this appeal, we are forced to begin at first principles.
              The root premise is the concept, fundamental in American jurisprudence, that “[e]very human being of adult years and sound mind has a right to determine what shall be done with his own body. . . .”

              For Anon who struggles in self-spun spider webs of trivia, that translates to “my body, my choice”.

          1. After Psaki initially responded that Biden believes “it’s a woman’s right, it’s a woman’s body and it’s her choice,” reporter Owen Jensen asked: “Who does he believe, then, should look out for the unborn child?”

      2. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/europe/iceland-halts-moderna-covid-19-vaccine-over-heart-inflammation-fears/2387646

        “Iceland has suspended the use of the Moderna anti-coronavirus vaccine, citing an increased risk of cardiac inflammation

        Earlier, Sweden and Finland suspended the use of the vaccine in people under the age of 30.

        Denmark and Norway also have completely banned the use of the Moderna vaccine for anyone under the age of 18.

        You can quibble with semantics all you wish.

        Iceland is not using Moderna. Sweden and Finland is not using it in people under age 30. Denmark and Norway have banned it for people under age 18.

        Get it?

        Of course denying people the right to go anywhere, get on a plane, have a job, go to school, or in some cases collect unemployment unless they get a particular vaccine is a means to force people to get it against their will. They don’t really have a choice if the alternative means starving.

        This doesn’t make any sense from an immunology standpoint, ether, as people who recover from Covid have immunity equal to or greater than the vaccinated. This is supposed to be about herd immunity, not how that immunity is acquired.

        1. Karen,

          Your claim was “Iceland, Sweden, and Finland just banned the Moderna vaccine.” That wasn’t a statement about Denmark or Norway. It wasn’t a statement saying that its use was being paused for people under a given age while continuing to be used for others. Your own source shows that your actual claim was false, and a better response from you would have been to acknowledge that you were wrong about the details.

          Your Turkish source is also mistaken about some details. For example, Iceland has not entirely suspended use of the Moderna vaccine. It’s still being used for booster shots in older people: https://www.landlaeknir.is/um-embaettid/frettir/frett/item47722/aframhaldandi-notkun-covid-19-boluefnis-moderna-a-islandi (you can use Google Translate to translate it)

          As for “Of course denying people the right to go anywhere, get on a plane, have a job, go to school, or in some cases collect unemployment unless they get a particular vaccine is a means to force people to get it against their will,” then you believe that the US armed forces have been forcing people to get vaccinations all along, that public schools have been forcing people to get vaccinations all along, etc. This is not force. It’s certainly strong leverage, but people can choose to leave the armed forces, can choose to homeschool their kids, etc. They aren’t being fined, they aren’t being put in jail, they aren’t being held down and injected without consent. According to your reasoning, people are also “forced” to get a photo ID if they want to travel on a plane and “forced” to get insurance if they want to drive.

    3. More of Karen trying to play scientist, and mixing political crap she heard on Fox with purported “science” to justify efforts by Republicans to derail Biden’s presidency. Karen is attempting to defend people who refuse vaccination based on an extremely rare complication, as if concern about this extremely rare complication explains refusal to accept the vaccine. Even you Trumpsters know better: Fox and other alt-right news organizations are part of the Republican efforts to keep COVID going, to help suppress the economy, all to help the narcissist get re-elected. They pander to the undereducated who believe whatever Hannity tells them about their “rights” and how Biden is abusing them. Well, it won’t work.

      “The decision to halt Moderna vaccinations was made after adverse effects to the shot were noted in several other Nordic nations, which have since restricted their own rollouts of the jab.

      “A Nordic study involving Finland, Sweden, Norway and Denmark found that men under the age of 30 who received Moderna Spikevax had a slightly higher risk than others of developing myocarditis,” Director of Finland’s National Institute for Health and Welfare Mika Salminen said on Thursday.

      Salminen announced that men born in 1991 and after would no longer be given Spikevax. One day earlier, Sweden stopped giving the Moderna shot to all of its population born in 1991 and later, while Denmark suspended its use on under-18s. Norway recommended that men under the age of 30 choose Pfizer’s jab instead.

      The European Medicines Agency in July published findings urging the heart conditions myocarditis and pericarditis be added to the list of potential rare side effects of mRNA Covid-19 vaccines manufactured by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna after reviewing over 300 incidences across the European Economic Area. According to the EMA, these cases are extremely rare”.

      It bears repeating: THESE CASES ARE EXTREMELY RARE. And, there’s only a “slightly higher risk than others of developing myocarditis”, for males under the age of 30. NO CAUSE OR EFFECT WAS PROVEN. Correlation does NOT prove cause or effect, and, importantly, it does not validate refusal to get vaccinated, which is PROVEN to spread COVID.

      According to Medline Plus (from the National Library of Medicine), “mRNA vaccines work by introducing a piece of mRNA that corresponds to a viral protein, usually a small piece of a protein found on the virus’s outer membrane. Individuals who get an mRNA vaccine are not exposed to the virus, nor can they become infected by the vaccine. Using this mRNA blueprint, cells produce the viral protein. As part of a normal immune response, the immune system recognizes that the protein is foreign and produces specialized proteins called antibodies. Antibodies help protect the body against infection by recognizing individual viruses or other pathogens, attaching to them, and marking the pathogens for destruction. Once produced, antibodies remain in the body, even after the body had rid itself of the pathogen, so that the immune system can quickly respond if exposed again. If a person is exposed to a virus after receiving mRNA vaccination for it, antibodies can quickly recognize it, attach to it, and mark it for destruction before it can cause serious illness.” https://medlineplus.gov/about/general/genetics/newhome/.

      And, Karen is exaggerating or even lying about the situation with vaccination refusal: in most instances, the choice is EITHER vaccination, or frequent COVID testing. That is neither unfair nor unreasonable, and the reasons are to limit the spread of COVID for everyone’s benefit. There is nothing to “debate” here because vaccine resistors have been lied to by the Republicans and alt-right media, and their motivation to spread lies and fear about vaccination is not to protect some perceived right of “individuality”–it is to prevent Biden from conquering COVID. Trump has already publicly done exactly that: claiming that Americans don’t trust Biden, so this is the reason why they won’t get vaccinated. Children have been required to get vaccinated for decades in order to attend school, so requiring vaccinations is nothing new. What IS new is a failing political party that spreads lies and panders to unreasonable fears to try to derail an administration chosen by the majority of Americans on the basis that those who refuse to get vaccinated are victims. Republicans and their media enablers are excellent at pandering to non college educated whites who believe themselves to be victims of college educated people, especially minorities and women

      1. “. . . to justify efforts by Republicans to derail Biden’s presidency.”

        R (thinking to himself): “Let’s see, I really want to get the vaccine. On the other hand, if I expose myself to a potentially deadly virus, I can harm Biden. Ok — no vaccine for me.”

        Remind me, again, which is the party of conspiracy theories.

      2. Natch: “efforts by Republicans to derail Biden’s presidency. ”

        ***

        My goodness, Natch, haven’t you noticed that Biden’s presidency has left the rails on its own? The engineer is senile and has missed all of the signals. Just lately his train went through a crossing and took out part of our supply chain and all of his credibility. Go Brandon!.

    4. Thank you for this cogent analysis. The trouble with this mandate is that it is so overbroad it becomes arbitrary. One size does not fit all. Data has shown there are risk factors associated with the vaccine so why should someone with better natural immunity risk getting myocarditis. Now it appears that the vaccine loses effectiveness over time. Is the federal government also going to mandate booster shots for everyone every year. Enforcement would require a breach of medical record privacy which is law. There is no basis for this mandate. It is not law. I don’t even know why it is called a mandate. It is a statement issued from a podium to which private companies are terminating employees without cause. Totalitarianism by proxy.

    5. Karen: you picked up the debunked theory about the vaccine creating a spike protein that binds to major organs and blood vessels from some alt-right media. Here is a study that this is simply not true:

      Home > Immunology > W. Glen Pyle

      Fake Banner
      The Thorny Problem Of COVID-19 Vaccines And Spike Proteins
      By W. Glen Pyle | May 12th 2021 05:26 AM | Print | E-mail
      User pic. W. Glen Pyle
      Almost since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, a piece of the SARS-CoV2 virus called the “spike protein” has drawn interest from researchers and healthcare professionals.

      New research by Yuyang Lei and colleagues published in the journal Circulation Research sheds new light on how the spike protein might play a critical role in the widespread damage caused by SARS-CoV2, and offers insight into treating the complications of COVID-19.

      Vaccine skeptics have seized on the study to cast doubt on the safety of vaccines. But a review of the study’s findings shows that the concerns raised by vaccine doubters are much ado about nothing.

      The Study

      The vascular endothelium is an important player in the illness and death associated with COVID-19. The endothelium is a system of cells that line and protect the inside of blood vessels. SARS-CoV2 injures the endothelium leading to blood clots, heart attack, pulmonary embolism, and stroke. Despite the established link between COVID-19 and these cardiovascular complications, the mechanism by which they develop is unknown.

      Researchers from Jiaotong University; the University of California, San Diego; and the Salk Institute used a pseudovirus coated with spike protein to investigate the effects of the viral protein on endothelial cells. Pseudoviruses – which were first developed over 50 years ago – contain the outer shell of the virus, but they lack the viral genes needed to reproduce.

      Hamsters treated with the spike protein coated pseudovirus showed lung damage similar to that seen in humans infected with SARS-CoV2. When researchers added pseudovirus to cultured endothelial cells they found that the mitochondria inside the cells were injured. Since mitochondria are responsible for providing energy to cells, their dysfunction can cause cell death.

      When isolated pulmonary arteries were exposed to the spike protein carrying pseudovirus there was some disruption in the ability of the blood vessels to dilate. The decreased ability to expand blood vessels that serve the lungs could impair the ability of the body to take up oxygen from lungs that are damaged by the virus.

      The novelty of this study was the discovery that the spike protein itself causes damage, and that the pathway triggered by the spike protein could explain the widespread cardiovascular complications that develop in COVID-19 patients.

      A Twisted Tale
      Shortly after Lei and colleagues published their study, vaccine skeptics touted the findings as proof that newly developed COVID-19 vaccines are dangerous. Afterall, if COVID-19 vaccines produce spike protein to trigger immunity, and that same spike protein causes injury, then vaccines are really no different than the disease they are designed to prevent.

      The problem with these claims is that science doesn’t support their arguments.

      The Long Road to Perdition

      COVID19 vaccines are injected into the deltoid where they are taken up by muscle cells. The vaccine remains largely contained near the site of injection. Local muscle cells that take in the vaccine produce the spike protein and place it on the surface of the cell where it is recognized by the immune system. Vaccine that is not taken up by muscle is drained into the local lymph nodes where lymphatic cells absorb the vaccine and similarly make spike protein. The lymphatic cells are responsible for activating T and B cells, which are important steps in generating immunity.

      In order to damage the endothelium of blood vessels, COVID-19 vaccines have to enter the vascular system and infect cells that circulate in the blood. Data collected by the European Medicines Agency shows that no significant amount of vaccine enters the circulation. The confinement of the expressed spike protein away from the circulatory system significant prevents it from causing damage to the vascular endothelium.

      Redesigning the Spike Protein

      The spike protein attaches SARS-CoV2 to cells through a receptor called ACE2. In order to fully interact, the spike protein must undergo a conformational change.

      A research team lead by Dr. Barney Graham from the Vaccine Research Center at the NIH National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases created an engineered form of the spike protein that is unable to make the shape change required to effectively bind to cells. The Pfizer/BioNTech, Moderna, Novavax, and Johnson&Johnson vaccines all use this inactivated spike protein, which means any spike protein that is produced by the vaccine is not able to be activated. This safety-switch limits the ability of the spike protein to bind ACE2 and limits its ability to cause damage.

      Stuck in a Hole

      In addition to engineering the spike protein so it can not be fully activated, the protein is tagged with an extra piece called a “transmembrane anchor”. The transmembrane anchor allows the spike protein to appear on the surface – or membrane – of the cell, but it is held in place by the anchor. This prevents the spike protein from drifting away and creates a fixed target for the immune system to recognize the foreign protein.

      Three Strikes Against Misinformation

      The significance of the work by Lei and colleagues has been overshadowed by the concerns raised by vaccine skeptics. Their claims of a looming vaccine catastrophe brought about by vaccine-induced spike proteins fails to consider that the spike protein of vaccines is different than the natural form; that its engineered shape prevents activation; and that multiple elements confine spike protein expression to a highly localized collection of cells whose purpose is to activate the immunity vaccines are designed to produce.

      Ironically, the same study cited by vaccine skeptics as proof of their arguments draws a very different conclusion than the negative ones they espouse. Lei and colleagues conclude their paper by noting that their study “suggests that vaccination-generated antibody and/or exogenous antibody against [spike] protein not only protects the host from SARS-CoV-2 infectivity but also inhibits [spike] protein imposed endothelial injury.” In other words, the spike proteins used by currently available vaccines actually offer a double layer of protection.

      1. “Hamsters treated with the spike protein coated pseudovirus showed lung damage similar to that seen in humans infected with SARS-CoV2. When researchers added pseudovirus to cultured endothelial cells they found that the mitochondria inside the cells were injured. Since mitochondria are responsible for providing energy to cells, their dysfunction can cause cell death.”

        The lung damage seen in COVID is essentially that which is seen in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis. What prompts the remodelling to the parenchyma is the result of a cytokine storm stemming from deficiencies primarily affecting the mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum. Magnesium and zinc is needed for cellular respiration. When cellular respiration is suboptimal or outright faltering, the mitochondria will produce excess reactive oxygen species (ROS). The endoplasmic reticulum (ER), if lacking sufficient zinc, will initiate the unfolded protein response (UPR) and also produce excess ROS. If both mitochondrial and ER dysfunction (via the UPR) are unrelieved, both organelles will initiate cell apoptosis. If ROS are produced in excess of what the body can scoop up with antioxidants (such as glutathione–and gluathione cannot be made without adequate zinc, magnesium, and selenium), then these ROS (such as H2O2) will prompt, among other things, TGF-B, which is an inflammatory cytokine. The storm of TGF-B and other inflammatory cytokines begin to affect the endothelial cells and the remodelling of the lung parenchyma.

        “The decreased ability to expand blood vessels that serve the lungs could impair the ability of the body to take up oxygen from lungs that are damaged by the virus.”

        Two additional things can cause the blood vessels to have difficulty expanding–zinc and magnesium deficiency, both of which get depleted in the body by the virus. Magnesium is important for the relaxation of the smooth muscle surrounding these blood vessels. Zinc is important for their elasticity, as well. Since the immune response to the virus (or to the spike protein in the vaccine) places a heavy toll on the body’s resources (magnesium, zinc, and B vitamins, for instance are needed to produce immune cells), the stores of micronutrients can be depleted. This can lead to a wide range of dysfunction. So, I disagree with: “In order to damage the endothelium of blood vessels, COVID-19 vaccines have to enter the vascular system and infect cells that circulate in the blood.” Simply having suboptimal, insufficient, or outright deficient levels or crucial micronutrients can damage the body.

        Magnesium in particular is important for iron homeostasis, muscle relaxation (including cardiac and smooth muscle around blood vessels), blood glucose regulation, the prevention of blood clotting, nerve function via the Na-K channels, oxygen-sensing via the Na-K-ATPase channels, immune cell production, among other things. Zinc is important for elasticity of both the lungs and blood vessels; its deficiency results in stiffening of the lungs. Furthermore, zinc deficiency also means the body cannot regulate histamine effectively, resulting in excess histamine being released. This plays a role in mast-cell activation. Plenty of other micronutrients can become depleted and play a role in the consequent systems dysfunction seen in COVID and long-COVID (e.g., B vitamins, vitamin D, folate, B12, selenium).

      1. No, Prarie Rose: what Karen said is wrong, factually and scientifically. The spike proteins produced by the vaccine do not spread to the general circulation or attach to vital organs. The vaccine is injected into the deltoid muscle of the upper arm and generates immunity from the deltoid muscle cells and the lymph system that drains this area, which is why women are advised not to get a mammogram right after getting the shot. See the piece cited above. According to the science, the vaccine produces better protection than naturally-occurring COVID infection, which is why vaccination is recommended for those who have been infected. There is no basis for having “discussions” or “debates” about this because the fears about vaccines are based on lies by Republicans and their media allies who are politically-motivated to spread misinformation and fear about the vaccines because Republicans think it will help them win elections. And, they don’t care who gets hurt or who dies in the process.

        1. There is no basis for having “discussions” or “debates” about this because the fears about the Fetus are based on lies by Democrats and their media allies who are politically-motivated to spread misinformation and fear about the the Fetus because Democrats think it will help them win elections. And, they don’t care who gets hurt or who dies in the process.

          it is striking what the change of one or two words will do. Relativism is like that which Democrats like Natch show us daily.

        2. Perhaps the spike proteins fo not migrate themselves. I don’t know; I’d have to do more research. However, the lipid nanoparticles containing the mRNA (which tells cells to produce spike protein) can migrate to other parts of the body for various reasons. It can depend upon the sort of lipid formulation and it can depend upon other ingredients, like polyethylene glycol:

          “Moreover, anti-PEG antibodies could result in fast systemic clearance of subsequently administered PEGylated nanoparticles by accelerated blood clearance127,169. The accelerated blood clearance phenomenon may change the bioavailability and biodistribution of the drug encapsulated in PEGylated nanoparticles and, thus, cause side effects127,169.”

          1. The following articles provide much insight into the questions you and Karen are discussing.

            Krammer, Florian. “SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines in Development.” Nature (London) 586, no. 7830 (2020): 516–.
            doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2798-3

            Sette, Alessandro, and Shane Crotty. “Adaptive Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19.” Cell 184, no. 4 (2021): 861–80. doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.01.007

            Recall that I told you 1+ years ago that foundational basic medical sciences come first, followed by pathology, followed by pharmacology.

            The following link from the University of Chicago SOM provides an excellent list of textbooks for understanding the basic medical sciences. These are all very doable considering you and Karen have a fascination with medicine, which I applaud, and would do well to learn these on your own. Your children might be physicians one day because of your influence.

            https://chicago.medicine.uic.edu/education/md-curriculum/curriculum-by-year/phase-1/m1-recommended-textbooks-and-materials/#recommended

        3. “According to the science, the vaccine produces better protection than naturally-occurring COVID infection . . .”

          According to the actual science in the Israeli study, that is inaccurate.

  6. The science and physics establishes that the masks have limited value to control droplet spread when following strict protocol, and random effect for other transmission modes. People who are at risk should either isolate and be attended to by people… persons who have seroconverted, and/or wear respirators with protective clothing and follow strict protocol. Vaccines have been demonstrated to cause excess adverse events including progressive viability (i.e. abortive). Vaccinated immunity has proven to be less durable and robust than natural immunity. The vaccines are non-sterilizing, and the evidence is that while they offer marginal personal protection, vaccinated immunity does not prevent infection or transmission (i.e. silent spreaders). The data from Spain (e.g. comorbidities correlated with age), India, Israel, Britain, Sweden, and America, too, is that vaccine mandates are antagonistic at best, and harmful at worst in general distribution on a forward-looking basis.

    1. “… that vaccine mandates are antagonistic at best, and harmful at worst in general distribution on a forward-looking basis.”

      I agree with everything you wrote. Now if you could invent a cure for Ivy-League brainwashing, we might get a republic again.

      1. Diogenes says:

        “I agree with everything you wrote. Now if you could invent a cure for Ivy-League brainwashing, we might get a republic again.”

        You are just jealous you were not accepted into the Ivy League.

    2. Read the piece above explaining why vaccine immunity provides better protection than natural immunity.

  7. Here’s some alarming information. But is it true?

    Whether this vaccine actually sheds the spike protein onto other people is still not yet proven (although Pfizer seems to indicate it can spread through skin-to-skin contact in “inhalation”), but the principle of mass vaccination with a faulty vaccine making a virus both more transmissible and more virulent is something that is hard to deny at this point. The reality is that more people have died from COVID-19 in 2021, with most adults vaccinated (and nearly all seniors), than in 2020 when nobody was vaccinated. Something is not adding up, and perhaps those who have been dabbling in gain-of-function research in recent years have the answer.

    According to the latest Public Health England report, the only country with granular weekly data, the COVID-19 case rates are higher per capita among the vaccinated in every age group over 30. Among those in their 40s, the case rate is nearly double among the vaccinated, for a vaccine efficacy – at least against infection – of a stunning -86%.Anyone who tells you this is normal and expected is simply lying to you. These numbers are getting worse every week. The bottom line is that cases are spreading quicker, including out of season, post-vaccine. It would be one thing if the virus became more transmissible and less deadly, which is what we typically experience with a natural pandemic. However, the opposite is true. This virus has taken a painful toll on both the vaccinated and unvaccinated over the past few months, a phenomenon that is very well explained with a leaky vaccine that fails to sterilize the virus but causes viral immune escape and a degree of vaccine mediated enhancement.

    Moreover, the notion that somehow the vaccines stop death is simply not true, especially not after they began to leak in efficacy after the first few months. We simply find no correlation anywhere in the world with higher vaccination rates and better outcomes. In fact, Israel is practically a textbook example of a leaky vaccine creating a degree of viral enhancement.
    https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/horowitz-the-data-is-in-and-we-are-now-worse-off-than-before-the-experimental-shots?utm_source=theblaze-breaking&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=30321012Trending-HorowitzDataIn&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%20TheBlaze%20Breaking%20News

  8. One more ‘woke’ company gets shunted aside to my “Do Not Use” rail siding – an ever-growing yard of derelict products and services.

  9. Turley– “In this case, the company is preventing its site from being used to raise money to allow courts to review the factual and legal basis for these claims — a curious effort for a company that claims to be fighting “misinformation.”

    +++

    “Misinformation” is a scam word to hide the fact that they want to suppress any information that departs from an accepted narrative, be it true of false. They would have taken down a GoF**Me page for Galileo.

    If truth were a genuine concern they would welcome an opportunity to have the questions fought out in an adversarial process before a neutral tribunal. .

    1. Since it requires no effort to host the information on their part, they could have followed Alphabet/Youtube’s lead and posted a disclaimer to indicate that they do not or cannot agree with the claims that they sincerely believe are misinformation. Instead, they have followed the woke and morally broke mob to confirm they are Antisci and bigoted.

    2. Young says:

      “If truth were a genuine concern they would welcome an opportunity to have the questions fought out in an adversarial process before a neutral tribunal.”

      Giuliani and Powell presented their misinformation in a district court, The case was thrown out, the lawyers were accused of perpetrating a fraud on the court, they were sanctioned by the judge and now stand to lose their law licenses.

      Fox News is being sued for defamation.

      All because TRUTH is a genuine concern and Trumpists are liars.

      1. “Giuliani and Powell presented their misinformation in a district court, The case was thrown out, the lawyers were accused of perpetrating a fraud on the court, they were sanctioned by the judge and now stand to lose their law licenses.”
        *********************************
        Obama protege Linda Parker issued the sanctions and bumped it along with this little judicious show of political impartiality: “[Judge Parker] recommended that the bar associations for each respective attorney investigate them for potential suspension or disbarment, noting that their involvement in the litigation showed they were unfit to practice law.” Classy.

        https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/25/powell-wood-trump-sanctions-506910

        Too bad she couldn’t show the same sense of compassion she showed to murderers and rapists when she famously said to Sen. Chuck Grassley “I very rarely see people who have evil in their hearts. It is just people making really bad decisions because they did not have any other option.”

        Another activist in a robe likely to be shot down yet again by an appeals couort.

        1. Mespo says:

          “Another activist in a robe likely to be shot down yet again by an appeals couort.”

          You do know that Turley NEVER attacks the integrity of judges based upon which President appointed them. You DO know that, don’t you?

          Now, can you tell me why?

          1. “You do know that Turley NEVER attacks the integrity of judges based upon which President appointed them. You DO know that, don’t you?

            Now, can you tell me why?”
            *****************************
            He’s more kind than honest?

            1. Mespo answers my question:

              “You do know that Turley NEVER attacks the integrity of judges based upon which President appointed them. You DO know that, don’t you?

              Now, can you tell me why?”
              *****************************
              He’s more kind than honest?”

              ——-

              True, Turley IS more kind than honest, I’m saddened to say. But your answer to my question is nonetheless wrong. You want another guess or shall I give you the answer?

  10. “it is an act of censorship and it is a denial of free speech by a corporation.”

    Yes, but corporations do not have any legal responsibility to allow free speech. On the contrary, they have a 1st Amendment right to limit speech on their business’s site as they see fit.

    Turley, you gripe over and over that corporations don’t want to use their 1st Amendment rights in the way that you prefer. But you do the same thing that you complain about: you remove comments from this site as you see fit, you only allow columns from others by invitation, … You, too, have a 1st Amendment right to do this.

    1. Go Fund Me certainly is free to say what it wants….but when it undercuts other’s free speech rights….that is wrong and directly contradicts the entire notion of “free speech”.

      The Professor is entirely correct when he states as he frequently does the the cure for misinformation or wrong headed thinking is yet more of that thing called “free speech”.

      Exactly as I am doing right now in response to you…using the Professor’s Blog Comments section.

      Perhaps Big Tech might take such a lesson from the Professor!

      By the way….did Go Fund Me refund all monies contributed to those accounts along with their Fees?

      1. “when it undercuts other’s free speech rights….that is wrong and directly contradicts the entire notion of “free speech”.”

        You do not have a right to post content on a company’s website, and their decision does not undercut your actual rights. They have a 1st Amendment right to restrict speech on their site as they see fit.

        Whether someone believes their choice is wrong is a matter of opinion.

        1. This has nothing to do with rights. God you people are dense. Just because something can be done, doesn’t mean it should be done. People have the right to be racist,. doesn’t mean it’s good for society. Big tech has the right to censor, doesn’t mean it’s good for society. Get it now, Forrest?

          1. Do you even recognize that you’re contradicting yourself by saying “This has nothing to do with rights. … Big tech has the right to censor”? Maybe you should avoid calling others “dense,” given your choice to make contradictory claims.

            This debate absolutely has to do with the company’s First Amendment rights and your desire that they not act on their rights.

            What is “good for society” is a matter of opinion.

              1. Actually, your inability to recognize the contradiction only underscores that you’re describing yourself.

                1. There is not contradiction. My point was CLEARLY that big tech can censor whomever they wish and they aren’t violating anyone right, but that’s it’s not a good idea. Only a dense person wouldn’t understand that point.

            1. “What is “good for society” is a matter of opinion.”

              But it’s not, it’s what the left says it is. that’s the whole point, lol. Keep up.

              1. “What is “good for society” is a matter of opinion. But it’s not, it’s what the left says it is. that’s the whole point, lol.”

                The reason is that Trumpists are lying that the election was stolen.

                1. How can you blame them for being suspicious when the media and democrats conspired with big tech and lied through their teeth for four years claiming Trump stole the election with the help of Russia?

                  1. “How can you blame them for being suspicious when the media and democrats conspired with big tech and lied through their teeth for four years claiming Trump stole the election with the help of Russia?”

                    For the same reason that Trumpists can lie through their teeth that the election was stolen.

                    Whatever you can do, we can do better.

        2. “You do not have a right to post content on a company’s website, and their decision does not undercut your actual rights. They have a 1st Amendment right to restrict speech on their site as they see fit.

          Whether someone believes their choice is wrong is a matter of opinion.”

          Correct.

    2. Are you so dense? Are you familiar with the word, “redundant’? The POINT is not that censorship is not allowed by private corporations, it’s that it’s not wise and good for society because these corporations have immeasurable influence over the populous and the ability to push an agenda and give voice to only one side. Stop being Stupid.

      1. Take your own advice.

        Whether it’s wise and good is a matter of opinion. Nothing is stopping anyone from starting a company to compete with them that does what you advocate.

        1. The ole “if you don’t like ti start your own company.. blah blah blah”. That’s not a valid argument. That’s a cop out when you’re out of a relevant defense.

      2. “Are you so dense? Are you familiar with the word, “redundant’? The POINT is not that censorship is not allowed by private corporations, it’s that it’s not wise and good for society because these corporations have immeasurable influence over the populous and the ability to push an agenda and give voice to only one side.”

        It’s called “good speech.”

      1. Not “butt-hurt” at all. Simply pointing out Turley’s hypocrisy. He has a right to do what he wants with his site.

    3. Yes, but corporations do not have any legal responsibility to allow free speech. On the contrary, they have a 1st Amendment right to limit speech on their business’s site as they see fit.

      Masterpiece Cake Shop would disagree with you.

  11. Why do so many people agree with censorship? Maybe it is because the “private-public partnership” of governments and media have imposed a ubiquitous propaganda
    campaign upon them. The Trusted News Initiative (TNI) , the WHO , the World Economic Forum, CEPI, and other such groups have “partnered” with governments to impose a
    predetermined agenda. One day before the FDA approved the Pfizer vaccine, the TNI announced the policy that “harmful disinformation myths (about vaccines) are stopped in their tracks”. So we see a tyranny imposed. What is “information” agrees. “misinformation” dues not. Over time, this twisted use of language has become normalized. “Misinformation” means anything the user says it means. And that definition is changed constantly to suppress any new challenge.

    Why is it legal for these corporations to change the terms of use for existing users? Doesn’t that violate the very idea of a contract? Doesn’t this practice reduce these agreements
    to contracts of adhesion, which used to be unacceptable? Also, if a true statement is labelled “misinformation” by a corporation, isn’t that slander?

    I hope that Mr. Turley will address these questions.

    1. Why do so many people agree with censorship?

      That’s the question, isn’t it Richard. Even before I got to the comments section, I knew what I would find. And in this corner, weighing in at… Our debates usually end up arguing two fundamental questions: Is it legal? Is it ethical? Bastiat said something very important about both:

      But, unfortunately, law by no means confines itself to its proper functions. And when it has exceeded its proper functions, it has not done so merely in some inconsequential and debatable matters. The law has gone further than this; it has acted in direct opposition to its own purpose. The law has been used to destroy its own objective: It has been applied to annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and destroying rights which its real purpose was to respect. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense.
      http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html

      He continues: Men naturally rebel against the injustice of which they are victims. Thus, when plunder is organized by law for the profit of those who make the law, all the plundered classes try somehow to enter — by peaceful or revolutionary means — into the making of laws. According to their degree of enlightenment, these plundered classes may propose one of two entirely different purposes when they attempt to attain political power: Either they may wish to stop lawful plunder, or they may wish to share in it. Woe to the nation when this latter purpose prevails among the mass victims of lawful plunder when they, in turn, seize the power to make laws!

      We are in this downward spiral and we lack the collective enlightenment to get out of it. His next point is where we are headed.

      It is as if it were necessary, before a reign of justice appears, for everyone to suffer a cruel retribution — some for their evilness, and some for their lack of understanding.

      1. Mark Levin will be very upset you are not quoting at length from his putrid book.

        Is there a thought in your mind which has not been put there by someone else? Think for yourself, man.

    2. Richard says:

      “I hope that Mr. Turley will address these questions.”

      Wishful thinking. Professor Turley is like Mr. Ed, he only speaks when HE has something to say.

  12. We have gone back and forth with the Lefties here: their position is that oppression in support of a Lefty cause is good.

    Waste of time debating with them.

    Elections will decide which way the country goes.

    As an aside. The Lefty response is always “Orange man bad”.

    Telling that they never admit to the corruption of the Biden family or Joe’s senility.

    Lefty dishonesty.

      1. Review 2016 and tell us again about liberals accepting results. If that doesn’t wet your pallet enough review the 2000 election results and tell us how the left reacted. For extra credit review also 2004 and tell us how the left reacted. Wear that hypocrite hat proudly now.

        1. I can tell you what they didn’t do which was enact voter suppression laws and give themselves the right to remove elected officials and change appointments to election boards and give themselves the right to throw out results. They also didn’t conduct fake audits by partisan donors with no election or audit experience. They aren’t asking for the social security numbers, addresses, and phone numbers of everyone in the state to give to unknown third parties.
          FYI, in 2000 they stopped the recount before completion which may have decided the election. I thought the ruling by the Florida Supreme Court to continue counting was shaped to reach a goal and not based on law (though I wanted the count to be completed). I thought the Supreme Court ruling on what Florida did was right based on the fault in the way Florida proceeded. I accepted George Bush as the President.

            1. Have Hillary and the DNC been tied to that event where one limo was burned. Did those people get branded as heroes and patriots by officials in government. Maybe they were told to “stand by” for future action?

          1. So in other words, you like elections when they go your way but have no problem complaining when they don’t. You also seem to ignore in 2000 that across the country at the state, local, and federal levels, political actors rammed through structural changes to the manner and oversight of elections. But that was ok, right?

            1. Provide the examples and let’s see if they’re the same thing? I don’t mind when people complain about election results. It’s trying to overthrow the results and stopping their implementation that I frown at. How are those fake audits going by the way. I think we need a few more in Georgia and Arizona because all of them so far haven’t changed the result. Wisconsin and Pennsylvania are acting just as stupidly, what do Pennsylvania auditors want with Social Security numbers anyway?

          2. There are no voter suppression laws. Voter laws apply to all races equally. It’s leftest like you who think black people and other minorities are too stupid to follow the same laws as white people.

          3. A lot of fantasy based on wishful thinking and grievances.

            Voter suppression:. That could be suppressing any voter of any race, religion or party. Unfortunately a lot of ballots were questionable based on voting boxes not being properly secured, questionable ballots, and a whole host of other things mentioned over and over again.

            I won’t go into the rest of the fantasy because you will claim disinterest in a real issue and revert back to fantasy.

        2. I recommend you and everybody else look at every presidential election the anti-Democrat party has lost going back 50 years!!!!! The minute they have lost each one, they have done everything they can, to try to overturn it!!

      2. Excellent point. The Russian/Trump “collusion” hoax perpetrated Hillary, the media and the liberal establishment as a whole was an unforgivable Un-American travesty.

      3. EB

        Both parties have done it and that denial is wrong.

        Hillary in 2016 compounded that denial with the Russia hoax which undermined Trump’s time in office.

        Arguably a greater assault on our country.

        Most Lefties (not you) ignore the Hillary actions and play the party game.

      4. Unless you don’t like the result so you devise ways to change them. How dishonest is that?

        Precisely. I cannot think of a more radical change to our election laws in the last 50 years than what took place in the 2020 general election.

          1. My statement was clear in its meaning. You acknowledge that by your attempt to justify those radical changes. Were these changes necessary to save lives? Who knows? Did these changes result in a fraudulent election? That’s only something an independent forensic audit could tell us.

            1. Olly says:

              “Did these changes result in a fraudulent election? That’s only something an independent forensic audit could tell us.”

              Who you gonna trust? CyberNinjas!

          2. When the Constitution delegates to one branch of State Government the ability to make such decisions, and another branch does it, is known as lawlessness.

            The pandemic doesn’t justify arbitrarily violating Constitutional boundaries.

        1. Changing the results comes after voting. You seem to be talking about changes prior to voting.

          I can’t think of a more dishonest attempt to change the results than Trump’s attempts to convince secretaries of state to “find” votes and to convince Mike Pence to reject Biden electors and replace them with Trump electors.

          1. Trump was looking for fraudulent votes or abuses of the law. The left was lawless and abused the law.

              1. Look who is making the accusations and then listen to what that group had to say:

                ‘It’s not Hunter’s laptop’ It sort of makes what you say sound dumb.

                These same people have spied on Trump, lied about Trump and have been involved in illegal activities trying to get Trump out of office. You are a fool, so I don’t expect any recognition from you about what the left has tried and failed to do.

      5. Kinda like “Crazy Abe” when the CSA licitly and constitutionally voted to secede – “Crazy Abe” having no force or weight to bring to bear against that legal exercise.

  13. Turley says:

    “Free speech can be its own disinfectant for bad speech.”

    Not always. Liars are not interested in good speech. They are liars! Get it?

    Turley: “GoFundMe is private company and can impose such rules on users.”

    Just like Turley’s imposition of his peculiar *civility rule* which permits liars to lie on his forum, but you can’t say a naughty word.

    Turley: “However, it is an act of censorship and it is a denial of free speech by a corporation.”

    Thank goodness there are some responsible corporations with their own *civility rule* which stipulates that lying is “uncivil.”

    Turley: “In this case, the company is preventing its site from being used to raise money to allow courts to review the factual and legal basis for these claims — a curious effort for a company that claims to be fighting “misinformation.”

    I suppose GoFundMe should allow Giuliani and Powell to raise money so they can perpetuate a fraud in another court of law after they got thrown out of a Michigan district court, sanctioned by the federal judge and referred for disciplinary proceedings.

    Turley refuses to acknowledge that there are bad faith liars and incontrovertible falsehoods which need not be litigated because they will be thrown out of court as fraudulent on their face and the lawyers sanctioned for lying.

    To date, Turley has yet to state that the election was not stolen. He should bear in mind Voltaire’s words:

    “Every man is guilty of the good he did not do.”

    Turley is guilty.

      1. Monument says:

        “You’re being sanctimonious again; unpleasant, especially when you are so wrong.”

        How so? Are you CAPABLE of articulating a REASON I’m wrong?

    1. Go Fund Me Takes Down Fundraising Campaign for Litigation Over Vaccine Mandate

      What GoFundMe is doing is open persecution based on beliefs. This is wrong, this is unethical, this is immoral.

      It’s really clear that GoFundMe doesn’t care one bit about inalienable human rights.

      PERSECUTE
      Merriam-Webster:
      To harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict specifically : to cause to suffer because of belief.

      Cambridge:
      To treat someone unfairly or cruelly over a long period of time because of their race, religion, or political beliefs, or to annoy someone by refusing to leave them alone.

      Oxford:
      Subject (someone) to hostility and ill-treatment, especially because of their race or political or religious beliefs.

      MacMillion:
      To treat someone extremely badly, or to refuse them equal rights, especially because of their race, religion, or political beliefs.

      Vaccine mandates are immoral, against the Nuremberg Code, and anti-liberty aka anti-Constitutional rights.

      NO ONE SHOULD BE FORCED OR COERCED BY ANY MEANS TO GET A COVID-19 VACCINE. THIS IS A PERSONAL MEDICAL CHOICE AND NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!

      JeffSilberman wrote, “Thank goodness there are some responsible corporations with their own *civility rule* which stipulates that lying is ‘uncivil.’ “

      So you think that corporations are the arbiters of truth and civility?

      I think it really, really interesting that 10 years ago during Obama’s presidency the political left was openly demonizing all corporations but now that the fascist totalitarians in the political left have figured out a way to either infiltrate corporations or intimidate corporations into crushing individual rights and openly persecuting those that oppose the social movement towards totalitarianism they climb in bed with the corporations and sing their praises just like JeffSilberman did.

      It’s because of people that think like JeffSilberman that the United States of America is currently swirling around the vortex of a social toilet on the brink of being flushed into the dark abyss of totalitarianism.

      Social Justice Warriors: The 21st Century Scourge

      1. “Vaccine mandates are immoral, against the Nuremberg Code, and anti-liberty aka anti-Constitutional rights.”

        So that applies to all vaccines? Try going to school or playing sports without getting vaccinated. Do you have the right to act stupidly and potentially kill yourself (as many right-wing talk show hosts already have), probably. Do you have the right to spread the disease and kill others including their children? I’d say no.
        Spreading opinions and misinformation is all good up to a point, killing and encouraging the death of others is a bridge too far.

        1. So you don’t believe in the right to smoke, drink or be obese either. by the way, playing sports is not an inalienable right but not wanting an experimental medical treatment is..

          1. The things you mentioned are individual rights (though you have to be a certain age to smoke and drink and can’t smoke in certain public spaces). Still, kill yourself it’s all good. Killing others is bad. I don’t want your second-hand smoke, or COVID germs.

            1. Glad you agree that vaccine mandates are wrong. If you are so scared, then stay inside. Germs existed before covid. No one is killing anyone with covid.

              1. Who said I’m against vaccine mandates? If you aren’t in a position where the public is forced to interact with you (or fellow employees) go ahead and knock yourself out (or kill yourself).
                “No one is killing anyone with covid.”
                That is as stupid a thing as you’ve written. A lot of families of doctors and nurses might disagree.

                1. No one is actively killing others with covid. If your goal was to kill people, using covid would be a real low percentage result. do you feel the same way about HIV/AIDS? DO you think we should all be tested and carry card proving no infection?

                  1. HIV is not an airborn disease. A vaccination is not the same as a negative test. There is no HIV vaccine.

                    1. Go back and read what the Omnipotent Fauci was preaching about HIV back at its peak. I was a universal danger to the entire population.

                      (The standard foment fear, ignore statistics, tactic being used today)

                  2. “If your goal was to kill people, using covid would be a real low percentage result.”

                    Culls the herd of the elderly and infirm. 🙁

                    ‘Specially if you fail to bring up the importance of vitamin D til the end of summer, barely discuss the importance of a good diet and exercise, malign perfectly good drugs like HCQ and ivermectin, and completely ignore the importance of zinc (plus a zinc ionophore) and magnesium (etc).

            2. I don’t want your vaccine, that has no long term studies whatsoever. It takes and average of 12 years for the FDA to approve a drug (it’s right on their website) PRECISELY because of long-term safety studies. How dare you attack people who don’t want to be guinea pigs.

        2. enigmainblackcom wrote, “So that applies to all vaccines?”

          Yes. Specifically; mandating an experimental vaccine (yes the COVID-19 vaccines are experimental) directly violates the Nuremberg Code.

          enigmainblackcom wrote, “Do you have the right to act stupidly and potentially kill yourself (as many right-wing talk show hosts already have), probably.”

          People have an inalienable human right to choose their own medical treatments, period, end of discussion.

          enigmainblackcom wrote, “Do you have the right to spread the disease and kill others including their children?”

          There is something to be said for civic duty but even that doesn’t overrule inalienable human rights. Personally, I chose to get the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine when it became available to me, I think it was my civic duty and a duty to my family.

          By the way enigmainblackcom ; it’s been proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the COVID-19 vaccine DOES NOT PREVENT the vaccinated from catching or spreading the virus, what has been definitively shown is that the vaccines reduce the severity of symptoms associated with the virus. At this point in time there is nothing known that will actually prevent a person from catching COVID-19, or one its variants, if a person is exposed to it. So based on actual facts, you know real science, your argument does not apply to the COVID-19 vaccines.

          enigmainblackcom wrote, “Spreading opinions and misinformation is all good up to a point, killing and encouraging the death of others is a bridge too far.”

          I’m not sure if you’re trying to state or imply that I have done such a thing; but, facts do not become “misinformation” just because you or others disagree with them.

          1. “By the way enigmainblackcom ; it’s been proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the COVID-19 vaccine DOES NOT PREVENT the vaccinated from catching or spreading the virus,”
            The vaccines absolutely do prevent most people from getting COVID-19. Otherwise, the rates of people getting affected would be the same for the vaccinated and unvaccinated. It doesn’t stop everyone from getting it, enough to make a huge difference and hopefully stop future variants that can come back and kill/infect the already vaccinated. I’d love to see your list of “unalienable rights.” Just curious.

            1. enigmainblackcom wrote, “The vaccines absolutely do prevent most people from getting COVID-19.”

              “Most people”? You’re kidding me, right? Did you seriously not comprehend what I wrote?

              Try again, here’s the relevant section for your reading pleasure…

              “It’s been proven beyond a shadow of doubt that the COVID-19 vaccine DOES NOT PREVENT the vaccinated from catching or spreading the virus”

              Logic and actual facts dictate that even if only one vaccinated person (it’s a hellavalot more than just one) contracts or spreads COVID-19, or any of the variants, then my statement is fact. In fact the makers of the vaccines do not claim that the vaccines prevent people from catching and/or spread the virus.

              Do you know what asymptomatic means?

              No one knows, let me repeat that and give it the emphasis it requires, NO ONE KNOWS how many asymptomatic vaccinated or asymptomatic unvaccinated people are walking around carrying and spreading the COVID-19 virus. Why do you think there are still mask mandates all over the place and the CDC is still recommending people wear masks?

              The COVID-19 vaccine DOES NOT PREVENT the vaccinated from catching or spreading the virus, period. If you think you can prove otherwise then do so.

          2. ‘People have an inalienable human right to choose their own medical treatments, period, end of discussion”

            This.

        3. None of my children ever got any vaccines and all attend/ed public schools and excelled at sports and after-school activities.

        4. You’re evading the question as usual.

          Please cite the Constitution for a legal basis and authority to issue mandates of any sort.

          There may be requirements in high school that obtain voluntary compliance.

          There is no power provided by the Constitution for Congress or the President to issue mandates related to personal healthcare.

          There are no “emergency powers” provided by the Constitution.

          1. One doesn’t have to cite the Constitution for everything. Does the Constitution require to stop for a red light? No! Try convincing a police officer that law is oppressive and tyrannical and you don’t have to obey it. If/when you come up with a Constitutional basis for passing traffic laws. Use the same one to justify mandates.

            1. I see what you mean.

              The Constitution says, “You communists do whatever you like today!”

              Not!

              The Constitution provides the power to Congress to suspend habeas corpus in a condition of rebellion or invasion.

              No “emergency powers” were provided to Congress to impose healthcare mandates in the event of an individual contracting the flu, a cold, etc.

              The Constitution leaves healthcare as a right and freedom of individuals as is it provides a right to privacy to individuals.

              A tie goes to the runner in baseball.

              A tie goes to the citizen in American governance.
              ______________________________________________________________________________________________

              9th Amendment

              The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
              _____________________________________________________________________________________________________

              “…or to the people.”

              10 Amendment

              The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

                    1. Enigma, most people know that I am pretty blunt and respond when people make accusations against me, so what you are saying:

                      “I have had a running commentary with you, pointing out what you’ve made up. You could have responded the first time(s) if you objected.”

                      is unadulterated BS. I defend my comments, and then you run away. That is how the last arguments ended. You don’t like that many have discovered your victimhood defense and that when it comes to dealing in the present, you run away from things successfully proven.

                      Don’t start the lying game, for if you do, you will lose.

                    2. “Don’t start the lying game, for if you do, you will lose.”

                      I couldn’t possibly top you with lying, you do it so frequently you apparently don’t even know you’re doing it. I’m not going to look up the many instances I’ve pointed out you making things up. They were responses to you so you should have seen them. I’ll throw it to the audience, does anyone remember me telling Allan (S. Meyer) that he makes shit up?

                    3. “I couldn’t possibly top you with lying,”

                      The difference is I and others have pointed out your lies. You haven’t successfully done that without a counterargument that demonstrates a difference of opinion or without my agreement that I said something wrong. Check in with a few other folks on the list.

                      You are starting the lying game at this juncture of time and are left with no proof. This lie of yours is very recent, so you can quickly check back and provide evidence.

                      “that he makes shit up”

                      I am sure a few on the blog dislike me, and their dislike is much more important to them than their credibility, so someone will likely speak up, but again without reference to fact. We deal with an ideology where deception and lying are second nature. However, I am happy to leave it to others to decide, but they will be unable to prove their case.

                      When I say you look towards the past, and I, the future, do you consider that a lie? I provided reasons in context to my claim and what you have said. How many times have you been caught looking backward rather than forward? Many, and that is not just my observation. It is the observation of many.

      2. “Vaccine mandates are immoral, against the Nuremberg Code, and anti-liberty aka anti-Constitutional rights.”

        The Supreme Court disagrees with you. They’ve ruled multiple times that they are constitutional. People can choose not to be vaccinated and then live with the restrictions that come with that choice (e.g., not being allowed to attend public school).

        1. My children attend public school and have no been vaccinated. If you’re so agreeable to the supreme court rulings, why are you lefties trying to pack the court? Could it be you’re only agreeable when it goes your way? lol.

          1. The Republicans already packed the court when McConnell refused to allow a vote on Obama’s last nominee.

      3. “It’s really clear that GoFundMe doesn’t care one bit about inalienable human rights.”

        No one has an inalienable right to use GoFundMe’s website.

      4. Due to the claims that there are multiple commenters using the Anonymous moniker and the problems that causes, I will no longer converse with anyone using the Anonymous moniker. If you want to converse with me then get yourself a unique moniker that no one else has, otherwise don’t waste your time.

        Thanks
        Steve

        1. When I choose to reply to someone’s comment, it means that I don’t think it’s a waste of my time to do so.

          You’re free to ignore my responses. I never assume that someone will choose to reply to me.

        2. Your response is irrelevant to my point: no one has an inalienable right to use GoFundMe’s website.

      5. Witherspoon says:

        “What GoFundMe is doing is open persecution based on beliefs. This is wrong, this is unethical, this is immoral.”

        You left out “fattening.”

        Steve says:

        “It’s because of people that think like JeffSilberman that the United States of America is currently swirling around the vortex of a social toilet on the brink of being flushed into the dark abyss of totalitarianism.”

        Wow! I’m visualizing that. Nice prose. However, “dark abyss” is redundant. Abysses are dark by nature.

        1. Jeffsilberman wrote, ” ‘dark abyss’ is redundant”

          Actually Jeff, no it’s not redundant.

          Redundant: c: characterized by similarity or repetition (Merriam-Webster)

          Dark: with little or no light.

          Abyss: a deep or seemingly bottomless chasm.

          Dark ≠ Abyss ≠ Dark therefore dark abyss is not redundant.

          You’re wrong so often it’s almost like you’re making an art out of it.

  14. I have to disagree with courts being the best arbiters of misinformation. As someone that has science degrees and has worked in research for the last 30 years, I have a fair background in it. A person with a history or poli sci degree with a JD (like most politicians and judges) is not does not have the background to understand many of the complexities – a case brief does not give you the background to issue an expert “opinion”. Reporters are the worse, most journalism schools do not have a science and math requirement – then these nitwits feel competent enough to explain “science” to the masses. Science has too many arbiters already – most are incompetent – the court case will not clarify anything

    1. I have to disagree with courts being the best arbiters of misinformation.
      Thats why more speech is the answer.
      I’ll give a current events example of terrible judicial reasoning

      All are aware RoundUp Herbicide is paying out $billions in settlements due to claims associated with its use.
      How the courts got to that place?

      The lawyers found “experts” that testified, they had eliminated all known causes of cancer, Non Hodgkins lymphoma for those exposed to Roundup. It only stands to reason, the only single event therefore was Roundup.

      No direct evidence links the two. It is one hundred percent a correlation argument.

      In effect forcing the accused to prove there innocence.

    2. The courts, like the citizenry, have no choice but to evaluate, as best they can, the evidence and the information from so-called “experts” and arrive at an opinion. That is all that can be done.

  15. America has now entered into very dangerous territory. And that territory is, if I don’t agree with your opinion then I will do everything I can to banish you. It doesn’t stop until people are dragged out of their house and strung up by a rope the way it was done in the south just over a generation ago. This is exactly where we are headed. We are already seeing people brutally physically assaulted on various streets, and folks dragged out of their cars in cities such as Portland / Seattle, and up and down the “Black Shirted” if you will, West Coast.

    There are places already in this country that there is no way I would travel with my wife in them unless, I had in my pickup or one of our SUV unless I had one of the many different sidearms / semi automatic, different bolt action or shotguns I own, in the cab. And one on her side that she could easily reach fast. I want to say Thank you to the anti-democratic party that supports and backs up the deranged and rabid socially insane fascist far left, and the socially insane radical groups that seriously need to be labeled domestic terrorist groups. ANTIFA & BLM.

    And yet with this party that is in power for right now in Washington, I am labeled the terrorist. White, middle age, upper middle income American with 2 homes. Born and raised here in the very NW part of Montana. YAAK Montana and spend time down at our home in Gulf Breeze FL. And, nearly every person we know that are like us that we are around when we are down in Northwest Florida, They, would be labeled the terrorist. And this administration wonders why we despise them. They wonder why. No we will not take your fake, phony non-vaccine. Not now, not ever.

    1. Remington says:

      “No we will not take your fake, phony non-vaccine. Not now, not ever.”

      Yes, you will. You just won’t admit that you did, but the implanted chip does NOT lie.

    2. We entered this period long ago. And the Chinese are thrilled with the results. We have a president who is track to make Jimmy Carter look like one of the top five ever, but there is no Reagan to save us and even if one was out there, the left would certainly make sure he or she is destroyed.

    3. “No we will not take your fake, phony non-vaccine. Not now, not ever.”

      You have a legal right to make that choice, you just have to accept the legal consequences (for example, a restaurant or airline may choose not to accept you as a customer).

Leave a Reply