Is The “Workaround” Working? Fourth Court Enjoins Biden Vaccine Mandate

A U.S. district court in Georgia became the fourth court to enjoin a Biden Administration vaccine mandate this week.  As with the other trial and appellate courts, District Judge R. Stan Baker found that President Biden has exceeded his authority in mandating the vaccine for all federal contractors. In the meantime, outgoing New York Mayor Bill DeBlasio has ordered all private workers to be vaccinated. All of these mandates are on course for a showdown in the Supreme Court where three justices have already expressed skepticism over the mandates. 

Biden issued an executive order on Sept. 9 that required contractors to ensure that their workers are vaccinated against Covid and enforcing mask and social distancing policies. Contractors were given until Dec. 8 to comply but that was later extended to Jan. 4.

The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia granted a preliminary injunction in favor of the Associated Builders and Contractors, a national trade group that represents the construction industry. To do so, the court had to find that the challengers were likely to prevail on the merits in arguing that President Biden does not have this authority under the Procurement Act.

Judge Baker wrote “In its practical application, it operates as a regulation of public health. It will also have a major impact on the economy at large, as it limits contractors’ and members of the workforce’s ability to perform work on federal contracts. Accordingly, it appears to have vast economic and political significance.” 

White House press secretary Jen Psaki insisted that the Biden Administration is “confident in our ability legally to make these happen across the country.” While the Administration could certainly prevail on appeal, the confidence remains an exercise of hope over experience in such litigation.

Other courts have enjoined mandates under OSHA and Medicare. In the OSHA case, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled based on its own “serious constitutional concerns.”  

In the prior column, I noted Chief of Staff Ron Klain acknowledged that the use of OSHA was a “work around” in light of the constitutional barriers preventing President Biden from ordering a national mandate directly. The Fifth Circuit quoted Klain in a footnote in granting its injunction.

Biden and Klain often seem to be competing for the greatest admissions-against-interest, including a prior admission from President Biden that they would be pursuing a presumptively unconstitutional measure simply to buy more time to spend more money on the now defunct eviction moratorium. Klain was celebrating a way to evade constitutional limitations — but for courts reviewing the OSHA rule, that is akin to a husband telling a spouse that he has found a “work-around” to his vows by redefining extramarital relations.

The federal litigation raises separate issues from those likely to be raised against de Blasio’s mandate. New York will rely entirely on Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), where the Supreme Court upheld a state smallpox vaccination mandate. The case has already been used successfully in other courts like the Seventh Circuit, including decisions from conservative jurists. See Klaassen v. Trustees of Indiana Univ., No. 21-2326, 2021 WL 3281209 (7th Cir. Aug. 2, 2021) (“Given Jacobson v. Massachusetts…there can’t be a constitutional problem with vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 [aka COVID-19]”). They have applied the low “rational basis” standard to uphold such mandates in light of Jacobson. 

Jacobson is not a lead pipe cinch of precedent. It involved smallpox, a disease with a much higher lethality of up to 30% of those infected. The disease also hit children to a far greater extent than Covid. It also involved a vaccine that was used for years and was universally accepted as safe. The case also involved only a $5 fine as opposed to being barred from employment, dining, travel and other basic functions in life.

On October 29, 2021, three Supreme Court justices dissented in a case where they felt review should have been granted. Justices Gorsuch, Thomas, and Alito raised questions over whether past deference on the pandemic is warranted and warned that the “compelling interest” recognized in such past cases “cannot qualify as such forever.”

Many of us support vaccinations. The question is the legal authority to require others to be vaccinated. Jacobson is likely to carry considerable weight in the review of state and city mandates.

However, the question is whether courts will demand more from the government in addressing issues of religious exemptions and natural antibodies. Studies indicate that such natural antibodies confer greater protection than vaccines though most doctors still encourage vaccinations. Over the last year, courts have remained highly deferential. However, the three justices previously noted that “if human nature and history teach us anything, it is that civil liberties face grave risks when governments proclaim indefinite states of emergency.”

 

261 thoughts on “Is The “Workaround” Working? Fourth Court Enjoins Biden Vaccine Mandate”

  1. You can avoid war by acquiescing to aggressors, but then you would also be avoiding freedom and prosperity.

  2. Jacobson is not a lead pipe cinch of precedent. It involved smallpox, a disease with a much higher lethality of up to 30% of those infected. The disease also hit children to a far greater extent than Covid. It also involved a vaccine that was used for years and was universally accepted as safe. The case also involved only a $5 fine as opposed to being barred from employment, dining, travel and other basic functions in life.

    Jacobson was about a right to privacy challege against the state satying, You must be vaccinated.

    It never addressed the issue of whether the state can say, “You shall not employ others who are unvaccinated. And Jacobson said nothing on free association rights.

  3. You prevent war by destroying your enemy’s capacity to wage war against you.
    When is the last time a diplomat prevented a war?

    1. Though not a diplomat, Trump who was President decided against certain military actions that could have led to war and acted in a fashion so that enemies were less likely to fight one. Though not a diplomat, the diplomats worked for Trump and he was hands on.

      So yes, war was prevented by the last administration on several occasions. In the meantime the Biden administration is bringing us closer to war with Russia, China, Iran and elsewhere.

      I would say that those that liked peace lost when Trump was replaced by Biden.

  4. “Klain was celebrating a way to evade constitutional limitations — but for courts reviewing the OSHA rule, that is akin to a husband telling a spouse that he has found a “work-around” to his vows by redefining extramarital relations.”
    *******************************

    They tred that, too! Oh the Wiley Coyote Dims and their doomed-to-failure “workarounds”:

  5. If what the First Amendment covers could just as well be covered by the 9th and 10th amendments, then it seems like an inefficient use of parchment.

  6. I am twice vaccinated, wear a mask to work and shopping, scheduled for my booster. I am now at home, sheltering in place with COVID-19. My wife is the same and she has it., we live in a blue state with fairly strict mandates.

    We caught it from a person who is vaccinated but we were around two families who were not vaccinated during a Thanksgiving meal. The young man who is half my age and unvaccinated is struggling.

    I am pro vaccination but am a realist. Not everyone will. It will probably be a matter of time before everyone will eventually get some form of COViD. COVID is real. How it impacts a person varies.

    What is offensive is how this has become so political. The exiting mayor of NYC is a Marxist Communist who is an angry man. It is obvious that he loves power and hates this nation.

    COVID-19 has been a gift for the far left socialist-communist faction who are now dictating the agenda in congress. They are rushing in and not leaving one stone unturned in their agenda to divide and destroy this nation. The people who are telling Biden what to say and do are part of this movement. The DOJ should be fighting criminals, locking them up and putting them behind bars but this is now what they do.

    Meanwhile in NYC a hardened criminal who should be behind bars was roaming the streets, beat up a woman, slashed her face. He then punched out a woman an hour later. The police caught him. Arrested him. He was back on the street an hour later with no bail. Put this into the big picture. The same government who allows this are the ones mandating a COVID passport so you can buy your granddaughter an ice cream cone.

    1. E.M.,

      I am unvaccinated, almost never wear a mask (unless asked, politely), and am waiting to see the results of the current long-term, worldwide, human clinical trails before making any decision regarding the experimental C-19 vaccinations. I am currently at home, not ill (nor is my wife who is also unvaccinated), and live in a red state with no mandates. Our C-19 infection rate is among the lowest in the nation.

      We spent Thanksgiving at a friend’s home with their extended family (four generations, plus their teen and twenty-something’s friends), all vaccinated but several suffering from colds and other (unspecified) aliments. There were comments to the effect that since being vaccinated they’ve consistently felt “under the weather” for one reason or another.

      I am not pro-vaccination, but am a realist. C-19 is real. Three extended family members (in other states) were hospitalized (from six to nine weeks) by C-19 and one died (in hospital, on a vent, after receiving Remdesivir). A long-time family friend, diagnosed with C-19 and faring poorly, was treated with Ivermectin and fully recovered within a week, at home. How C-19 affects a person varies, as does the effectiveness of treatments for it.

      What is offensive is how this has become so political. It’s easy to tell when fear of C-19 is being ramped up — public mask use goes up dramatically, then gradually falls off again. It’s cyclical, apparently in response to some perceived political need, as far as I can tell.

      Tonight I’ll be attending a largish motorcycle rally and classic car show at a popular local restaurant. If past rallies (it’s held every other week) are any indication few, if any, will be masked. It’s a risk I’m willing to take, and have many times recently, living normally and free of unwarranted fear (it’s a bonus pointing out Fauci and Biden’s fear-based narrative). As far as I can tell, there has been no significant increase in crime here.

      More people from blue states are arriving every day to escape those states’ mandates. In fact, it’s a flood of newcomers — crowded bars and restaurants, full campgrounds and RV parks, and heavy traffic even in our rural area. Our property values are soaring, inflating so fast it will make your head spin (this is not necessarily a good thing in my opinion). We receive unsolicited offers for our home weekly from REITs and real estate agents, and a few people who occasionally stop and ask if we’d be willing to sell.

      Wishing you and your family a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Be of good health and good cheer.
      (And, since this is the internet and just to be sure, that sentiment is sincere not sarcastic).

  7. Civil liberties and the Constitution are not important to this President. He will push and devise “work arounds” to force vaccination on every person if given a chance.

    Does vaccination stop the spread of the virus? No. Is this case similar to the smallpox case? No. This attempt is a clear case of the left trying to convert this Constitutional Republic into a Fascist Oligarchy.

    I am not advocating one way or the other regarding vaccination. I am advocating for upholding the Constitution.

    1. Anonymous, nobody is being forced to be vaccinated. People have a choice besides vaccination. The mandates have several options that include weekly testing instead of vaccination or if anyone qualifies for medical or religious exemptions don’t have to be vaccinated. People’s civil liberties are always intact.

      1. Coercion is not a free choice.

        Since one can spread Covid with or without the vaccine, there is no logical argument for the use of coercion or force.

        1. S. Meyer,

          It’s not coercion. You still have a choice to not vaccinate. To keep your job you can test weekly. Covid test are quick these days. There’s even home testing available.

          One test a week is a very small sacrifice to make. No liberties are being denied by doing that.

          1. ATS, of course it is coercion, though there are different degrees.

            The thief says, your wallet or you life, while shoving a gun into your ribs. That is coercion.

            Your boss who determines your raises, says he is collecting for United Way and would you like to generously contribute? That too is coercion though to a lesser extent.

            As an aside the rapid Covid test is not that accurate, and the test along with what happens after isn’t always small potatoes. If those vaccinated can transmit Covid, then why should only the unvaccinated face such coercion? Why not do the rapid test for everyone?

        2. S. Meyer, what liberties are being lost?

          The mandate gives you the choice NOT to vaccinate by getting a weekly test. It means you are not required to get it by choosing another option.

          “ Since one can spread Covid with or without the vaccine, there is no logical argument for the use of coercion or force.”

          Yes there is a logical argument for getting it. The vaccine has been proven to lessen the severity of the illness and reduce the likelihood of being hospitalized vs not getting it. The majority of severe cases and hospitalizations are of those who are not vaccinated. Some cases do involve vaccinated individuals, but that’s due to either those getting a single dose or those who vaccinated early and their immunity has faded.

          1. “Yes there is a logical argument for getting it. The vaccine has been proven to lessen the severity of the illness and reduce the likelihood of being hospitalized vs not getting it. “

            Coercion is not the choice of a free people even if it may be helpful to the individual. To say something that ridiculous means that everyone can be told they must get a flu shot, they must eliminate certain foods from their diet, they must wear a monitor to prove they exercised, etc. You are looking for a mother, not leadership.

            Furthermore, why should the young that do not die from Covid be forced to take the vaccine? It has caused severe problems in a lot more than seem to be admitted by the CDC. The risk of the vaccine is greater than the risk from the disease for groups, and many of those being forced to take that risk already had Covid and have better immunity than those taking the shot.

            So far you haven’t proven your case, or a reason to coerce people into taking the vaccine.

            1. Anonymous,

              Nobody is being coerced. You have choices. You can choose not to get the vaccine and be tested once a week.

              What liberties do you lose by choosing testing over the vaccine?

              Nobody has been able to answer that question.

              You get to keep your job even when you choose not to get the vaccine by getting tested once a week.

              You haven’t proven what liberties you lose by choosing to get tested instead of the vaccine.

              1. No matter how slight it appears, coercion is always backed up with force and, eventually, a gun. You need to explain why vaccination is an emergency and requires individuals to suffer whatever risk exists. Then you have to explain why, if the rapid test is required on the non vaccinated, why isn’t it also required for the vaccinated.

                Why not say that unvaccinated must wear something yellow? That isn’t coercive to you, even though the word, must, makes it coercive.

                I provided a reason above why the rapid test is problematic.

                Let’s hear your answers. Don’t run away.

                1. Anonymous, your response was, “Get a life”, but that response is missing from the blog. The response demonstrates your ideas were not well thought out. I’ll present the questions raised, numbering them to give you another chance.

                  1)No matter how slight it appears, coercion is always backed up with force and, eventually, a gun.
                  2)You need to explain why vaccination is an emergency and requires individuals to suffer whatever risk exists.
                  3)Then you have to explain why, if the rapid test is required on the non vaccinated, why isn’t it also required for the vaccinated.

                  4)Why not say that unvaccinated must wear something yellow? That isn’t coercive to you, even though the word, must, makes it coercive.

                  Let’s hear your answers. Don’t run away.

              2. “You can choose not to get the vaccine and be tested once a week.”

                What if I choose: None of the above? What action will the government take against me and/or my employer?

                Government by its nature is an institution of physical force. It is its police powers.

                Your notion of “you have a choice” (vax or testing) is a con game. When government decrees: Do A or do B, under the penalty of fine or imprisonment — that is not choice. That is naked aggression.

                What is truly horrifying is those who are so casual about calling for the use of government compulsion in the context of an individual’s medical choices.

                Government force against one’s body is force against one’s judgment, convictions, thinking. If that is *not* a violation of one’s liberty, then there is no such thing.

                1. Sam, I think one of the problems we face is that people like this anonymous do not know what fascism is and do not understand what it means to be free. They have an inability to concentrate on the unknown, so well described by Bastiat.

                2. Your notion of “you have a choice” (vax or testing) is a con game. When government decrees: Do A or do B, under the penalty of fine or imprisonment — that is not choice. That is naked aggression.

                  That’s absolutely correct. It’s government effectively using eminent domain over our bodies, not only without just compensation, but with the threat of lost compensation, fines or imprisonment.

                  1. “. . . using eminent domain over our bodies . . .”

                    Good point.

                    And it’s the same collectivist premise: the “public interest” or the “good” of the community.

                    Individualism is the only cure for this pandemic of forced vaccinations.

    2. I am not advocating one way or the other regarding vaccination. I am advocating for upholding the Constitution.

      ^^^THIS^^^

      The leftist always frame their response backwards. I am not anti vax. I am a rabid, take no prisoners advocate for limited govt as directed by the Constitution.
      Clearly we are no longer in an emergency, legislative bodies have plenty of time to address needs through regular debate and consent.

  8. Where in the Constitution does it say that someone has a right to own a business in the first place?

    1. Better yet, where does it say they can’t? The Constitution isn’t about what rights we have, only what rights the government can’t take away from us.

      Of course you don’t realize that based on your absurd comment.

    2. The Constitution outlines the extent of what the Federal government gets to do for governance and no more. 9th and 10th Amendments point out that there are all kinds of rights not expressly outlined in the Bill of Rights. Being able to own a business falls under that.

    3. “Where in the Constitution does it say that someone has a right to own a business in the first place?”

      The Privileges and Immunities Clause is your huckleberry. For the lay person like yourself who does not have a historical context and understanding of the language’s nuanced meaning at the time of the drafting, may I recommend the excellent, brief online program offered by Hillsdale College.

    4. Where in the Constitution does it say that someone has a right to own a business in the first place?

      What are babbling on about???

      The Constitution does not grant rights. It forbids the federal govt from enumrated actions that would infringe on God given rights.

      How about the fact that owning a business long predated the Constitution?
      The constitutition was the document creating the Federal Government. To take on the tasks, States could not do. Defense of National boarders, Diplomatic relations, etc.
      The states were running things fine for 5 to 6 Generations.

  9. But isn’t it an inherent power of the individual states to issue such an order based on public health concerns? If serious about the 10th Amendment, wouldn’t the Court overturning a local public health decree also be an overreach? Agree that the de Blasio decree is too broad and should be scaled back, but the principle remains that it should/could be a right of the local jurisdiction

    1. No power is unconstrained if we are to operate under a constitutional rule of law. In Jacobson, the court addressed specifically the authority of a state, pursuant to a state statute, to require vaccination against smallpox versus penalty of a small fine. Justice Harlan, for the court, outlined a four-part test. If that precedent were to be applied as written, the local vaccine mandates would be unlikely to survive.

    2. “If serious about the 10th Amendment . . .”

      10A is not a blank check for state governments. America is not a loose coalition of city-states. It is a federalist system. As such, no government (federal, state, or local) can take any action unless that action is expressly *permitted* by the Constitution.

    3. Agree that the de Blasio decree is too broad and should be scaled back, but the principle remains that it should/could be a right of the local jurisdiction

      State and local jurisdictions. But 22 months into the virus, no jurisdiction is operating in an emergency. Governing bodies must be the source. Not a lone executive ordering agencies to act.
      The people are being cut out of self governance.

  10. Jacobsen has been misused. The case predated the “rational basis” test. In his opinion for the court, Justice Harlan applied a four factor test. Many have argued that the local vaccine mandates meet none of them, let alone all four. An honest application of Jacobsen would likely lead to the end of local mandates.

  11. We are now in the endemic phase. 21-22 months we have been dealing with this.

    EMERGENCY! left the building a long time ago.
    There is no reason to be governing by emergency decree. That is the ONLY way Democrat leftist can govern. If a federal mandate cannot clear legislative procedure, there is no need for the mandate.

    The default governance must always be, By the will of the people.

    Side note. Here in Iowa, we had school board elections Nov 2. One by one School Boards with new elected members are voting away mask mandates, very few mask mandates are surviving, One year ago the same elections took place, no major changes. The people are done with the hyped up scare tactics, the polls,ie, ballott boxes are all the evidence needed. 11 months from now the People will speak as a nation.

      1. With the shift in schoolboards, I’m sure Garland will take over schoolboard elections. That’s one of those powers the Democrats have nationalized.

    1. “EMERGENCY! left the building a long time ago.”

      Why did you have to introduce facts and evidence into the discussion? Don’t you know that “emergency” is whatever the Left says it is? And that it lasts as long as is political expedient?

      You’re probably one of those unvaccinated. Or a domestic terrorist. Maybe both.

    1. Witherspoon, the COVID vaccine is no longer experimental. Over a billion doses have been administered without serious effects.

      The covid vaccine is as safe as the flu shots people get every year.

      1. Please spare me your “flu shots are 100% safe BS”. My mother was just released from the hospital this past Monday following an undiagnosed and unaccountable reaction to her yearly flu vaccine. On Friday of last week we were told she likely wouldn’t “make it”. Nothing you inject is 100% safe.
        We choose not to get the flu vaccination. Likewise we get to choose whether or not to get the Covid vaccination.
        What government mandate or vaccine ended the 1918 Spanish Flu epidemic?
        My great grandparents never got the Smallpox vaccine as they had already contracted and survived it. Can you say the same about the Covid vaccine?

      2. “the COVID vaccine is no longer experimental. Over a billion doses have been administered ”

        Svelaz, the Germans used Zyklon B on around 1 million humans. I guess it was no longer experimental, but that didn’t mean it was safe.

        You continue your statement by saying: “without serious effects.”, but even the most conservative researchers admit it killed people and caused harm.

        Why is it that everything you say needs to be corrected? One would think your intellect would protect you from posting such garbage, but apparently, it doesn’t.

        I am still waiting for you to correct your comments made in the past.

        1. Anonymous (S. Meyer),

          There have been over 8 billion doses administered worldwide. In this country 475 million doses and only 6 unconfirmed deaths. It’s a far better record than your poor Zyclon B analogy.

          You shouldn’t speak about intellect when you attempt to apply nonsensical analogies that have nothing to do with the subject matter.

          1. Svelaz, I can’t help it that you are terminally ignorant. We are all basing our opinions on incomplete facts created purposefully by the left. You quote numbers that you like, not meaningful numbers. Why would you post anything significant? Your handlers want you to remain Stupid and promote Stupid leftist information.

            I am not an expert on the vaccine, but I can draw conclusions on my own and understand the reasons behind them. You draw talking points without any critical thinking skills. That is well known to anyone on the blog.

            Dr. McCullough is a brilliant cardiologist, and I think, an epidemiologist who is very heavily credentialed and respected. Olly posted an audio interview of him. I didn’t listen to it because I have heard him many times. He makes sense and has more knowledge than those feeding you your responses. Likely he has more ability than many CDC politicians who are pushing politics rather than science. I think you would benefit from listening to it while thinking critically. If you can engage in any intellectual thought, then after listening, at the very least, you won’t be so sure of yourself, and you will sound more intelligent. If you listen without an open mind, you will remain in your present state, dumb as a doornail.

            1. I think you would benefit from listening to it while thinking critically.

              SM, regardless of what we all “think” we know, this podcast will undoubtedly benefit anyone that is looking for objective answers, free of politics. We have to be skeptical, if for any other reason than we can’t all be right in what we think we know. There is too much at stake with this topic to allow ego or politics to drive our opinions. I don’t normally watch webinars or listen to podcasts due to time constraints. I have no medical background, I’m not a lawyer or political scientist. Regarding this subject, I am extremely interested in watching or listening to medical professionals that will objectively break down the data, explain what that data informs them and then explain what recommendations have been made that defy the what the data suggests, or aligns with what the data suggests. This podcast does exactly that.

            2. S. Meyer,

              “ I am not an expert on the vaccine, but I can draw conclusions on my own and understand the reasons behind them.”

              LOL!!!!! You just admitted you rely on your own ignorance. That’s very true.

              “ Dr. McCullough is a brilliant cardiologist, and I think, an epidemiologist who is very heavily credentialed and respected. ”

              “Very heavily credentialed”? BWHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! You can tell you are full of crap S. Meyer. Especially when you “think” rather than KNOW. You’re one MASSIVE LIAR. LOL!!!!

              1. “LOL!!!!! You just admitted you rely on your own ignorance. That’s very true.”

                I just said I wasn’t an expert. That doesn’t mean I am like you and know nothing. I can think. You clearly can’t.

                ““Very heavily credentialed”? BWHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! You can tell you are full of crap S. Meyer. Especially when you “think” rather than KNOW. You’re one MASSIVE LIAR. LOL!!!!”

                Why do you make such an a$$ of yourself, Svelaz, He is a university professor of medicine who is widely published and referenced. There is more, but you can look it up for yourself and realize what a Stupid jerk you are.

      3. Svelaz wrote, “the COVID vaccine is no longer experimental. Over a billion doses have been administered without serious effects.”

        Hogwash! You swallowed and are parroting false information.

        1. The vaccines ARE still experimental, don’t believe the “settled science” mantra. This is the first time the mRNA vaccine method (Pfizer and Moderna) or the viral vector method (Jensen) to instruct the body to make this particular spike protein to fight COVID-19. We do not know the mid or long term side effects of the spike protein or the methods of delivery, we only know the short term side effects; the human race are COVID-19 vaccine test subjects. The spike protein is only supposed to last for a short time in the body and remain in the arm but multiple studies have shown that the spike protein is traveling all over the body and in some cases congregating in organs, like reproductive organs, and we don’t know what effect this will have. The vaccine failed to react in the body as predicted and allowed the spike protein to travel all over the body like it wasn’t supposed to, that unpredicted outcome should have been a huge red flag and cause it to be rejected by the FDA but fear of COVID-19 had eaten the minds of scientists. Also; there are some conspiracy theorists have gone completely off the reservation with vaccine issues and are saying that “they’ve put weapon’s against humanity in a needle” and “they could kill billions” but I put no stock in these correlation = causation theories. The point I’m making is that there are problems, there are unknowns, it is still experimental, and there are far too many “scientists” that are not even bothering to do their due diligence and look at possible problems with the vaccines and instead are running around with blinders on parroting the “safe and effective” mantra.

        2. There have been serious side effects and lots of them, it’s literally being hid from the public because they REFUSE to publicly discuss them and they just keep parroting that the vaccines are “safe and effective”. The last time I checked the numbers of serious side effects to the vaccines the percentage of those serious side effects is very low for COVID but higher than the flu shots by at least a factor of 10, I think the numbers for serious negative effects for COVID were around .008% vs Flu which were around .0008% but it could have been .08% vs .008% respectively. Those percentages numbers are identifying the serious side effects and they are in the thousands of known and we don’t know how many are unknown because the public reporting system is seriously flawed – there are videos that discuss this.

        There are plenty of videos out there from reputable scientists, medical doctors and investigative reporters that talk specifically about the problems with vaccine side effects and the origins of COVID itself. Blow past the conspiracy theory videos that are talking about the weapons against humanity, evil satanic things behind the vaccines, calling the vaccines bioweapons, etc. even though they bring up some decent questions that haven’t been answered.

  12. I have been shocked by the fear mongering about Covid from both the media and world governments.

    I have never received so much misinformation, disinformation, and outright lying.

    And individual liberties have been lost as a result of government mandates.

    Don’t know the answer, but the loss of liberties should be accompanied by reasonable debate and truth.

    Neither has been visible in the entire process.

      1. In NYC, being able to patronize a restaurant without getting one vaccine.

        (Funny how people can refuse the swine flu vaccine, the measles vaccine, the polio vaccine, and restaurants are still legally allowed to let them dine in.)

    1. Perhaps we have undergone something like a soft coup where our Constitutional liberties have been quietly removed and replaced by the rule of partisan individuals instead of the rule of law.

      1. S. Meyer, what liberties have been “quietly removed”?

        Which have been lost? You and monumentcolorado keep saying that, but don’t list any.

        1. You are too dumb to recognize liberties lost. There is no reason to explain it to you, for you will run away like you have so many times before. Learn the difference between American Republican democracy based on a constitution and the ideology of your handlers which is a cruel type of fascism or Marxism. You ran away from that discussion in the past, so why would I discuss it with you today?

Leave a Reply