She's the first I heard that used George Floyd as an example of the Dems hypocritical "worship" of a felon. Brilliant. And of course he had convictions on drugs, theft, etc, including a prison term for armed aggravated home invasion robbery.

More from MTG letting Fauci have it. WTG MTG! Fuck these commies.

Triggered Democrats Send Hearing into Chaos When Marjorie Taylor Greene Refuses to Address “Mr. Fauci” as ‘Doctor’ While Ripping Him Over His Evil Experiments and Lies

By Cullen Linebarger | Jun. 3, 2024 1:40 pm

As The Gateway Pundit’s Jordan Conradson reported, the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic heard testimony at 10 AM ET in the Rayburn House Office Building from “Dr.” Anthony Fauci, the former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and face of sinister COVID-era lockdowns and fraudulent medical guidance.

Upon arrival at the Capitol, Fauci received some much-deserved heckling from conservative journalist, lawyer, and activist Ivan Raiklin, who unloaded on him with questions on his sick record of lies as he strolled away.

Things got worse for Fauci following lackluster grilling by GOPers and slobbering statements from Democrats when Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) got her shot at him. The beating was so severe it sent the hearing off-kilter as Democrats and Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-KY) erupted over her being too rude and not addressing Fauci as doctor.

Greene first ripped apart Fauci for signing off evil experiments torturing innocent dogs to death in the name of science.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1797665042068041933



GREENE: As director of the NIH, you signed off on these so-called scientific experiments. And as a dog lover, I want to tell you this is disgusting and evil!

And these experiments that happened to beagles were paid for by the American taxpayer. And I want you to know Americans don't pay their taxes for animals to be tortured like this. So the type of "science" that you are representing, Mr. Fauci, is abhorrent, and it needs to stop!

She continued to rip apart Fauci on his malevolent lies, this time on the NIH making a killing from Big Pharma and his hypocrisy on mandates. She even held up a photo of him not wearing a mask during the pandemic and demanded he go to prison.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1797665522013863977



GREENE: You also told people they had to "distance" by six feet, they needed to wear masks. Let's also talk about the "science" that you like to represent.

(reads New York Post headline) "NIH scientists made $710 million in royalties from drug makers" (stop reading). A fact that's been hidden.

"Is it right for scientists and doctors getting paid by the American people, government taxpayer paychecks to get patents where they're paid millions and hundreds of millions of dollars in royalty fees? Especially when the NIH and these government agencies are recommending medical suggestions and advice and making up guidelines like six-foot mandates and masking children.

Do you think that's appropriate? Do the American people deserve to be abused like that? Mr. Fauci? 'cause you're not Doctor, you're Mr. Fauci."

Nah, I don't need your answer. I want to talk about this right here (holds up the infamous photo of Fauci talking to friends at a Washington Nationals game without his mask on).

RASKIN: Mr. Chairman, objection, Mr. Chairman, objection.

WENSTRUP: Gentlelady will suspend.

RASKIN: Under the rules of decorum, are we allowed to deny that a doctor is not a doctor just because we don't want him to be one?

GREENE: Yes. Because that man does not deserve to have a license. As a matter of fact, it should be revoked and he belongs in prison!

This moment sent the hearing into total chaos. Democrats continued to melt down over Greene's "lack of decorum" before Westrup sided with them and finally forced Greene to back off.



UNNAMED DEMOCRAT: Is this what we have become? Is this what we have devolved into? No decorum.

That's completely unacceptable to be able to deny Dr. Fauci, who's here, a respected member of the medical community, his title," he continued. "And that's actually a personal attack on his character."

WESTRUP: And I have instructed her to address him as a doctor.

GREENE: I'm not addressing him as a doctor.

ANOTHER DEMOCRAT: We should have to take her words down.

GREENE: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a point of order. Because they accused us of worshipping President Trump. We don't worship President Trump.

WESTRUP: Gentlelady will suspend! The rule on taking down words does not apply to a witness. Again, I'm not condoning the words.

The chair overrules the point of order by the gentleman from Maryland but asks that members please afford all other members the respect they're entitled, refrain from using rhetoric that could be construed as an attack on the motives or character of another member, or the witness.

GREENE: You belong in prison, Dr. Fauci

quote:

Originally posted by 12131:
UNNAMED DEMOCRAT: Is this what we have become? Is this what we have devolved into? No decorum.

To all Democrats - Just following your example and playing by your rules, pal.

These fuckin' people

Deborah Birx Proposes Weekly Testing for Millions of U.S. Cows and Dairy Workers for ‘Asymptomatic’ Bird Flu

In days gone by, public officials who failed at their duties and who caused harm to the public would resign in disgrace and withdraw from public life, but these days, the motherfuckers get promoted or go get a new job! These people have no shame, no sense of honor and no conscience. This bitch oughta go home and hang herself.

NEVER FORGET:

Dr. Tony Fauci and Dr. Deborah Birx used the Imperial College Model to persuade President Trump to lock down the ENTIRE US ECONOMY.
The fraudulent model predicted 2.2 million American deaths from the coronavirus pandemic.
The authors of the Imperial College Model shared their findings with the White House Coronavirus task force in early March 2020.
Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx then met with President Trump privately and urged him to shut down the US economy and ruin the record Trump economy based on this faulty model.
A later critique of the Imperial College Model found the study was “completely unusable for scientific purposes” — The Imperial College study was a complete sham.
Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx, acting as experts, pushed a garbage model on the White House and the American public and destroyed the US economy

As reported in early 2020 — in mid-April of 2020, Dr. Fauci admitted that he and Dr. Birx persuaded President Trump to lock down the US economy knowing the massive destruction this would cause in jobs, lives, economic and personal suffering and commerce.

Trumps biggest mistake in office was trusting and underestimating the motives of the “experts” around him. Imagine where’d we be right now if his administration had America’s best interests in mind.

^^^^^^^^^^

And to be fair, Trump appointed Vice President Pence as the one in charge of the Covid-19 shitstorm. It was Pence who got Birx onboard and kept her there, agreeing to all of her bullshit. And Trump, having no experience in a situation like this, deferred to Pence, Birx, and Fauci, even though it was Trump was expressed a desire to quickly end the lockdowns and masks.

Why hasn't Birx been questioned by congress? I doubt much will come of it, but she should be right there with Fauci, she's just as guilty.

^^^^^^^^^^^
In recent days she admitted there was an effort to suppress the Covid lab leak, contradicting Fauci. And speaking of that scumbag-

https://x.com/wideawake_media/...5th-open-thread-2%2F

when the China flu arrived Fauci initially criticized trump for restricting travel from China. Shortly after he said a few things that were absolutely correct, masks don't work, and cases would spike and variants emerge in the Fall. He later hedged that to scare everyone into doing his bidding

CNN ran its Fall season update story yesterday headlined, “FDA vaccine advisers vote unanimously in favor of updated Covid-19 shot for fall.”
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/05...ovid-shot/index.html

The best news is you wouldn’t have even noticed had I not told you.

It’s mRNA happy hour! It’s not for me, or anybody I know, but the useless, feckless, totally captured FDA vaccine committee yesterday recommended an ‘update’ to the covid booster. They want to tweak the formula to make it equally dangerous and ineffective against this year’s variant, so-called JN.1.

You may not recognize ‘JN.1’ by its technical moniker. This is the one they originally labeled “Pirola” (a reference David Pecker can relate to), and are now calling FLiRT. Soon it will have its own dating website.

So here’s your public service advisory: get ready to tell your helpful, FLiRTY pharmacist what to do with her new and improved, “free,” Fall season covid shot.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...rue&utm_medium=email

It's not going to work this time:

https://x.com/uTobian/status/1798531704396910747

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
CNN ran its Fall season update story yesterday headlined, “FDA vaccine advisers vote unanimously in favor of updated Covid-19 shot for fall.”
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/05...ovid-shot/index.html

The best news is you wouldn’t have even noticed had I not told you.

It’s mRNA happy hour! It’s not for me, or anybody I know, but the useless, feckless, totally captured FDA vaccine committee yesterday recommended an ‘update’ to the covid booster. They want to tweak the formula to make it equally dangerous and ineffective against this year’s variant, so-called JN.1.

You may not recognize ‘JN.1’ by its technical moniker. This is the one they originally labeled “Pirola” (a reference David Pecker can relate to), and are now calling FLiRT. Soon it will have its own dating website.

So here’s your public service advisory: get ready to tell your helpful, FLiRTY pharmacist what to do with her new and improved, “free,” Fall season covid shot.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...rue&utm_medium=email

thank God disaster averted

Pfizer COVID Jab Has 'No Significant Effect' Against Infection or Transmission: Journal 'BMC Medicine'

https://jonfleetwood.substack....rue&utm_medium=email

How effective is the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 transmission and infection? A national programme analysis in Monaco, July 2021 to September 2022

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38840159/

Abstract
Background: We quantified SARS-CoV-2 dynamics in different community settings and the direct and indirect effect of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in Monaco for different variants of concern (VOC).

Methods: Between July 2021 and September 2022, we prospectively investigated 20,443 contacts from 6320 index cases using data from the Monaco COVID-19 Public Health Programme. We calculated secondary attack rates (SARs) in households (n = 13,877), schools (n = 2508) and occupational (n = 6499) settings. We used binomial regression with a complementary log-log link function to measure adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and vaccine effectiveness (aVE) for index cases to infect contacts and contacts to be infected in households.

Results: In households, the SAR was 55% (95% CI 54-57) and 50% (48-51) among unvaccinated and vaccinated contacts, respectively. The SAR was 32% (28-36) and 12% (10-13) in workplaces, and 7% (6-9) and 6% (3-10) in schools, among unvaccinated and vaccinated contacts respectively. In household, the aHR was lower in contacts than in index cases (aHR 0.68 [0.55-0.83] and 0.93 [0.74-1.1] for delta; aHR 0.73 [0.66-0.81] and 0.89 [0.80-0.99] for omicron BA.1&2, respectively). Vaccination had no significant effect on either direct or indirect aVE for omicron BA.4&5. The direct aVE in contacts was 32% (17, 45) and 27% (19, 34), and for index cases the indirect aVE was 7% (- 17, 26) and 11% (1, 20) for delta and omicron BA.1&2, respectively. The greatest aVE was in contacts with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and a single vaccine dose during the omicron BA.1&2 period (45% [27, 59]), while the lowest were found in contacts with either three vaccine doses (aVE - 24% [- 63, 6]) or one single dose and a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (aVE - 36% [- 198, 38]) during the omicron BA.4&5 period.

Conclusions: Protection conferred by the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against transmission and infection was low for delta and omicron BA.1&2, regardless of the number of vaccine doses and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. There was no significant vaccine effect for omicron BA.4&5. Health authorities carrying out vaccination campaigns should bear in mind that the current generation of COVID-19 vaccines may not represent an effective tool in protecting individuals from either transmitting or acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection.

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
Pfizer COVID Jab Has 'No Significant Effect' Against Infection or Transmission: Journal 'BMC Medicine'

https://jonfleetwood.substack....rue&utm_medium=email

How effective is the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 transmission and infection? A national programme analysis in Monaco, July 2021 to September 2022

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38840159/

Abstract
Background: We quantified SARS-CoV-2 dynamics in different community settings and the direct and indirect effect of the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in Monaco for different variants of concern (VOC).

Methods: Between July 2021 and September 2022, we prospectively investigated 20,443 contacts from 6320 index cases using data from the Monaco COVID-19 Public Health Programme. We calculated secondary attack rates (SARs) in households (n = 13,877), schools (n = 2508) and occupational (n = 6499) settings. We used binomial regression with a complementary log-log link function to measure adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and vaccine effectiveness (aVE) for index cases to infect contacts and contacts to be infected in households.

Results: In households, the SAR was 55% (95% CI 54-57) and 50% (48-51) among unvaccinated and vaccinated contacts, respectively. The SAR was 32% (28-36) and 12% (10-13) in workplaces, and 7% (6-9) and 6% (3-10) in schools, among unvaccinated and vaccinated contacts respectively. In household, the aHR was lower in contacts than in index cases (aHR 0.68 [0.55-0.83] and 0.93 [0.74-1.1] for delta; aHR 0.73 [0.66-0.81] and 0.89 [0.80-0.99] for omicron BA.1&2, respectively). Vaccination had no significant effect on either direct or indirect aVE for omicron BA.4&5. The direct aVE in contacts was 32% (17, 45) and 27% (19, 34), and for index cases the indirect aVE was 7% (- 17, 26) and 11% (1, 20) for delta and omicron BA.1&2, respectively. The greatest aVE was in contacts with a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and a single vaccine dose during the omicron BA.1&2 period (45% [27, 59]), while the lowest were found in contacts with either three vaccine doses (aVE - 24% [- 63, 6]) or one single dose and a previous SARS-CoV-2 infection (aVE - 36% [- 198, 38]) during the omicron BA.4&5 period.

Conclusions: Protection conferred by the BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine against transmission and infection was low for delta and omicron BA.1&2, regardless of the number of vaccine doses and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection. There was no significant vaccine effect for omicron BA.4&5. Health authorities carrying out vaccination campaigns should bear in mind that the current generation of COVID-19 vaccines may not represent an effective tool in protecting individuals from either transmitting or acquiring SARS-CoV-2 infection.

k that checks a few boxes, now how about overcoming the virus once infection occurs

From the Washington Post (non paywall) Of course the clot shot was not even mentioned as a possible cause.


‘Unusual’ cancers emerged after the pandemic. Doctors ask if covid is to blame.

https://archive.ph/HKlBX

Now the Mexican Health Secretary is publicly calling out the WHO.

Mexican Health Secretary Accuses WHO of Misinformation Over Alleged New Bird Flu Strain That Killed 59-Year-Old Man

It's not going to work this time.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rules the Covid 19 shot is NOT a vaccine in its case involving the Los Angeles Unified School District.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.c...ls-rules-mrna-covid/

^^^ Yesterday, we received a terrific judicial decision from another unlikely place — the Ninth Circuit, which before Trump’s historic appointments, lawyers used to lampoon as the “Ninth Circus.” But the Ninth has become one of the most reliable protectors of Constitutional freedom from the worst excesses of the pandemic. Yesterday’s decision added to the Court’s admirable library of liberty.

In Health Freedom Defense Fund vs. Los Angeles United School District, the Court of Appeals overturned the federal court’s dismissal of a lawsuit by LAUSD teachers over the District’s 2021 vaccine mandate, which has continued, in fits and starts, ever since. The decision included three remarkable features.

First, LAUSD tweaked its strict vaccine mandate after the plaintiffs sued the first time. The tweak allowed a ‘testing alternative.’ The LAUSD then successfully argued the plaintiff’s first case was moot. Right after that first case got dismissed, LAUSD promptly revoked its testing alternative. So the poor, exhausted plaintiffs re-filed and sued again.

Again the federal court dismissed their case, this time on the merits. The plaintiffs appealed. Then, following a contentious appellate hearing, having enjoyed its first go around, the LAUSD again rescinded its vaccine requirement and again asked for the case to be dismissed as moot.

But the Court of Appeals saw right through that cynical ploy:

LAUSD’s pattern of withdrawing and then reinstating its vaccination policies is enough to keep this case alive. Twice LAUSD has withdrawn its policy only after facing some litigation risk.
Litigants who have already demonstrated their willingness to tactically manipulate the federal courts in this way should not be given any benefit of the doubt. LAUSD’s about-face occurred only after vigorous questioning at argument in this court, which suggests that it was motivated, at least in part, by litigation tactics.
This case is not moot.

Next, in a wonderful development, the Court distinguished the horrible, ancient Supreme Court case the government wielded like a club during the pandemic, Jacobson vs. Massachusetts. You’ll love the reason why—because Jacobson was about vaccines, and the covid shots aren’t really vaccines:

The district court held, applying rational basis review under Jacobson, that the Policy satisfied a legitimate government purpose. But the district court’s analysis diverges from Jacobson.
In Jacobson, the Supreme Court balanced an individual’s liberty interest in declining an unwanted smallpox vaccine against the State’s interest in preventing disease. The Court explained that the “principle of vaccination” is “to prevent the spread of smallpox.”
Jacobson, however, did not involve a claim in which the compelled vaccine was “designed to reduce symptoms in the infected vaccine recipient rather than to prevent transmission and infection.”
The district court thus erred in holding that Jacobson extends beyond its public health rationale—government’s power to mandate prophylactic measures aimed at preventing the recipient from spreading disease to others—to also govern “forced medical treatment” for the recipient’s benefit.

The justices were skeptical of the government’s evidence of vaccine benefits:

LAUSD only provides a CDC publication that says “COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective.” But “safe and effective” for what? LAUSD implies that it is for preventing transmission of COVID-19 but does not adduce judicially noticeable facts that prove this.

Finally, even more encouragingly, in a concurring opinion, one of the judges recognized a Constitutionally protected liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment:

The district court further erred by failing to realize that these allegations directly implicate a distinct and more recent line of Supreme Court authority, in which the Court has stated that “[t]he principle that a competent person has a constitutionally protected liberty interest in refusing unwanted medical treatment may be inferred from [the Court’s] prior decisions.”
In Washington v. Glucksberg, the Court explained that Cruzan’s posited “‘right of a competent individual to refuse medical treatment’” was “entirely consistent with this Nation’s history and constitutional traditions,” in light of “the common-law rule that forced medication was a battery, and the long legal tradition protecting the decision to refuse unwanted medical treatment.”
Given these statements in Glucksberg, the right described there satisfies the history-based standards that the Court applies for recognizing “fundamental rights that are not mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.”
The Supreme Court’s caselaw thus clarifies that compulsory treatment for the health benefit of the person treated—as opposed to compulsory treatment for the health benefit of others—implicates the fundamental right to refuse medical treatment.

This reasoning is a legal earthquake. For years, we anti-mandate lawyers have argued that the covid mandates were unconstitutional. But the government lawyers have always argued “there is no Constitutional right not to take a vaccine.”

Now, a federal appellate judge — one step below the Supreme Court — just cut through the confusion like a hot needle through butter, agreeing with our arguments. Since the shots are not vaccines, Jacobson does not apply. Since they don’t protect others, mandated shots are legalized battery.

It is the concurrence heard round the world. It’s taken three years to reach this point, which is lightning speed in the law. As I keep saying, this is not over.

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com...rue&utm_medium=email