________________________________________________________________________________________________
Happy Friday C&C! Today’s end-of-week roundup includes: it’s not time to panic over shedding yet; I opine on the Supreme Court case everyone’s asking me about; Republicans investigate Navy vaccine discrimination; alarming news from Science; Florida divests from ESG; anti-vaxx nurse who gave elderly patients saline injections gets light sentence; and the FDA pushes lab-grown chicken.
🗞 *THE C&C ARMY POST* 🗞
🎄 In case you need some Christmas gift ideas for your pro-vaxxed extended families, here are a couple good, recently published covid books that they might enjoy:
Title: The Courage to Face Covid-19
Authors: John Leake and Dr. Peter A. McCullough
Subtitle: Preventing hospitalization and death while battling the bio-pharmaceutical complex.
Link: https://couragetofacecovid.com/
Title: The Covid-19 Vaccines & Beyond …
Authors: Sally Saxon, Dr. Deborah Viglione, Dr. James A. Thorp
Subtitle: What the Medical Industrial Complex is NOT Telling Us
Link: https://www.amazon.com/COVID-19-VACCINES-Beyond-Medical-Industrial/dp/0985818069
You might like them, too!
🗞*WORLD NEWS AND COMMENTARY* 🗞
🔬 A recent study published in Infectious Diseases Research was titled, “Current state of knowledge on the excretion of mRNA and spike produced by anti-COVID-19 mRNA vaccines; possibility of contamination of the entourage of those vaccinated by these products.” I’ve seen some alarming discussion making the rounds, but it’s not time to panic yet.
The “study” is not so much a study as a roundup of other studies, which is fine and perfectly normal. The author reviewed results from a number of other studies showing the persistence of mRNA and spike, as well as studies finding mRNA and spike in various unexpected places, like breast milk. She also reviewed reports by unvaccinated people who experienced adverse effects after being near jabbed people. Then she proposed some possible ways how mRNA might be transferring between jabbed and unjabbed people.
Unlike spike protein, for “shedding” to work in an mRNA context, there needs to be some mechanism for packaging. To stabilize and deliver the delicate mRNA molecules, vaccine mRNA is packaged inside a tiny blob of fat called a lipid nano protein (LNP). In very general terms, the LNP blob sticks to cells, which “eat” the fat, thinking it’s food. That’s how mRNA gets into the cells so that it can start replicating spike.
But “bare” mRNA — absent the LNP packaging — is highly unstable. Which is why they need the jabs; if mRNA were stable outside the body, they could just spritz us with mRNA in a delicate mist or something. So that’s the first problem.
Next, bare mRNA has no known way to invade individual cells to trigger replication without the LNP packaging. So even if it did shed, mRNA can’t last long outside the body, and we currently don’t know exactly how it could “infect” an unvaccinated person. The author of the study suggested a couple ways it MIGHT happen, but the important thing is that we don’t yet have any evidence of VIABLE mRNA transmission.
Dr. Peter McCullough, who reviewed the study, is taking a cautious approach and warns that close contact like kissing, sexual contact, or breastfeeding might transfer mRNA particles between people. I assume the close contact requirement is due to how unstable bare mRNA particles are outside the body, without their LNP packaging.
Note that mRNA shedding is distinct from “spike shedding,” which is a different thing. The study author’s concern is that the mRNA, which MAKES spike, could shed and then somehow possibly “vaccinate” an unwitting person who didn’t want the shot and doesn’t even know they’re being vaccinated. But absent the LNP envelope, mRNA shedding remains a hypothethesis.
The bottom line is we still don’t know if mRNA “shedding” even exists or, if it does exist, how long it lasts after injection, or whether it would be temporary or permanent. What Dr. McCullough and the author of the study seem to be saying is there’s enough data to be cautious.
I don’t know about you, but I was ALREADY being cautious.
🔥 I might have to revise my original decision to ignore this next story, due to a recent surprise development.
I’ve been getting a lot of questions about a guy named Raland Brunson. Brunson filed a pro-se lawsuit a couple years ago against 388 (three hundred and thirty eight!) elected and appointed federal officials, including Joe Biden, originally asking a Utah state court to remove them all from office for sedition and treason. The gist of Brunson’s argument is that, since 100 congressmen wanted an investigation before certifying the 2020 election, and since the US Congress ignored their objections and certified anyway, the defendant congressmen “adhered to our enemies” and, because the certification vote was procured “by fraud,” they, Biden and everyone that he appointed should be promptly removed from office.
The first time someone asked me about the case, I took a quick look at the pro-se format and the extreme relief that was requested, plus the crazy high number of defendants, and opined it had a snowball’s chance. Move on. I didn’t pay any more attention to the case.
But now Brunson has managed to get a toenail into the Supreme Court somehow.
First, props to the three Brunson brothers, who are managing the case without lawyers, since they navigated the minefield of getting all 388 official defendants served under very difficult circumstances, like covid lockdowns and security, and because they have avoided making any number of rookie mistakes that would have let courts flush the case without dealing with the merits.
Just as I’d expect, the case history so far has amounted to very little. Unsurprisingly, the federal government successfully removed the case from Utah state court to federal court. Then the federal district court unsurprisingly dismissed Brunson, finding he lacked standing to bring the case because he failed to describe a “particularized” harm. To be fair, this was an easy way for the district court to flush the case without having to get into the facts. It’s it happens all the time, especially with these pro-se political cases.
Undeterred, Brunson appealed to the 10th Circuit, which sat on the case for a good while. In the meantime, the Brunson brothers found a fascinating strategy that involved a little-known and almost never used rule, and properly asked the Supreme Court to take the case as a matter of original jurisdiction, since it involved a national emergency, even though the 10th Circuit hadn’t yet ruled on the appeal.
It was a bold and clever move. More props to the Brunsons. It forced the 10th Circuit to quickly issue a decision, which unsurprisingly upheld the district court’s dismissal of the case. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court opened a case, which can now be found online. Opening the case is a good sign but it means nothing by itself. Even if the Court just plans to flush the case too, it had to open the case first, so it can be removed to the circular file.
According to a Zoom discussion they published this week on Bitchute, the understandably enthusiastic Brunson bothers reported that the Supreme Court clerk had contacted them, expressed interest in their case, and asked them to submit some additional materials. The Brunsons interpreted this as a sign suggesting that the Supreme Court intends to hear their case.
I’m not sure.
To be fair, I have limited Supreme Court experience in only a handful of cases. But in that limited experience, I’ve found the clerks at the Supreme Court to be universally smart, proactive, helpful and pleasant. So I’m not surprised that the Brunsons reported dealing with a knowledgeable and involved clerk. It would be wishful thinking to assume anything about the Court’s posture because of how the clerk sounded.
To be even more fair, the Brunsons were not just excited because of the clerk, but also because of some other, more technical developments in the case, like the government unexpectedly switching attorneys, or the government’s surprising decision to waive its right to respond to Brunson’s petition.
But there are multiple possible reasons for these things, and some of the possible reasons are NOT helpful, like maybe the government is so confident about what the court will do that it didn’t feel like it needs to respond.
Here’s the bottom line, for me. This is a massive “Hail Mary” case. It is unimaginable that, two years later, the Supreme Court would start removing elected officials from office just because Congress failed to investigate the 2020 elections. I literally can’t imagine how that could happen. Brunson has been dismissed by two courts already, or three if you count the state court who lost jurisdiction. The most likely result is the Supreme Court will dismiss the case too.
Still, kudos to the Brunsons for doing a technically terrific job, making it hard for the government to get rid of them, and for just reaching the Supreme Court at all. Normally, most cases (99%) are promptly rejected by the Court. I’m not getting my hopes up, but a miracle would certainly be welcome.
It will take a miracle.
If you want to keep an eye on developments, here’s a link to the Brunson case’s online docket on the Supreme Court’s website.
💉 Fox News ran a story Wednesday headlined, “Republicans demand Naval Academy Transparency After Unvaxxed Midshipmen Allegedly Denied Diplomas.”
Republicans in Congress announced this week they intend to investigate reports that the U.S. Navy is denying diplomas to graduates who have failed to get jabbed, after their religious exemption requests were denied, hung up in red tape, lost in the mail, or washed overboard.
“We’re seeing massive [numbers of] people being kicked out of academies and kicked out of their military service, all for the reason of refusing the vaccine [for] religious exemptions,” Representative Greg Steube (R-FL), who is leading the committee of Republican representatives.
It’s beginning to look like there’s a lot of pent-up demand for Congressional investigations.
🔥 When I saw this next story, at first I thought, oh please, how much are we expected to take in one week? Re-animating ancient viruses and now THIS? The New York Post’s headline yesterday read, “Scientists Make ‘Wormhole’ Without Rupturing Time and Space, Study Says.”
Then I read the article and discovered that the scientists only made a “virtual” wormhole. In other words, it was just a “model,” like all the awesome covid death models from 2020 that turned out to be 100% wrong. I guess the excitement for this story is that they used a “quantum computer” to model their fake wormhole. So what?
If they ever CAN make a proper wormhole, they’ll do it in a heartbeat, never doubt it. But maybe it could be used for good. They could use the wormhole to go back in time and warn everybody about Joe Biden or something.
🔥 Yesterday, Reuters ran a story with the encouraging headline, “Florida Pulls $2 Bln From BlackRock in Largest Anti-ESG Divestment.” Jimmy Patronis, Florida’s chief financial officer, explained yesterday that his department will relocate $2 billion worth of its assets that are managed by BlackRock, as a protest against environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) policies.
Patronis explained the state believes BlackRock focuses more on ESG than on finding investments that produce higher returns for investors. Patronis explained, “Florida’s Treasury Division is divesting from BlackRock because they have openly stated they’ve got other goals than producing returns… Fiduciaries should always value performance over politics.”
Florida is not the first. In October, Louisiana’s treasurer pulled $794 million from the investment company, and Missouri’s treasurer sold off $500 million. A good start.
Meanwhile, Reuters reported that democrat officials argue that BlackRock does not focus enough on ESG issues.
💉 Yesterday, the Daily Mail UK ran a heartwarming story headlined, “Anti-Vaxxer Nurse Who Injected Up to 8,600 Elderly Patients With Saltwater Instead of Covid Vaccine Walks FREE From Court in Germany.”
German Red Cross nurse Antje T, 39, was initially fired after a co-worker reported her for using saline (“saltwater”) instead of mRNA to inject 8,600 patients, who were mostly elderly care home patients, hospital employees, educators and doctors over the age of 70.
After being fired, she was convicted of six counts of intentional assault in the Oldenburg District Court on November 30th. Her nursing license was revoked and she was given six months probation. This sentence alarmed the Daily Mail’s reporter, who described the punishment not even as a slap on the wrist but as “walking free.”
The reason for the light sentence appeared to be that prosecutors were only able to PROVE six shots were saline and not mRNA, and they tried but failed to link the nurse’s anti-vaxx Facebook posts with an intent to defraud patients. In other words, Nurse T had a good lawyer.
🔥 Morrison Forrestor, a law firm specializing in helping pharma get FDA approval, tweeted this week celebrating the FDA’s November 16th approval of its client’s new fake chicken product: lab-cultured chicken cells.
Cultured meat and other novel food producers should rejoice: FDA is committed to supporting innovation in the food supply. Read more on the MoFo Life Sciences blog: bit.ly/3GShp9Q
Why? Why do we need to do this? What’s wrong with PROPER chicken wings? Why must we play God and create our own gross chicken “stuff?”
Anyway, it’s spreading. On the same day, November 17th, the FDA issued a statement titled, “FDA Spurs Innovation for Human Food from Animal Cell Culture Technology.” Summarizing various other alarming things in its statement about how excited the FDA is to help bring lab-grown meat to market, it said “The FDA is ready to work with additional firms developing cultured animal cell food and production processes[.]”
Terrific.
In totally unrelated news, I’m looking for some good plans for an attractive, easy-to-maintain chicken coop. I’m going to be a chicken rancher!
Have a fabulous Friday and I’ll see you back here tomorrow for the weekend edition.
Rose Rambles... 