Misleads unemployment cmsn about Comirnaty at 29:00; Relies on Pfizer press release as evidence. (edited for clarity).
Let me get this straight Warner. According to the attorney for the hospital, if I don’t assert a constitutional right up front, at the onset, then I don’t have that right? Where was this woman educated? I want to sue that institution for improper training.
I would love to hear the outcome although I think the hearing officer was partial to the other side. Also The hospital would never accept your constitutional right as a valid exemption so that is just bologna. From listening we know that proper informed consent was never given. Maybe this could fall under the false claim act.
The whole world was duped by the head-fake cominarty approval. It’s exasperating. They read the propaganda from the perps. No bias there. Totally believable. (Sarcasm). I just want to scream STFU.
Thank you for the true crime recording!!
Unfortunately, this is one we lost. My client did not want to appeal it further.
I'm not subject to any vaccine (mRNA gene therapy) mandate and even I know that no FDA-approved vaccine is available in the US. And it is anticipated that no FDA-approved vaccine will be available in the US until it is on the child vaccine schedule, because once on the child vaccine schedule, the manufacturers will be absolved of liability for both children and adults. While it is in EUA status, the manufacturers are absolved of liability under the PREP Act. The PREP Act requires an emergency, which is why the Biden Administration extended the emergency declaration until early 2024. Your client should not be required to put his trust and health in Pfizer, a pharmaceutical company that paid a $2.3 billion fine to resolve charges for illegal and fraudulent promotion of its products (see https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/stories/2009/september/pfizer_settlement_090209) nor in Moderna which has no public record, good or bad, on the market because Moderna's so-called vaccine is its first product on the market. But I did read a quote from a Moderna VP (I don't have it handy) paraphrased that mRNA gene therapies are not appropriate for conditions that require multi-dosing because of the adverse events, i.e. the adverse events increase with each dose. And I calculated that multiple doses would be required because most people, myself included, get multiple common colds (coronaviruses) per year. And that is exactly what has happened.
Also, stating that this so-called vaccine protects others is not supported by the evidence. The clinical trial endpoints did not include prevention of infection nor prevention of transmission. See the October 2020 BMJ article (https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4037). I don't even believe it has been revealed via the FDA Pfizer documents the PCR cycle number used to identify a positive Covid-19 case in the trials (all PCR tests were shipped back to Pfizer for processing, i.e. not processed at the trial sites). High quality evidence is important and the FDA and CDC have not supported their positions with high quality evidence. In fact, they have changed their positions multiple times when real-world evidence did not align with their suggested, but unfounded assertions. The Canadian Covid Care Alliance presentation "The Pfizer Innoculations for Covid-19, More Harm Than Good," page 6 details the Scientific Levels of Evidence (See https://www.canadiancovidcarealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/The-COVID-19-Inoculations-More-Harm-Than-Good-REV-Dec-16-2021.pdf).
Bottom line, the person that accepts or rejects a medical procedure is the one that will endure the consequences, good or bad -- not their doctor or their employer or the state -- thus, only the individual can make the decision regarding their personal health. Forcing someone to accept an experimental medical procedure via coercion of job loss is against the Nuremberg Code. It is immoral. And forcing someone to accept a medical procedure via coercion so that the employer, a health care provider no less, can get paid is abhorrent.
Warner, thank you for representing these grievously-wronged individuals. You and your clients are on the right side of history.
On a separate note, something is up with vaccine serial numbers. I don't remember the exact language, but a portion of the EU contract was shared online and it stipulated that the vials were not to have serial numbers. Perhaps that would exclude identification of specific vials for adverse event research. I'm not sure, but it sounds questionable.
Second point, if I were in a hearing, or trial, such as this, I can simply use a newspaper article or corporate press release as proof for my case? When did this happen ? I just need to see these new rules of evidence. This changes the ball game entirely!!
Listening to this, then reading Warner say they lost this case makes me want to puke. I pray the heavens above shower all these evil scum with wrath that they can't even dream up in Hollywood