You really know you're living in a clown world when even the establishment health officials start dressing up as clowns to announce the Covid death numbers, as occurred with the Oregon official pictured above last October. The theater of absurd has only continued to become increasingly nonsensical since, with a crumbling Covid mandavaxx narrative finally reaching America's high court on Friday, January 7th. Supreme Court justices heard hours of arguments for and against Biden's two nationwide OSHA-implemented 'vaccine' mandates after previously announcing the court would take up the case which will officially decide the constitutionality, the legality (or lack thereof), of the most sweeping US mandates to be announced, and the charade highlighted the nonsensical nature of the crumbling narrative driving the 'vaccine' coercion campaign that appears to be on the verge of stalling out completely. The unprecedented federal mandate package includes both a US worker and healthcare mandate, one rule to require all private businesses with 100 or more employees to mandate the experimental mRNA injections on their workers, and one rule to require all businesses receiving medicaid or medicare benefits mandate the injection on their employees.
Although the mandates are clearly a directive of the Biden Administration, because Biden instructed OSHA to implement them they are officially being defended as OSHA rules implemented for workplace safety, and are not technically speaking executive directives at all. This was the desperate White House attempt to 'legally' implement a federal 'vaccine' mandate through executive directive and thus circumvent congressional approval while at the same time avoiding use of an actual executive directive. This sets the stage for the entire case being made for these mandates, as foxy and shifty in argument as the means by which the Administration is attempting to implement them.
At the heart of the argument in defense of the mandates is that forced vaccination is necessary to protect the safety of employees, as the injection is the only effective means of 'protection' against the 'virus', and simultaneously - I kid you not - that they are not vaccine mandates at all, being that employers who do not wish to force the injection on workers can opt to enforce masking and weekly testing instead. So it is being sold as a 'mask-or-test' mandate, the justices reminded (and reminding us) time and again that it is "not a vaccine mandate," with over 40% of businesses opting to use the test option rather than force the injections if the mandate goes into effect, the Court is told, while simultaneously also being informed that "there is nothing else" that will better "end all this" than coercing, or to use their words, "incentivizing" vaccination, a policy OSHA determined was necessary for workplace safety because the unvaccinated workers are said to pose a threat to the safety of other employees and must be vaccinated to create a safe workplace. Absolutely nonsensical argument, mirroring the inherent absurdity of the entire case for universal injection, all the more absurd when it is being mandated, and by a federal agency officially instituted to oversee workplace safety (OSHA) as opposed to public health (DHHS, NIH, etc.). Those who see nothing wrong with this picture aren't looking hard enough.
Obviously, if "nothing else" but universal vaccination with "end" the 'pandemic', then allowing for a weekly testing option is ridiculous, especially if up to half or more of businesses will take that option. And if OSHA is truly introducing the 'vaccine-or-test' mandate because it determined vaccination to be crucial for workplace safety, then insisting the mandate is not a 'vaccine mandate' about coercing injection is ridiculous, especially when the goal is literally to "incentivize" vaccination, that is to coerce unwilling workers into getting it, but apparently without mandating it per se, no doubt to avoid the legal pitfalls of doing so. Like a snake, you see, they slither around the heart of the matter: If this is about mandating the 'vaccine', then why doesn't it just do that without exception; and if it isn't about mandating the 'vaccine' after all, then why does it do exactly that, rather than simply require masking and weekly testing for everyone, being that it has been repeatedly shown that the vaccinated are not immune to Covid? And more importantly, what the Court is actually meant to be deciding here, is whether this is lawful, or is it an egregious and tyrannical violation of human rights enshrined in the Constitution? That, of course, was the farthest thing from the minds of those making the case for the nonsensical mandates.
Oh, and while we're on the topic of nonsensical arguments for kinda sorta but not really mandating a demonstrably unsafe and ineffective experimental injection, we also got an official admission that the vaccinated can still be infected and spread the 'virus', and that the unvaccinated thus pose a 'threat' to both other unvaccinated employees and those who are already allegedly 'protected'. Of course, if the 'vaccine' can't stop infection and transmission, then the 'threat' posed by the unvaccinated is not and cannot be eliminated by that same vaccination, a fact that seems lost on its proponents, because that is exactly what is being argued here, albeit in a very indirect and circular manner, the absolute unwillingness to give direct answers to simple yes or no questions that challenge the core dogmas at the heart of the case for universal/mandatory vaccination. Total theater of absurd, and worth a listen for those with time to kill, to see just how fast the mandavaxx narrative is crumbling in real time, before the highest court in the land.
Or better yet, just watch Ryan Christian's in-depth show on this absurdity, highlighting a few key moments during the lengthy and rather boring hearing along with a plethora of other highly relevant news showcasing the quickly crumbling narrative - The COVID Narrative Has Officially Collapsed, But That Does Not Mean The Agenda Has Been Stopped.
But even more absurd than the Administration/OSHA argument for this tyrannical mandate package are the asinine comments coming directly from some of the Supreme Court justices themselves, demonstrating just how dangerously ignorant some of the very justices of the highest court of the land tasked with deciding this most important matter really are. Either shamefully ignorant of facts widely available to the public, or outright lying in defense of measures they are supposed to be deciding the legality of as impartial judges rather than advocates, because three of the nine justices on the bench were busy spouting blatant lies in support of the narrative throughout the hearing.
The trio of Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, and Sonia Sotomayor made claims during oral arguments that could have been classified as incorrect, ignorant, misinformed or hysterically exaggerated.
Describing it as "unbelievable" that those fighting for the health freedom of the 100 million Americans affected would demand a stay of the measure from the Court, Breyer made the incredibly false and indeed impossible claim that there are currently over 700,000 new cases a day, "750 million" in fact, despite the fact that the total population of the country is only about 330 million Americans! In typical upside-down clown world fashion, Bryer said that "with nearly a million people -- let me not exaggerate -- nearly three-quarters of a million people, new cases every day," he found it unbelievable that the Court would be asked to block the mandate from taking effect, when even health officials themselves and numerous studies have found that these 'cases' are highly exaggerated numbers. And just go ahead and throw in another lie while you're at it, a lie later repeated by Sotomayor, that US hospitals are at full capacity. Breyer's twin deception straight from the Supreme Court hearing manuscript:
I mean, there -- there were three-quarters of a million new cases yesterday. New cases. Nearly three-quarters, 700-and-some-odd thousand, okay? That's 10 times as many as when OSHA put this rule in. The hospitals are today, yesterday, full, almost to the point of the maximum they've ever been in this disease, okay?
Okay? If we keep spewing outright lies in your face about how scary the most mild variant so far is, which is coincidentally being driven by the vaccinated, will you admit you are crazy for demanding the freedom to make your own health choices about your own body about this experimental injection demonstrably not stopping the spread of the 'virus' as we speak? Pure propaganda is all they have left to sell the narrative being used to coerce this injection upon the unwilling, and unfortunately nobody directed justice Breyer to HHS, the government's own real time data on hospital beds, showing that nearly 21% of inpatient beds and over 18% of ICU beds nationwide were unoccupied as of Friday, and then with only about 20% of those total occupied hospital beds even listed as housing Covid patients! Oops. Maybe his later revision to "750 million new cases" was a slip-up, or error in transcription, however both he and Sotomayer clearly believed, or intended to decieve listeners into believing, that hospitals were at full capacity when they weren't, with nowhere near the majority of patients even alleged Covid patients, and then a large number of those ‘cases’ simply patients hospitalized for other reasons who then tested positive after admission.
Meanwhile, Justice Kagan mindlessly repeated the party line, although a giant mountain of evidence flatly contradicts it, stating as fact that:
We all know what the best policy is. I mean, by this point, two years later, we know that the best way to prevent spread is for people to get vaccinated and to prevent dangerous illness and death is for people to get vaccinated. That is by far the best.
The reality, as I recently documented, is that, if anything, as more time has passed, the more we know with increasing certainty that vaccination can't possibly be the best way to prevent spread, symptomatic disease and death, what with recent studies finding that both the double and triple injected are at a higher risk of infection than the unvaccinated, with all of the government data from England, Scotland and Israel (among other places) clearly revealing that the majority of Covid hospitalizations and deaths are consistently among the 'fully vaccinated', and another recent study finding ZERO 'vaccine' efficacy against Covid death.
Of all of the inherently deceptive absurd comments coming from these justices, however, Sotomayor's may have been the most ridiculous of all. In response to the argument that the OSHA requirements would cause undue harm by causing at the very least 1-3% of US workers to quit all at once, she retorted: "But we are now having deaths at an unprecedented amount." This patently false assertion, otherwise known as a lie or deception, comes in the wake of the official announcement that Covid deaths are steadily falling despite a sharp increase in new 'cases'.
Then, after repeatedly insisting that "this is not a vaccine mandate," but rather a "masking mandate, no different than there is when we tell people that if there are sparks flying in the workplace," she then likens healthy humans who may well have natural immunity, for which the mandate makes no provision, to machines that create sparks, painting the entire unvaccinated population as 'virus'-spewing machinery: "Why is the human being not like a machine if it's spewing a virus, blood-borne viruses?"
To answer the absurd question with logic, we might respond that the science coming from her own establishment, in the form of dozens upon dozens of peer-reviewed studies, indicates that the vast majority of humans now have natural immunity that is at worst equal to and at best far exceeds the short-lived 'vaccine'-induced 'protection', and this number will only rise with the fast spread of 'Omicron'; and that the unvaccinated people she is here referring to, if they are being tested weekly with a test being sold as reliable indicator of Covid infection, are quite clearly not going to be "spewing a virus," because they are Covid negative, and therefore the masking requirement is entirely nonsensical. If one was to admit that the tests, on the other hand, are inaccurate and unreliable as the science, the data, the New York Times, and Dr. Fauci all actually indicates, then the absurdity of requiring weekly testing for those who opt out of vaccination is fully revealed. Adding to the absurdity is the fact that Sotomayer herself already insisted that the unvaccinated pose a threat to the vaccinated, who admittedly are at risk of infection despite their 'protection', meaning they too can spread the 'virus' just as well as those without the 'protection', rendering the restriction of both the masking and weekly testing requirement to those who opt out of vaccination absurd on its face. Oh yes, they have twisted themselves up in a web of absurdity. And this "mask mandate," if it wasn't already clear, is nothing like other OSHA mask requirements for workplaces with machines creating sparks, because this "mask mandate" doesn't apply to all those in contact with the 'machine' "spewing a virus" but only those refusing to comply with the injection coercion, and the spark related mask requirements have no such exceptions nor are they aimed at incentivizing or coercing an unwanted medical intervention as this particular "mask mandate" clearly and admittedly is.
Sotomayer's most blatant lies, or shameful shows of ignorance, came later, when she claimed that the "numbers show that Omicron is as deadly and causes as much serious disease in the unvaccinated as Delta did," a statement that is flatly contradicted by all of the available data and scientific studies, not to mention the claims of countless 'experts', altogether demonstrating quite unambiguously that 'Omicron' is far more mild than 'Delta' ever was. Probably the most absurd lie of all, however, was her wild exaggeration of child hospitalizations, that: "We have over 100,000 children, which we've never had before, in -- in serious condition and many on ventilators." Actually, the judge should know, this claim "defied data from the Department of Health and Human Services showing a total of 3,342 confirmed pediatric hospitalizations with COVID-19 across the US as of Friday," as the New York Post notes, "making the justice’s math off by a factor of nearly 30." Although I would argue it isn't the justice's math that's the problem here, but rather her blind acceptance of blatant lies being spewed by the Covid Clown World establishment propaganda machine translating to incredible ignorance, either that or her willingness to knowingly deceive the public - neither being a quality one looks for in a judge appointed to the highest court of the land.
Possibly most disturbing of all, coming from a justice tasked with deciding the constitutionality of laws brought before the Court, is Sotomayer's apparent ignorance of the Constitution itself, for she said: "“I’m not sure I understand the distinction why the states would have the power, but the federal government wouldn't,” to institute a mandate like the one being advanced by the Biden administration, despite the 10th Amendment to the Constitution clearly stating that: "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."
Thankfully, there was some redemption in the hearing, with justices being pointed to the "Scovy Study," which "showed that vaccinated individuals who are 65 or older are twice as likely to die as unvaccinated individuals 18 to 49." But never mind the science that illuminates the absurdity of the tyrannical mandates, ignore all of those studies, because only the science supporting the mandavaxx narrative is 'science' worth 'trusting' and citing in defense of these tyrannical and oppressive measures. At one point, argue this is about protecting unvaccinated workers, but when presented with evidence indicating that a large number of these same unvaccinated workers are at far less risk than a number of vaccinated workers, shift the argument to be about protecting those whom the unvaccinated pose a 'threat' to in regards to potential transmission, a threat admittedly also posed by the vaccinated, rendering the argument equally absurd. If nothing else, this hearing is a case-in-point demonstration of the real time collapse of a crumbling narrative, and it is mighty hilarious to behold.
As has been made abundantly clear, the narrative underlying the case for universal injection is based on deception and propaganda, and without their all-important narrative which is now coming apart at the seams, the mandavaxxers have absolutely no case for their mandates at all.
As to the legality of these OSHA mandates, the only thing the Court should actually be deciding in this case, in a rare direct answer to a pointed question, the OSHA representative flatly admits that the agency has no authority to impose these tyrannical rules. To make his point, Justice Alito presented the following analogy: If waving a magic wand above a worker's head was shown to protect a worker and/or workers around that worker from disease, and the agency introduced a rule requiring the waving of wands for workplace safety, would the agency have the authority to compel the worker to continue waving the wand above their head in the hours they are not at the workplace, overnight and on days off. The answer was a simple 'no'. And since these injections remain in effect after workers leave the workplace, as Alito noted, with both the known risks and perceived benefits, and there is no way for a worker to be 'vaccinated' at work but then 'unvaccinated' at home, then OSHA clearly has no authority to require employers to compel workers to receive this experimental injection as a condition of employment. If a 'safety' regulation extends beyond the workplace, it is out of OSHA's jurisdiction, plain and simple, and OSHA knows this. Maybe that's a big reason why this piece of medical tyranny is being alternately passed off as a "vaccine-or-test mandate" and a "mask mandate," rather than the "vaccine mandate" we all know it is intended to be, as Biden made abundantly clear when he announced the plan last year.
As to those millions of initially compliant 'fully vaccinated' American workers whose privileged status is about to be revoked if they don't soon get a third injection, and then a fourth one just a few months down the line after that, well let's just say the establishment's gonna have it's hands full with a hornet's nest full of millions of fighting mad American workers coming to the realization that they were all lied to when they were promised that all they were being asked to do was 'just get the shot'.
When you sell lies for a living, you're always bound to eventually step on a previous lie, and the 'vaccine'-pushers are currently stepping on lies left and right in their desperate attempt to perpetuate their flailing narrative. "Oh what a wicked web we weave, when first we practice to deceive," the saying goes, and it couldn't be any more relevant than it is right now in our present situation. The more desperately they cling to the crumbling narrative, the more insane this theater of absurd will become, and clinging they are, so the clown show goes on.