Another solution to lockdowns: The Constitutional lawyers

An open letter and an offer

by Jon Rappoport

December 30, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

There are a few principles involved in any effort to change the direction of fascist control.

One person alone doing or saying something may have an effect.

Two hundred people—each on his own—doing or saying the same basic thing—will have a significant effect.

Two hundred people—some alone and some together—will have a larger effect.

A person who sees himself as isolated and alone will probably not believe his actions have any effect. So he stays silent. He could have an IQ of 90 or 190; he stays silent.

The primary mistake lockdown opponents are making comes down to: failure to see the bigger picture.

And the big picture is composed of many different individuals and groups taking action of various kinds—which add up to a tsunami of our own, against the wall-to-wall messaging of the lockdown liars and fascists.

I’ve read a great deal of what constitutional lawyers have to say about the lockdowns. I’m not talking about heroic lawyers who are actively filing lawsuits against governments. I mean lawyers who are largely spelling out problems in bringing these cases to court.

Problems having to do with judges, with the intricacies of the law, with past court decisions, with technical issues.

If two hundred of those lawyers instead turned their attention to BASIC constitutional foundations, and published papers and essays and spoke out on THAT subject, we would see a tide beginning to turn in our favor.

Constitutional lawyers are, first and foremost, supposed to understand the underlying meaning and purpose of the Constitution, which takes precedent over minutiae.

If they can’t see the forest for the trees, they should pack up their offices and seek other work.

So let me repeat what I’ve been saying for months. There is a constitutional line that can’t be crossed for ANY reason. A government can’t take away the freedom of citizens because some disaster has occurred.

This goes beyond the question of whether the disaster is real or imagined. It doesn’t matter. Freedom to live, to live out in the open, to work, to do business, to survive, is untouchable.

There are a million ways to spell this out. I challenge constitutional lawyers to DO IT. Not just a few lawyers. MANY. Go to work. Your area of focus is the jackpot of all legal focuses: the Constitution itself, why it is there, what it means, what it is FOR.

What are you waiting for? The sky to collapse?

Why aren’t 200 or 5000 of you turning into tigers?

Are you trying to prove to doomsayers that they’re right and we’re all irretrievably going down the drain?

Is that your final response to the constitutional crisis we’re facing?

Is the measure of your worth the amount of dilly-dallying you can perform on the minutiae surrounding the eternal struggle for FREEDOM?

Realize that if a few hundred of you publish and speak out, you can have an enormous effect.

I understand that some of you know very little about gaining publicity for your views. I do know something about gaining publicity for the truth. If a group of 20 of you comes to me, I will give you what I can to help you achieve visibility.

Turn your attention to writing and speaking on behalf of the people, instead of the media and your colleagues. Come to grips with what first inspired you to study the founding documents of the Republic—before the practicalities of your profession turned you into…

Whatever you are now.

If you think I’m being unduly harsh on you, take a look at the economic and political landscape. Look at the devastation. Ask yourself under what banner this tyrannical operation marches. And what it is doing to people.

Everyone speaks of “culture” these days. Well, you constitutional lawyers can influence the culture directly. You can make a heroic stand. You can make your words have fire, just as the words of Paine and John Adams and Samuel Adams ignited minds, when it counted.

Be heroes, not clerks.


ADDITIONAL READING:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/tag/lawsuit/

[2] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/09/15/grand-ohio-covid-legal-case-against-kings-on-their-thrones/

[3] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/29/covid-open-letter-to-business-owners/

[4] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/12/28/covid-where-are-the-courageous-religious-leaders/

[5] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/category/public-relations/


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

COVID: Open letter to business owners

And an offer

by Jon Rappoport

December 29, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

As I’ve been saying for months, people have to open up the economy every which way they can.

A few bar and restaurant owners have seen the need to band together and fight the lockdowns.

As a business owner of any kind, you need to think and take action along these lines. But in a much larger way.

You need to form associations of your types of business: barber shops, salons, bars, restaurants, small grocery stores, gift shops, caterers, food trucks, inns, independent truckers…

Each type of business puts together its own association(s).

In addition to whatever you do to survive, you each file lawsuits against governors and state public health departments, for unconstitutional lockdowns based on false science. [1] [2]

Several lawsuits along these lines already exist. They reveal how to proceed.

Every lawsuit is accompanied by a major publicity push, alerting the press and the public, and describing the horrendous effects of lockdowns and closures on business owners. [3] [4]

Whether or not the lawsuits succeed, they provide an occasion for the dissemination of truth.

Imagine this: associations of barber shops, bars, restaurants, truckers, etc., each filing its own lawsuit and each launching a PR campaign to expose the truth of what’s happening to small and medium size business owners.

Small business owners and entrepreneurs are decidedly independent-minded. You each have your own way of building your businesses. But you can form these associations, create and bolster your power.

“Today, in Missouri, a group of 50 bar owners jointly filed suit against the governor charging that lockdowns of their operations are illegal…their representative spoke to reporters outside the capitol…”

Multiply that action by 100 more like it, launched by associations of business owners across the country, and you have something. Something formidable.

There is no doubt that governments are targeting you. They’ve been coming after you like rabid hounds. They want to close you down and out for good. Their pals are already buying up the bankrupt properties of small businesses at bargain basement prices. Your enemies want to concoct a new world where only large corporations survive. They’re counting on you to remain scattered, unorganized, and weak.

Your response to this war needs to be strong. And in this case, there is strength in numbers.

I make this offer. For any new association of small businesses, with at least 30 true and honorable member/owners ready and willing to fight the lockdowns, I’ll give you every piece of advice about acquiring publicity I can muster. [contact: qjrconsulting

I’ve been running NoMoreFakeNews.com for 20 years. I’ve gained some knowledge about disseminating the truth.

THEIR side has tremendous resources enabling them to flood messaging through media and government. OUR side needs to find ways to counter that force.

All is not lost. Freedom doesn’t die in people’s minds and hearts. It’s there forever.

If it’s asleep, it needs to be reawakened.

Nobody said it would be easy.

But those who say it’s impossible are wrong.


SOURCES:

[1] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/09/15/grand-ohio-covid-legal-case-against-kings-on-their-thrones/

[2] https://pcrclaims.co.uk/videos

[3] https://bongino.com/new-york-gym-owner-gets-huge-court-win-over-cuomos-covid-19-restrictions

[4] https://youtu.be/xAwbH3__KzU?t=148 — “NY business owner tears up $15K government fine on live TV”


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

COVID: Where are the courageous religious leaders?

by Jon Rappoport

December 28, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

“The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.” Edmund Burke, 1784

When are religious leaders going to issue demands to their members? Demands to express a duty to God first; above and beyond the restrictions of the State.

These leaders certainly believe God created humans with the quality of freedom. The Bible irrevocably states it. Therefore, under the cover of COVID, the State cannot remove that freedom.

The religious leaders must order their flocks to rebel.

Not just in order to attend church services; but to live without fear, out in the open, without hiding behind masks, without keeping their distance, without lockdowns, without sacrificing their right to earn a living.

Several Catholic prelates have declared the COVID fraud is being used as a rationale for creating an anti-spiritual new world order.

The next step is telling their Church members and believers to rebel, to choose The Good and God.

Every early story about every religion shows how the State power of the day had to be overcome. Is it now time to develop terminal amnesia about these origins?

Are those stories buried because they are inconvenient?

Quoting from an anonymously written article, “Ancient Christian Martyrdom: A Brief Overview”:

“By 200 [AD], the [Christian] faith had permeated most regions of the Roman Empire, though Christians were mostly in the larger urban areas (Gaul, Lyons, Carthage, Rome). By 325, an estimated 7 million were Christians with as many as 2 million killed for the faith.”

Among the reasons for this vast persecution: “Christian refusal to worship or honor other gods was a source of great contention.”

“Christians were accused of being atheists because of their denial of the other gods and refusal of emperor worship. Thus, they were accused of treason to the state.”

“For many provincial governors, Christians were considered social radicals, rather than being persecuted specifically for their faith only.”

And now, in 2020, the major religious objection to COVID restrictions concerns the number of worshipers allowed inside a church during services?

Is this the evolution of faith, or its destruction, at the hands of the faithful themselves?

Is conscience “outmoded”?

Is civilization now so “advanced” that suffering and even dying for one’s faith is considered absurd?

Is bargaining with the State over whether 10 or 50 members can enter a house of worship the cutting edge of rebellion?

It seems to me people should renounce their religion, if they’re unwilling to go to the wall for it.

Just admit that what true faith requires is too much.

Jesus endured pain and torture, and surrendered his human form, in order to save humanity, but now faithful followers can declare their loyalty during online virtual services. Or from their cars, in a parking lot. Without feeling a tremor of conscience.

Over the years, I’ve heard many claims that America (and other Western nations) were created on the basis of Christian values. Putting aside counter-arguments, if that is the assertion, then where is the courage to back it up?

What good are these claims, if in a great crisis, there is no mass rebellion, out in the open, against the tyrannical State, on behalf of God?

Again, mass rebellion means the refusal to wear masks, the refusal to maintain distancing, the refusal to obey lockdowns or close businesses. It means reclaiming freedom.

But perhaps some people believe God wants obedience to the State. He wants his loyal followers to submit to the lockdowns. He wants worshipers to surrender to an all-encompassing secular new world order, in which citizens will function as pawns in a Brave New World technocracy. He wants the faithful to be stripped of their humanity.

If so, let’s hear THAT argument.

Months ago, I said pastors and priests and other religious leaders should stand up in their houses of worship and confess their lack of courage and resign their positions. Confess they are unworthy to lead congregations. Ask for the most brave to step forward and take over.

That’s a correct course of action.

Why should these religious leaders make superficial distinctions about the limits of rebellion? In order to maintain their non-profit status with the State? In order to keep their flock comfortable?

Jesus: “Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.”

But perhaps, in these enlightened times, people should worship a purported virus, and desert God.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

COVID is a data-driven operation, but suppose the data are wrong?

by Jon Rappoport

September 23, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

A recent New York Times article reported on a large study that concluded up to 90 percent of all US COVID cases are false-positives. [1]

There have been numerous reports of hospitals writing “COVID” on patients’ death certificates with no justification whatsoever. The CDC itself has stated that only 6 percent of reported US COVID deaths are FROM the virus. The rest are WITH the virus. This means something is very wrong. These mostly elderly people (the 94 percent) had prior medical conditions that were potentially lethal on their own. [2] [3]

Both COVID case numbers and death numbers show evidence of fraud.

According to law, significant fraud committed during a disaster is a felony, with a penalty of up to 30 years in prison.

Wouldn’t you expect a law-enforcement agency to be conducting an investigation of potential COVID fraud? After all, the lockdowns and the economic devastation are justified on the basis of…what? Case and death numbers.

Data. If the data are wrong, someone in the Justice Department should find that out.

A simple analogy: a rich man wants to buy a choice piece of land and build shorefront condominiums. Presently, there is a building on the land. The owner runs his business out of that building. His profit margin is slender. The rich man offers to buy the building, but the stubborn owner refuses.

One day, a building inspector shows up and does a full-on inspection. His report shows 20 code violations, some of them quite serious. The building owner must make major repairs, but he can’t afford them.

So he agrees to sell the building to the rich man.

But a local prosecutor receives a tip: the code inspector falsified his report.

False data.

An investigation ensues. To no one’s surprise, it turns out that, yes, the inspector committed fraud. In fact, there are no serious code violations.

Everyone understands this case. There’s nothing mysterious about it.

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) should be very interested in the possibility of COVID case and death number fraud. Suppose the true numbers are much, much lower than official reports indicate?

The lockdowns and the economic devastation would have been unnecessary. And unjustified.

I’ll sketch out what a DOJ investigation could look like.

DOJ analysts dig in and find out that, in every state where a lockdown was ordered, the governor was receiving his data on case and death numbers from his public health department. They, in turn, were getting their numbers from state institutions who were receiving federal money.

For instance, in State X, University Y’s epidemiologists were collecting data and calculating case and death numbers, rates, percentages, and so on. University Y was then sending data reports to the governor’s public health department.

So DOJ agents visit University Y. They seize computers and reports. They take names. They interview the scientists and tell them data fraud can land them in prison for 30 years.

This is how it begins.

Word quickly spreads in the medical/scientific community. The gravy train (federal money) is stopped on the tracks. Prison terms are a strong possibility. “I didn’t know the data were wrong” and “I was just repeating what other people told me” and “I did what I was ordered to do” aren’t going to fly.

The whole house of false data begins to collapse. The criminals make deals and roll over on each other.

This would be called Justice.

Of course, a very strong US Attorney General would have to take control of his Justice Department, and refuse to back down.

Equally important, he would have to overcome a blind spot about Science. It isn’t a holy of holies immune to challenge.

On one level, we’re talking about data. That’s it. False data.

What do you think bank fraud is about, and investment fraud, and money laundering, and cooked safety studies, and massive tax evasion? The DOJ makes these cases all the time.

They look for false data.

It’s no mystery.

So look at COVID from the point of view of wrong data. There’s nothing holy or unchallengeable about it.

At different points in the communication network, people are committing data fraud.

As everyone in the public was told, when the computer age dawned, garbage in equals garbage out.

“But this is Science!”

No it isn’t. It’s data. Look at the reports. Analyze them.

De-mystify them.

On this simple direct level, the situation is no different from a broker telling clients that Company ABC stock is a great buy…and then the stock unaccountably and suddenly crashes, and it’s discovered that the broker fed the clients grossly wrong information.

SEC agents interview the broker. He says he was just acting on reports about Company ABC and its stock. Which reports? The ones compiled by a firm that makes investment recommendations. Well, how did that firm come to wrong conclusions? The firm obtained its information from yet another analytic outfit, and that outfit, lo and behold, ultimately got its data from Company ABC itself.

The SEC focuses on three executives in Company ABC. The executives built an elaborate lie. They invented data.

Company ABC was not a great stock opportunity. The Company was in deep financial trouble. When that fact emerged, the stock crashed.

This was no mysterious economic puzzle only Nobel Prize winners could understand.

In the same way, COVID case and death number fraud isn’t a complex science labyrinth only the experts can navigate.

It’s a question and answer. Yes or no.

Let’s find out.

Let’s not go to Joe Biden or Donald Trump for the answer and the facts. Let’s not go to their political parties. Or the evening network news.

DOJ agents and their educated white-collar analysts and veteran statisticians can sit down with Anthony Fauci and Robert Redfield and get their answers. Fine. But other interviews can be conducted with scientists like Scott Atlas and John Ioannidis.

There is nothing arcane here. It’s about DATA. Are the data true or false? If false, who is committing fraud? Who is skewing the numbers and inventing transparently absurd reasons for skewing the numbers?

A reader may be thinking, “I know already the answers.” Sadly, this is not my point in this article. If the Department of Justice can come to know the answers, and then prosecute the criminals, and put the fear of prison into countless other enablers, then all of us win.

If the DOJ refuses, if the Attorney General doesn’t have the stomach for the battle, then we still have the courts.

We have, for example, the recent decision in the Pennsylvania case, where a federal judge ruled that the governor’s lockdown measures were violations of Constitutional freedoms.

Most importantly, there is the Ohio case I’ve been writing about, and the small-town lawyer, Tom Renz, who is relentlessly pursuing a suit against the state governor. One part of that suit is very definitely a challenge to the official case and death numbers. [4]

Mr. Renz has a lineup of expert witnesses, who can establish fraud.

As Mr. Renz builds his organization, I soon hope to have a link to publish, so people can donate to his legal fund. He can use our help.

The information age is not new. For centuries, leaders have been using false data to sell stories that put their populations under the gun. Here and now, a leader who, instead, wants an open and free society, can make his power and influence count.

Can someone tap US Attorney General Barr on the shoulder and tell him that?

Among my readers, there are people who work in the field of information technology. They should tell their colleagues and friends COVID has a straight-out DATA problem. Spread that word. It’s easily grasped. It takes the sacred “science” generality out of the equation.

SOURCES:

[1] nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

[2] www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/#Comorbidities

[3] https://www.bizpacreview.com/2020/08/30/enron-level-scandal-cdc-reports-just-6-of-covid-19-deaths-occurred-in-people-without-comorbidities-966362

[4] https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/09/15/grand-ohio-covid-legal-case-against-kings-on-their-thrones/


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Overturning COVID restrictions and states of emergency

“You think you got the horses for that? Well, good luck and God bless, but I tell you this…the last place you want to see me is in court.” (attorney Arthur Edens, in the film, Michael Clayton, 2007)

Memo to lawyers: What are you waiting for? File big cases now.

by Jon Rappoport

September 16, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

I’ve been covering the decision in the Pennsylvania COVID case and the court filing in Ohio. They give us the templates for potential victories in other states and countries.

(‘Lawsuit’ article archive here)

In Pennsylvania (ruling), a federal judge just ruled that Governor Wolf’s COVID containment measures are unconstitutional. The judge went further. NO emergency cancels the Constitution. There is a line that cannot be crossed. The right to assemble, to have freedom of movement, to earn a living—they can’t be wiped off the board by lockdowns for ANY reason.

This is, indeed, a heroic ruling. It affirms the unmistakable rays of light emanating from the basis of the American Republic.

In Ohio attorney Thomas Renz’s gigantic Ohio filing against Governor Mike DeWine, both the Constitution and issues of fact/science are asserted. Facts mean something. A declaration of emergency must undergo scrutiny, to determine whether a clear and present danger justifies the declaration.

Otherwise, a government can destroy the Constitution, the rule of law, and human rights by falsely claiming danger when there is none. We would be back in the time of Royal Edict, with the king’s army as the “rationale.”

(Attorney press release posted here; Attorney plaintiff document filed with court posted here.)

In 2020, lunatic cultural proclivities, media propaganda, political jockeying, pretensions of science, scare tactics, rigging of “facts,” and profit motives are in the mix. They produce amnesia about basic principles.

The law, when correctly applied, refreshes memory and sweeps away a blizzard of claims and counter-claims. The law comes to the point.

Using the law, one can say to governors and their public health advisors, “You’ve been going on for months now about the COVID spread and the emergency and the containment measures, but we want to reduce this to basics: do you have the Constitutional right to strip away our freedoms, and is there a factual reason to believe a state of emergency is necessary—so we’re going to court.”

Or, putting it another way: “Sir, you’re holding a gun to my head while you’re explaining at length why I can’t move. But you see, nothing has happened in court yet. Meet my lawyer. Are you going to shoot us both? Is that where you really want to go?”

In Ohio, attorney Tom Renz, on behalf of his clients, and against the governor, is asking for a jury trial. He wants citizens to hear the complex arguments about COVID SCIENCE. He wants citizens to understand the con and the game that is being played, in great detail. This is impressive. Renz believes The People deserve to know and they are capable of understanding.

From my nearly 40 years working as a reporter, experience tells me attorney Renz is correct. When the truth is laid out step by step, The People come to their senses. They cut through their own malaise. They cut through media indoctrination. As if they once took a voyage to an island called Logic, they suddenly remember that voyage.

After all, the COVID lockdowns and the economic destruction are being visited on the population at large, so let a dozen of their members (OUR members) hear the case and adjudicate it.

I’m not naïve about courts and judges and lawyers and juries. But I do know that, among the denizens of that system, there are keen minds and persons of good will. Persons who know that the Law, as it was once enshrined by the Founders, is a beacon and a breakthrough.

It is a culmination, after centuries of struggle, which places freedom at the head of the table.

Freedom—not edicts, not lockdowns.

What is COVID science? Has the virus actually been defined? Have case and death numbers been drastically inflated? Is there a pandemic? Why is a diagnostic test that has so many holes, that has never been properly validated, being deployed? How many obfuscations has the CDC planted to hide official secrets?

Let’s go to court and turn on the lights and explore the rabbit hole.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Covid update: The grand Ohio legal case for our time, against kings on their thrones

—You can hate the law until it’s not there anymore—

by Jon Rappoport

September 15, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

The news is coming fast, the implications are titanic.

On Monday, I wrote about Thomas Renz, the Ohio lawyer who is taking on a case for a set of plaintiffs, against Ohio Governor Mike DeWine and the state of Ohio.

The charge: DeWine has created massive damage through lockdowns and other “containment measures” designed to stop the spread of the purported coronavirus.

Against DeWine, attorney Renz has mounted a legal case to defeat both Constitutional violations AND gross scientific fraud.

(Attorney press release posted here; Attorney plaintiff document filed with court posted here.)

(‘Lawsuit’ article archive here)

Update: A crucial part of this case is the DISCOVERY process. Attorney Renz and his colleagues would have the opportunity to sit down with key players in the COVID operation and grill them, in great detail, on matters of fact and science.

Imagine Fauci, Birx, Redfield in the room having to answer very probing questions UNDER OATH.

And the discovery proceedings would be made public, as they happen. Renz would be filing periodic reports with the court.

Another factor. The Ohio court, as part of its verdict, could grant PERMANENT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF. This means it could order the governor of Ohio to cancel the State of Emergency—thereby ending all orders and “containment measures” connected with the Emergency. No lockdowns, no mandatory masks, no mandatory distancing.

Yes, I’m aware that nothing is a slam-dunk in the judicial system. Fingers crossed. But this is a chance, an opportunity, a ray of light, a practical and real possibility.

Further, attorney Renz’s case is a model and a template for other lawyers, in other states and countries, who want to file similar cases.

When a government declares an Emergency, it must explain and justify it on the facts, not on lies and deceptions. Otherwise…

The Constitution no longer exists.

The Law no longer exists.

In their place, there is a reversion to a time of arbitrary edicts, handed down from kings and their wise ones who must not be doubted or challenged.

On what rational basis has Governor Mike DeWine taken away the freedom of citizens? Where is his evidence? What is the quality of that evidence, beyond the mere claim that “experts are always right”?

In his law suit against Governor DeWine, attorney Renz takes up big questions:

What are the REAL COVID case and death numbers?

How much flim-flam has been deployed to cook those numbers?

What is the underhanded definition of a COVID case?

Why is the PCR test useless?

Can a strip of RNA stand in for a virus that isn’t defined?

Is this a pandemic or is it just “another flu season?”

These are just a few of the many questions attorney Renz raises in his lengthy Ohio court filing. He has shocking answers. They do not depend on the news or the assumed primacy of the Coronavirus Task Force or a sitting president or a presidential candidate or a political party or governors. The answers don’t depend on what Governor DeWine thinks or what he has been told.

You could compare this case to a proceeding in which the evidence of a law-enforcement lab is challenged purely on the merits of its findings. The name of the lab doesn’t matter. The government agency which houses the lab doesn’t matter. The so-called reputation of the lab doesn’t matter. What matters is a searchlight centering on fact and truth.

The serious nature of the Ohio proceeding is magnified, because at stake is the freedom of many, many citizens. Their liberty, as enshrined in basic Law, is on the line.

We’re at a crossroads. This case and what happens to it are of vital importance.

Attorney Renz is asking for a jury trial. Citizens would be empaneled to listen to a profound and detailed UNCOVERING of evidentiary fraud, on a truly massive scale. And then this jury would hear how the fraud is leveraging the lockdowns and the destruction of businesses and lives, and the removal of freedom.

This case puts its arms around the immediate future of the country, the Constitution, the basic concept of Law, the difference between a jury and a King, and whatever still remains of 1776.

This case dives into the difference between claims of science, and science, and who controls the distinction.

Winning this one would expose a scientific fraud so solid, so dense, the whole world would see an iron curtain of a century’s duration exploding in front of their eyes.

Victory requires one imperative: follow the Law.


CODA…BREAKING… More good news: federal judge declares Pennsylvania governor’s COVID restrictions unconstitutional.

Bricks are falling out of the walls of the American imprisonment—

CBS News, Pittsburgh: “U.S. District Judge William Stickman IV, an appointee of President Donald Trump, sided with the plaintiffs. Stickman wrote in his ruling that the [Pennsylvania] Wolf administration’s pandemic policies have been overreaching, arbitrary and violated citizens’ constitutional rights…”

FOX News: “The ruling found that [Pennsylvania Governor] Wolf’s restrictions that required people to stay at home, placed size limits on gatherings and ordered ‘non-life-sustaining’ businesses to shut down were unconstitutional.”

In this case, the judge made his ruling strictly on Constitutional grounds. His conclusion is worth reading:

“…even in an emergency, the authority of the government is not unfettered. The liberties protected by the Constitution are not fair-weather freedoms — in place when times are good but able to be cast aside in times of trouble. There is no question that this Country has faced, and will face, emergencies of every sort. But the solution to a national crisis can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experiment. The Constitution cannot accept the concept of a ‘new normal’ where the basic liberties of the people can be subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures. Rather, the Constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even in an emergency. Action taken by Defendants [Governor Wolf] crossed those lines. It is the duty of the Court to declare those actions unconstitutional. Thus, consistent with the reasons set forth above, the Court will enter judgement in favor of Plaintiffs.”

United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, US District Judge William S Stickman IV, County of Butler et al v. [Governor] Thomas W Wolf et al.

NO emergency is so great that it supersedes individual liberty and freedom.

Even if the science underlying the official response to COVID were true (which it decidedly is NOT), it wouldn’t justify tearing away Constitutional and natural freedoms.

The resistance to tyranny is alive.

A million peaceful protestors in Berlin; 460,000 bikers riding into Sturgis, South Dakota, where Governor Kristi Noem has never locked down; numerous other protests the mainstream press refuses to cover; the new groundbreaking Ohio lawsuit filing I’ve been covering; untold millions of people who know what a sham and a crime the whole COVID operation really is…

Lights are coming on and the wind has changed direction.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

COVID: Major case filed against Ohio governor and the state of Ohio for restricting freedom without legitimate justification

by Jon Rappoport

September 14, 2020

(To join our email list, click here.)

Ohio attorney, Thomas Renz, on behalf of plaintiffs, has filed a case against the state of Ohio and Governor Mike DeWine. Renz is asking for a jury trial.

(Attorney press release posted here; Attorney plaintiff document filed with court posted here.)

(‘Lawsuit’ article archive here)

This case, in the current climate, should provoke intense interest from the public, and from every lawyer within hailing distance.

Here is the impressive opening salvo in the court filing:

“In recent months, entire states have been imprisoned without due process and with the clear threat to impose such lockdowns again, interstate travel has been severely restricted, privacy rights have been devastated, numerous business takings without compensation, and many regulations being implemented without statutory process requirements under the guise of a health emergency that is roughly as dangerous as a seasonal influenza outbreak. The plaintiffs in this case have all been injured in various capacities by these unconstitutional actions, and without action by the Court, will be left without redress. More terrifying, without action by the Court, the Court will be setting future precedent that will allow states to withhold fundamental Constitutional rights, in violation of US Supreme Court precedent, circumventing the various levels of scrutiny applied to such rights, and justify such actions under public health emergency orders without subjecting those orders to any real review—just trust the bureaucrats because they are the experts.”

Here is the most important point: “We humbly ask the Court in this case to…Recognize that the political process and operative orders are invalid if based on false or misleading information… and recognize the criticality that all future emergency orders be based and maintained on clear, honest facts—particularly when such orders are infringing on Constitutional rights.”

In other words, a declared State of Emergency cannot stand on the mere basis of arbitrary edict.

Facts matter. Actual science matters. Reasons why an Emergency is declared matter.

People can’t be locked down and restrained from earning a living and having contact with other humans simply because a state authority decides to issue such orders.

If this case goes to trial, the door will open to the presentation of fact and science.

Attorney Renz, for the plaintiffs, is well aware of this, and his filing is studded with bold and accurate claims of fact:

“According to recent data from the Ohio COVID-19 Dashboard, we can see that the ‘spike’ in cases is actually just a spike in testing. The State went from a few thousand tests per day to 25,000 tests plus per day. The positivity rate for COVID-19 has remained fairly steady but there have been more tests.”

“When the Emergency was declared we heard a daily drumbeat about the danger and deaths related to COVID-19. Now that the case fatality rate has been shown to be roughly the same as the yearly flu…those [death] numbers are simply not scary to the public. As a result, the State sees no impact from talking about fatalities and has instead begun testing more so they could tell us there are more cases.”

“The PCR tests are generally viewed as the means of determining if a patient has COVID-19. The problem is that the inventor of the PCR test, who won a Nobel Prize in chemistry for the invention, specifically stated that the test was not well-suited to and never designed to diagnose disease. Much has been made about this in the press and elsewhere but the reason there are issues with PCR testing in relation to COVID is that PCR testing cannot detect how much of a virus exists in a person. Exposure of the existence of incomplete traces of a virus do not mean a person is infected with a disease [,] which is part of the reason the PCR tests have an elevated rate of false positives.”

“…there is not even a true standard for testing…Instead we have numerous tests from numerous vendors that may or may not have a similar standard for what it means to ‘have’ COVID-19. The CDC, governor, and ODH [Ohio Department of Health] know this so they have allowed for the diagnosis of cases based on as meaningless criteria as a cough in a community in which COVID supposedly exists.”

Plow through this quote and then receive the translation below: “Another document also came to light that is critical in demonstrating the egregiously misleading nature of the public COVID-19 data. On the final paragraph of page 39 of a document published by the FDA regarding instructions for a COVID-19 test is the following quote: ‘Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/μL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen’.”

“In plain English this means that there are no available pure 2019-nCOVvirus isolates to test against so instead an educated best guess is being used. The question this leads us to is how accurate can a test be for a virus that has not been defined…? If our freedoms are to be abridged under an emergency declaration related to a disease, should it not be a requirement that the disease at least be defined?”

As you can see, this case is being argued not only on Constitutional grounds, but on major and deep issues of science. The plaintiffs are not accepting “the Word from the experts.”

There is no reason why they, or anyone, should surrender and accept.

In Ohio, a bright light is shining in the darkness.


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Monsanto loses lawsuit and $289 million

by Jon Rappoport

August 13, 2018

(To join our email list, click here.)

A lot of people were waiting for this day. It finally arrived.

Reuters: “…a California jury ordered [Monsanto]…to pay $289 million for not warning of cancer risks posed by its main weed killer [Roundup].”

“The case of school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson, filed in 2016, was fast-tracked for trial due to the severity of his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph system that he alleges was caused by Roundup and Ranger Pro, another Monsanto glyphosate herbicide.”

More than 5000 lawsuits against Monsanto and Roundup are waiting in the wings, and this verdict, in favor of Johnson, is a strong signal to future juries.

Of course, Monsanto, and its new parent company, Bayer, claim last week’s court ruling was deeply flawed and Roundup is not a health threat; an appeal is in the works.

And that is where the danger lies.

As you go higher in the court system, judges, not juries, are making the decisions, the judges tend to be appointed on the basis of their politics.

Official science IS politics, with mega-corporations the favored clients.

Monsanto’s lawyers will be able to restate the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] assessment that Roundup is not a proven or likely carcinogen.

The judges of an appeals court could decide, for example, that the scientific evidence presented by both sides “cancels itself out” and leaves a definitive opinion on Roundup in maybe-limbo “at the present time.” Therefore, the accuser, Dewayne Johnson, has not proved his case. Therefore, there is no judgment in his favor, and no $$ penalty against Monsanto.

I would say Monsanto (and its new owner Bayer) are counting on this scenario.

Could we also be talking about secret payoffs (or blackmail) to assure a favorable outcome? I’m absolutely shocked that anyone would suggest the possibility. As we all know, these corporations are models of propriety and good citizenship. Their reputations are above reproach. They arise each day seeking only to do good in the far flung communities they serve. They search their souls for any sign of moral turpitude and eradicate such problems in short order.

Right?

No?


Exit From the Matrix

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, Exit From The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Breakthrough in explosive lawsuit against Monsanto

Breakthrough in explosive lawsuit against Monsanto

by Jon Rappoport

May 23, 2018

A San Francisco lawsuit against Monsanto and its weedkiller, Roundup, is moving forward. And it’s just received a new green light from the judge in the case.

Monsanto’s lawyers are bracing for a deep level of attack, which they were hoping to avoid. The judge has ruled the jury can hear testimony on this issue: Monsanto suppressed evidence that Roundup causes cancer.

Reporter Carey Gillam has the story (The Guardian, 5/22): “At the age of 46, DeWayne Johnson is not ready to die. But with cancer spread through most of his body, doctors say he probably has just months to live. Now Johnson, a husband and father of three in California, hopes to survive long enough to make Monsanto take the blame for his fate.”

“On 18 June, Johnson will become the first person to take the global seed and chemical company to trial on allegations that it has spent decades hiding the cancer-causing dangers of its popular Roundup herbicide products – and his case has just received a major boost.”

“Last week Judge Curtis Karnow issued an order clearing the way for jurors to consider not just scientific evidence related to what caused Johnson’s cancer, but allegations that Monsanto suppressed evidence of the risks of its weed killing products. Karnow ruled that the trial will proceed and a jury would be allowed to consider possible punitive damages.”

“’The internal correspondence noted by Johnson could support a jury finding that Monsanto has long been aware of the risk that its glyphosate-based herbicides are carcinogenic … but has continuously sought to influence the scientific literature to prevent its internal concerns from reaching the public sphere and to bolster its defenses in products liability actions’, [Judge] Karnow wrote.” [Yes, the Judge in the case wrote that statement.]

“Johnson’s case, filed in San Francisco county superior court in California, is at the forefront of a legal fight against Monsanto. Some 4,000 plaintiffs have sued Monsanto alleging exposure to Roundup caused them, or their loved ones, to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Another case is scheduled for trial in October, in Monsanto’s home town of St Louis, Missouri.”

“How the Johnson lawsuit plays out could be a bellwether for how other plaintiffs proceed. If Johnson prevails, there could be many more years of costly litigation and hefty damage claims. If Monsanto successfully turns back the challenge, it could derail other cases and lift pressure on the firm.”

“According to the court record, Johnson had a job as a groundskeeper for the Benicia unified school district where he applied numerous treatments of Monsanto’s herbicides to school properties from 2012 until at least late 2015. He was healthy and active before he got the cancer diagnosis in August 2014. In a January deposition, Johnson’s treating physician testified that more than 80% of his body was covered by lesions, and that he probably had but a few months to live.”

How will Monsanto proceed? First, they’ll argue that Johnson’s cancer could have been caused by other factors. They’ll throw the kitchen sink at the jury. It could have been genetics. It could have been lifestyle. It could have been causes that are still unknown to researchers. It could have been starlight from a galaxy far, far away. Monsanto’s lawyers will try to bury the jury in reams of supposition.

Second, they’ll show the jury an EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) finding that Roundup does not cause cancer. Like the FDA, the EPA has sided with major corporations in efforts to protect them. Monsanto will claim: “The federal government has asserted Roundup is safe, and that’s the end of our responsibility. The federal government is the final arbiter.” Which is to say: the truth isn’t the final arbiter.

Third, Monsanto will execute a series of acrobatic moves to prove they never suppressed evidence that Roundup causes cancer. They were simply “considering all relevant safety issues.” They were “posing various scenarios.” Their internal memos were “temporary work product” on the way to making a final judgment about Roundup’s safety. They were raising valid concerns about flawed studies that claimed Roundup was dangerous.

If all else fails, Monsanto might try to settle with Johnson—and then claim the $$ payout was simply a way to show compassion for his unfortunate condition—and move on—continuing to offer the public a fine and safe product (Roundup). No guilt admitted.

In the extreme—and I need to raise this question—might Monsanto, behind the scenes, secretly and illegally offer Johnson’s lawyer and his client a very large sum to present a weak case in court and let Monsanto win the case?

You decide.

If Monsanto has intentionally hidden the dire effects of Roundup for decades, while people have gotten sick and died, what wouldn’t they do?

Among the myriad scandals and crimes of Monsanto, here is one that sheds light on the mindset of the company. Axisoflogic.com reports (3/22/12): “In 2001, 3,600 inhabitants of the city of Anniston, Alabama, attacked Monsanto for PCB [a chlorine chemical] contamination. According to a report, declassified by the U.S. Agency of Environmental Protection (EPA), Monsanto for almost forty years dumped thousands of tons of contaminated waste in a stream and an open garbage dump in the heart of a black neighborhood in the city.”

“The way The Washington Post reported the story is instructive: ‘Monsanto documents — many emblazoned with warnings such as ‘CONFIDENTIAL: Read and Destroy’ — show that for decades, the corporate giant concealed what it did and what it knew. In 1966, Monsanto managers discovered that fish submerged in that creek turned belly-up within 10 seconds, spurting blood and shedding skin as if dunked into boiling water. They told no one.”

“Monsanto was finally convicted in 2002 of having polluted ‘the territory of Anniston and the blood of its people with the PCB’. The firm was ordered to pay $ 700 million in damages and to guarantee the cleaning-up of the city. No legal action was brought against the company officials.”


The Matrix Revealed

(To read about Jon’s mega-collection, The Matrix Revealed, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Shareholder lawsuit: delightful weapon against drug companies

by Jon Rappoport

May 24, 2017

(To join our email list, click here.)

The company is NewLink. The vaccine, or drug, depending on how it is defined, is called algenpantucel-L. A clinical trial of the drug recently failed to produce benefits in cancer patients, and the stock price of the company took a major dive.

A shareholder in NewLink, Rickey Ely, decided to sue.

His reasons are interesting, to say the least.

Clinical trials of new drugs seeking FDA approval go through four phases. The lawsuit states that phase 2 produced no encouraging results, violated standard protocol (there was no control group), and yet the company hyped the outcome of phase 2, and launched phase 3 only a few months after starting phase 2. Phase 3 shouldn’t have been initiated at all.

Owing to the company’s PR machine, shareholders were encouraged, but when phase 3 turned out to be a bust, the company’s stock price collapsed—thus punishing those shareholders.

Not only that, the lawsuit charges, but during the PR hype about the drug’s promising outlook, some execs of the company actually sold their own personal shares—1,154,161 shares worth $39.9 million—turning a very nice profit for themselves, before the stock price crashed.

A shareholder-lawsuit like this can be quite a strategy against drug companies (or any publicly held company). The shareholder, a part-owner of the company, is “working from the inside.” He’s “trying to protect the company from the harmful actions of its bosses.” Even if he only owns one share, he can sue.

In this case, Rickey Ely is directly suing several NewLink executives. That always tends to get execs’ attention.

They lock their office doors. They call their lawyers. They spill coffee. They have conversations with their spouses. They put personal plans on hold. They make lists of people they can blame. They make sure their secretaries are screening phone calls. They undertake a deep inventory of their…money.


power outside the matrix

(To read about Jon’s collection, Power Outside The Matrix, click here.)


Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.