TRUMP TO INVESTIGATE BIG PHARMA FOR THE “STUNNING RISE” IN AUTISM, INFERTILITY, ALLERGIES, etc

[sparebulb]

Sounds to me like your friend is too far gone. Might be best to distance yourself from him as he continues to not live in reality.

I've considered that for reasons that I will not mention.

I've come to the conclusion that he has gone from one cult following to another all of his life.

MAGA seems to have a cult-like nature to it.

Q founder, Gen Flynn leading a mass hypnosis exhibit using a cult prayer from Elizabeth Claire Profit, for example.

 

[sparebulb]

I laughed when I read that. We have a liberty group that meets on random Fridays. It is open to everybody in hopes that we can help shed some light. That said, there are a small group within the group that are devout Christians and honestly believe that Trump is a Disciple of God.

For example, referring to Post #6 above, when I show that material to them, I am told by one woman in particular that it is a complete lie/fabrication by the Satanists. She insists that Obama and Biden are working behind the scenes at the WH and use AI Technology to make it look like Trump said those things... holographic imagery, voice-overs and the like, and that Obama and Biden control all technology/media. Unfortunately the others in that small group actually believe her over our core group.

How can one argue? Which is why this country is done. Put a fork in it already

I see exactly what you have rightfully mentioned.

I should have been clear about a legitimate, non-woke, non-Israel-first Christianity.

I am a very poorly behaved Christian.

But I clearly see the deception in Trump.

 

[Working Poor]

I don't think Trump can take out big pharma. The people could if they could wake up from their trance and say no I don't want that crap.

I can do it. I just say no and that works for me at this time. My mother forced me to get vaccines when I was a child and I fought like hell against it. I screamed and fought against them in my earliest years. I think it was ethically wrong for those doctors and nurses along with my mother to hold me down and force me to take them. I have fought with my daughter in law over it and finally they listen to me thank God. I have talked with other parents about them

Anybody could say no to vaccines. Truly it is up to you you can't blame anyone one else for what you allow into your body or your children's body. If you want to end big pharma it begins with you. There are some medications that everyone should have on hand and you shouldn't have to get permission. The only way al this sickness will end is if you stop believing the medical industrial complex and there programming oh yea and don't eat zee bugs.

 

[acptulsa]

The only way al this sickness will end is if you stop believing the medical industrial complex and there programming oh yea and don't eat zee bugs.

I know someone who weighs 400 pounds. Sits on the toilet four times a day trying to move all that breading and vegetable oil, and brags about being on the paleo diet and eating only lean meat. Um, like, meat isn't lean if it has corn fat sponges attached to it.

Can't breathe, guts in an uproar, doctor says lose weight -- then puts him on prescriptions to help his intestines process the constant overload, to help him breathe around his fat apnea, etc. etc. And guess what happens if any of them are taken on an empty stomach? Eat less, the doctor says, just be sure you eat four times a day so you can swallow this crap, because otherwise any of them would eat your stomach lining.

Medicine has been redesigned to be self-defeating in every way.

 

[Swordsmyth]

He just asked RFK to run this for him.

 

[unknown]

Damage control from pushing the clot shot?

 

[jmdrake]

Immune from random judges, not immune from congress impeaching and senate convicting.

Actually according to the [MENTION=65299]Swordsmyth[/MENTION] doctrine, immunity for official duties includes impeachment because immunity means something isn't a crime and if it isn't a crime you can't be impeached unless SS has deemed it "malfeasance" in which case you can impeach but only under very limited circumstances.

 

[fisharmor]

Here's the thing, though - they're *not* going to find any link between vaccines and autism.
If anyone cared to look into developmental problems at all, they'd quickly find that autism numbers did the same thing covid numbers did.

Remember how in 2020 and 2021 absolutely nobody caught the flu?

Well, there has always been a bucket where medical professionals toss developmentally disabled kids. Sometimes these kids have Down Syndrome and they can actually put a proper diagnostic label on them and actually go look at their chromosomes and say "this kid has this chromosome abnormality which everyone with this condition has" and then there's a proper diagnosis.
It's all very clear-cut and airtight. This physical condition exists.

Well, there has always been a very large number of people who don't have that specific diagnosis who are still clearly messed up people. Oh, there are other diagnoses - Angelman Syndrome, Rhett Syndrome, the list goes on and on - and none of them have a clear-cut and airtight set of diagnostic criteria like Down does. Once you dig into them, you find out there's a genetic marker that they've associated with the disease, but the fact of the matter is, they don't have proof. It could just as easily be the gene that controls resistance to toenail fungus for all we know.

Up until the 1990s (interestingly enough, right after Rain Main premiered) all these kids were tossed into a big bucket labeled "Mentally Retarded" and forgotten about.
Then, for reasons that I'm just sure have nothing to do with the popularity of any movies, someone made a new bucket and slapped an "Autism" label on it.
And then money for Autism research started showing up.
And then they made it politically incorrect to refer to these kids as mentally retarded anymore.
So of course, they all started getting moved from one bucket to the other.

And to accommodate this, we now have an "Autism Spectrum". They've completely abandoned the idea of coming up with a specific set of diagnostic criteria.
Megacepaly? Autism spectrum. Microcephaly? Autism spectrum.
Extreme sensitivity to the point of not being able to wear clothes? Autism spectrum. Extreme lack of sensitivity to the point of walking straight into door jambs and not noticing? Autism spectrum.
Is the kid not able to eat solid food without going bezerk? Autism specturm. Does the kid literally eat sand and rocks? Autism spectrum.

They've got like 20 years now of sticking people with 180 degree polar opposite diagnostics in the same bucket. There is a precisely 0.0000% chance they were all caused by the same cause.

No matter what happens with this effort of Trump, no matter how hypocritical it is, no matter how many people died of covid jabs, the biggest shame of this is that it's just going to set back real research into these people's issues. They've never had proper research put into them - they've always been tossed into a big bucket and forgotten, except perhaps to fund what only amounts to self-important daycares for them with taxpayer money.

You don't find root causes by spitballing ideas and assuming individual cases that have no commonalities all fit into that cause. You find root causes by repeatedly researching individual cases first, finding similarities, and looking for what caused those similarities.

Trying to pin their problems on something it literally can't be is just going to set them back another couple decades at least.

 

[Anti Federalist]

 

[LibertyEagle]

Well, we can just wait for libertarian perfection to get elected to President to do it perfectly.

I don’t think we will have a country then, but by all means, continue shooting yourselves in the foot. You have every right to do so.

 

[dannno]

Actually according to the @Swordsmyth doctrine, immunity for official duties includes impeachment because immunity means something isn't a crime and if it isn't a crime you can't be impeached unless SS has deemed it "malfeasance" in which case you can impeach but only under very limited circumstances.

If that's what he said he's wrong, you can be impeached as President for high crimes and misdemeanors, it says so in the Constitution.

 

[jmdrake]

If that's what he said he's wrong, you can be impeached as President for high crimes and misdemeanors, it says so in the Constitution.

Right. I know that. You know that. Even he knows that. But his argument is, that anything (kinda sorta not really) that the President does as an "official duty" is by definition not a high crime or misdemeanor. And yes. He's wrong. Multiple people told him that multiple times. But yeah. Impeachment is the way to hold presidents accountable for acts that they do as president that they may be able to claim criminal immunity from. Obama could have been impeached for murdering Anwar Al Awlaki. He can't be criminally tried for that.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Actually according to the @Swordsmyth doctrine, immunity for official duties includes impeachment because immunity means something isn't a crime and if it isn't a crime you can't be impeached unless SS has deemed it "malfeasance" in which case you can impeach but only under very limited circumstances.

Completely wrong, but I'm not going to keep arguing with you when you obviously are incapable of understanding.

 

[Swordsmyth]

If that's what he said he's wrong, you can be impeached as President for high crimes and misdemeanors, it says so in the Constitution.

It's not what I said.

 

[jmdrake]

Completely wrong, but I'm not going to keep arguing with you when you obviously are incapable of understanding.

:rollleyes:

It's not what I said.

[MENTION=10908]dannno[/MENTION] This is what SS said. You can judge for yourself.

Not for most of them.

Only the ones that claim he committed crimes that were not official acts or that claim they can show a non-core official act was criminal, and the latter are required to prove it was non-core and criminal before proceeding to try the case.

They are all dead, even the New York garbage is in limbo because they used evidence the ruling says they are not allowed to use.
(In addition to the total illegality and unconstitutionality of the case from all other angles)

The SS doctrine is a president can only be impeached for crimes someone claims he committed that were not official acts

 

[Swordsmyth]

:rollleyes:


@dannno This is what SS said. You can judge for yourself.



The SS doctrine is a president can only be impeached for crimes someone claims he committed that were not official acts

Now I know you are being deliberately dishonest, that quote was about the prosecutions not about impeachments.
None of the prosecutions allege he committed High Crimes or Misdemeanors using his core powers, so that possibility was not involved in that exchange.

I repeatedly said a POTUS can be impeached for (only) High Crimes and Misdemeanors committed using core powers or other powers of his office.
What the immunity ruling barred, aside from prosecutions for noncrimes, was Congress attempting to criminalize and restrict core powers in addition to the possibility of impeachment for (only) High Crimes and Misdemeanors.


@dannno

Drake and others were trying to claim that High Crimes and Misdemeanors had no historical definition and that Congress could impeach for any or no reason.

 

[jmdrake]

Now I know you are being deliberately dishonest, that quote was about the prosecutions not about impeachments.
None of the prosecutions allege he committed High Crimes or Misdemeanors using his core powers, so that possibility was not involved in that exchange.

I repeatedly said a POTUS can be impeached for (only) High Crimes and Misdemeanors committed using core powers or other powers of his office.
What the immunity ruling barred, aside from prosecutions for noncrimes, was Congress attempting to criminalize and restrict core powers in addition to the possibility of impeachment for (only) High Crimes and Misdemeanors.


@dannno

Drake and others were trying to claim that High Crimes and Misdemeanors had no historical definition and that Congress could impeach for any or no reason.

Hmmmm.....let's see.

It specifically said Congress couldn't criminalize legitimate actions with his core powers, if they can't make it a crime they can't impeach him for it.

Lucy you've got a lot of 'splaining to do.

 

[Swordsmyth]

Hmmmm.....let's see.



Lucy you've got a lot of 'splaining to do.

Define legitimate as opposed to "High Crimes and Misdemeanors".

Is English not your first language?

 

[dannno]

Now I know you are being deliberately dishonest, that quote was about the prosecutions not about impeachments.
None of the prosecutions allege he committed High Crimes or Misdemeanors using his core powers, so that possibility was not involved in that exchange.

I repeatedly said a POTUS can be impeached for (only) High Crimes and Misdemeanors committed using core powers or other powers of his office.
What the immunity ruling barred, aside from prosecutions for noncrimes, was Congress attempting to criminalize and restrict core powers in addition to the possibility of impeachment for (only) High Crimes and Misdemeanors.


@dannno

Drake and others were trying to claim that High Crimes and Misdemeanors had no historical definition and that Congress could impeach for any or no reason.

Ya that's sorta what I expected, and in fact there are historical definitions of high crimes and misdemeanors. I don't remember the definitions, but Robert Barnes went over it a while back on a Viva and Barnes episode.