Posted on 10/13/2021 8:01:46 AM PDT by Enlightened1
“How is Florida going to secede without Miami, Orlando and Tampa, etc.? Dems control nearly all the cities. Secession is a day dream at this point.””
Silly rabbit, Of course they can.
A majority (Trump won Florida)
Secede county by county. We don’t want the Democrat counties anyway.
Don’t look to the “law” here. Laws don’t apply to a revolution. You can do whatever the hell you decide to do.
First you have to show an emergency.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/29/655
Well based on this there is going to be a whole lot of wrangling before this rule can even be mandated
From your link:
(c)Emergency temporary standards
(1)The Secretary shall provide, without regard to the requirements of chapter 5 of title 5, for an emergency temporary standard
to take immediate effect upon publication in the Federal Register if he determines (A) that employees are exposed to grave danger from exposure to substances or agents determined to be toxic or physically harmful or from new hazards, and (B) that such emergency standard is necessary to protect employees from such danger.
= = = =
Since this is an OSHA regulation, it applies to the workplace. So let's consider people of working age (15-64):
According to the CDC,
https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex-and-Age/9bhg-hcku/data
as of 10/6/2021, for the time period 01/01/2020 to 10/02/2021,
Age Range COVID DEATHS
15-24 years. 1,542
25-34 years. 6,712
35-44 years. 16,911
45-54 years. 42,626
55-64 years. 96,649
total deaths age 15-64 years: 164,440
That's over 21 months for the whole country.
Or 7830 / month
or 261 / day.
There are
10.69+11.03+11.88+11.57+10.94+10.11+9.87+10.05+10.51+9.98
106.63 million
males
and 10.27+10.56+11.36+11.27+10.89+10.2+10.1+10.34+11.09+10.82
106.9 million
females
or 213.5 million
or (261/213,500,000)x100=0.000122% fatality rate per day among working age people.
About 1/8000th of 1% per day fatality rate.
Did they ALL catch it at work?
How does this justify jabbing everyone at work or firing them, even those working from home?
...smallpox (in the Jacobson case in Massachusetts in 1905) involved a 30% fatality rate, and a vaccine which had been in use for years.
No forcing into that vax, or losing your job, either.
Just a $5 fine (around $165 today, or a large speeding ticket).
What do you say ? Mandatory untested clot-shot making Moderna and Pfizer tens of billions of $$$ each?
For what Moderna admitted in their July 2020 Wall Street filing, was an experimental gene therapy?
All numbers lightly rounded, population figures from https://www.statista.com/statistics/241488/population-of-the-us-by-sex-and-age/
...but it's worse than that. You have to subtract out of the total dead, those who died after the clot shot: because the risk for someone dying from COVID without a jab, shouldn't include deaths of those who WERE jabbed.
And it's worse than that: top-tier medical sources show:
Deaths increase after the jab
There is no link between jab rates and infection rates People with the jab are dying from COVID more than the unjabbed.
(See below).
Johns Hopkins showing time series graphs for deaths from COVID before/after the jabs.
Deaths skyrocket across the board AFTER the jabs.
Harvard study showing no correlation between jab rates and infection rates across 67 Countries, and across over 2900 US counties https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00808-7
New England Journal of Medicine Article showing antibodies from jabs drop off around 3 months https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2114583
And from the Market Ticker
Ticker Guy analysis of the Uk Report:
NEGATIVE EFFICIENCY CHART
Unfortunately what this means is that now for anyone over 30 you are more likely to get infected, yes, adjusted for the population that is vaccinated, if you are vaccinated. Indeed in the 40-49 age group you’re close to double as probable on a per-population basis.
This means that if your employer mandates the jabs he or she can be sued for putting those who can’t get vaccinated at double the risk, on purpose, by enforcing the mandate.
Since there are people who can’t (due to immune compromise, such as cancer patients) be vaccinated this is now intentional risk.
In other words this is hard, scientific evidence that these mandates by employers have increased the risk of customers (and other employees) contracting Covid-19. This isn’t a natural risk (which an employer is not responsible for) it’s a man-made one created by the employer.
That’s actionable.
So far this is not translating into higher risk of Covid hospitalization and death on a per-100,000 basis. But that the vaccine makes you more likely to both get and give to others the virus is now established. It is fact. It is in fact true for everyone who is over 30.
I have pointed out that preventing infection was never in the cards; it was not part of the EUA, it was not part of the studies, it was never demonstrated. But this is much worse because now we are talking about a direct threat to others.
The CDC, NIH and Biden almost-certainly know this.
This is why the mad rush to demand you get jabbed; they know damn well what this means and that while the manufacturer is immune the employers are not and in fact any such mandate leaves them wide open legally as soon as an unvaccinated person gets infected after being at said firm either as an employee or customer and sues the company on the basis of intentionally and maliciously increasing their risk by forcing their employees to get the jab, which is exactly what they did.
The data from England is conclusive in that regard.
https://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=243859
...SNIP...
The report he is reviewing is linked below: UK Health Security Agency COVID-19 vaccine surveillance report
Week 40
THERE IS NO MEDICAL EMERGENCY FOR THE JAB!
...not to mention Ivermectin.
And Japan and Uttar Pradesh in India, and (I think) Indonesia, are all using Ivermectin and stopping infection in its tracks.
https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2282
From 4 April to 20 June unvaccinated people died from covid-19 at 16.6 times the rate among the fully vaccinated (95% confidence interval 13.5 to 20.4). Between 20 June and 17 July that rate fell to 11.3 (9.1 to 13.9). Before 20 June admissions of unvaccinated people with covid-19 to hospital were running at 13.3 (11.3 to 15.6) times the rate among the vaccinated, but this had fallen to 10.4 (8.1 to 13.3) after that date.
Some how the motto “Come and Take it” has got to fit in here.
Well, the TES will surely be challenged, but not on the basis of its not having been "passed by Congress." At least, not in the sense that I think you mean here.
The TES, if/when it is promulgated, will be in the nature of a federal regulation, equivalent to other workplace "standards" that OSHA has been imposing for decades. The only thing different will be the "emergency" aspect of this particular action (i.e., the TES will apparently be made immediately effective upon publication in the the Federal Register, instead of the normal notice-and-comment procedure that OSHA otherwise follows when adopting workplace standards).
Upon promulgation and subsequent legal challenge, a key issue before the reviewing court will be whether the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the federal statute from which OSHA derives its authority to adopt workplace standards that have the force of (federal) law, affords OSHA the authority to adopt this particular standard. That is to say, there is a pre-existing federal statute in play here (i.e., the OSH Act of 1970); the issue is whether, under the terms of that statute, OSHA is authorized to adopt the TES that it has promulgated. Does that make sense?
Where in the USC is the Federal government given the power to create and require occupational health and safety standards (however defined) in all the States? I don't remember seeing anything close. We're talking about private exchanges of services for money, under conditions agreed to by the respective parties. Isn't that by definition a State or local matter, since the Federal government is not a party to any of it? Our Federal government is a union composed of States, not individual people or ants in thrall to it severally.
The insanity of Federal overbite is exactly what the Founders foresaw, and they prepared the Constitutional framework specifically to block it. It seems to me the only road away from Stalinism is restricting FedGov to exactly what is authorized in the USC by retaking legal and physical territory back from FedGov from all directions, until there's no way of catching all the marbles as they roll.
Dig moats around them and shut off the power.
A further consideration would be that, with OSHA's attempting to adopt this standard only now, when vaccines have been available in the U.S. since the beginning of 2021, does seem to undercut the proposition that there's truly any "emergency" that needs to be addressed in this manner.
I can hear in my mind both DeSantis and Abbott saying in their heads “I’ll be your huckleberry.”
Well given the fact that 94% of the Covid deaths have co-morbidities like Cancer, heart disease, motorcycle accidents, etc...., and that VAERS only represents 1% of all Covid deaths.
That would put the real numbers as follow.
Those that died from Covid alone at 70k vs. 1.5 million from the vaccine.
Maybe this is how CWII starts?
5.56mm
***Correction***
Well given the fact that 94% of the Covid deaths have co-morbidities like Cancer, heart disease, motorcycle accidents, etc...., and that VAERS only represents 1% of all Covid deaths.
That would put the real numbers as follow.
Those that died from Covid alone at 42k (6% of 700k) vs. 1.5 million dead (1% from VAERS over 15k dead) from the vaccine.
From 4 April to 20 June unvaccinated people died from covid-19 at 16.6 times the rate among the fully vaccinated
And yet FL went for Trump at a good margin.
They either go along, or can move out of the state back to where they came from.
10th Amendment.
There is a solid separation of powers argument to be made that the Biden regime is usurping power it is not Constitutionally allowed to claim.
Even the much touted Jacobson vrs Mass specifically refers to state legislative power.
“Dig moats around them and shut off the power.”
Aside from the former-per your reply, the later is realism.
Some know where to shut it off to black out the entire west coast. One place.
At two points, nearly the whole state of CA gets shut down.
For weeks.
And there is no unambiguous test for dying "From" COVID since the PCR test (according to the guy who won the Nobel Prize in Medicine for inventing it) was never meant to be used as a diagnostic.
And usually those numbers count as the unjabbed, those who got jabbed less than 2 weeks earlier.
You should have been banned long ago.
First, I assume by "USC" you mean the U.S. Constitution? Second, with respect to the balance of your questions/observations, I believe you will find that Congress has many decades for relied upon the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution as giving it the authority to adopt such statutes as the OSH Act of 1970, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Federal Labor Relations Act, and a host of other statutes that impose enforceable requirements on private actors.
The Commerce Clause -- found in Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the Constitution -- reads: "The Congress shall have Power ... [t]o regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes." On the slender reed comprised by these few words rests almost all of the modern "administrative state." The Constitution does not otherwise contemplate that the federal government, as opposed to the governments of the "several States" would have anything approach plenary "police powers." And there have been many, particularly in recent years, that have challenged the presumed scope of the Commerce Clause. But, to date, they have yet to make much, if any, real progress with the U.S. Supreme Court in seeking to advance that challenge.
That's about the best I can do in response to your questions. One could fill a good size library with the law review articles and other commentary that have addressed these matters.
So, democrats think their guy can be a dictator. Let’s rumble!
Commerce Clause, it is true, has been warped and bloated far away from its actual meaning.
And that’s not likely to change absent a SCOTUS which would put patriotism above power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
