All right, let's get this show on the road. Everybody welcome to Medical Doctors for COVID
Ethics International. This group was founded by Dr. Stephen Frost during the darkest days
of the COVID scam responses with a desire to pursue truth, ethics, justice, freedom
and health. And today we honor Rashid Butar's passing and we think about him and we might
have a conversation about him in due course. Stephen Frost has stood up against government
and power over the years and has been a whistleblower and activist. His medical specialty is radiology.
I'm Charles Covets, the moderator of this group. I'm Australasia's passion provocateur
and my jacket is red because red is the color of passion. I practiced law for 20 years before
changing career 30 years ago. And over the last 12 years, I've helped parents and lawyers
to strategize remedies for vaccine damage and damage from bad medical advice. I'm also
the CEO of an industrial hemp company and industrial hemp will be a crucial tool in
our war for freedom. We comprise lots of professions, including doctors, lawyers, homeopaths, journalists,
scientists, filmmakers, professors, peacemakers and troublemakers. And we're from all around
the world. If this is your first time here, welcome and feel free to introduce yourself
in the chat and where you're from. If you publish a newsletter or a podcast or you have
a radio or TV show or you've written a book, put the links into the chat so we can follow
you, promote you and find you. And even if you've done it in our previous meetings, keep
doing it because it makes it easy for us to find you. And remember that we have a variable
population live so that the links in the chat to your podcast or newsletter are important
every time. Most of us understand we're in the middle of World War Three and that there
are various battle lines as part of this war. Some of us believe we're in a continuation
of World War Two. Most of us understand the development of science and that the science
is never settled. The meeting runs for two and a half hours after which for those with
the time, Tom Rodman runs a video telegram meeting. Tom puts the links into the chat
if you are able to join. We listen to Bobbi Anne Cox, our guest presenter, for as long
as she wants to speak. And then we have Q&A. Stephen Frost, by long established tradition,
asks the first questions. There's no censorship. It's a free speech environment with appropriate
moderating. Free speech is crucially important in our fight to preserve our human freedoms.
If you're offended by anything, be offended. We're genuinely not interested. We reject
the offense industry that requires nobody to say anything that may offend another. We
come with an attitude and perspective of love, not fear. Fear is the opposite of love. Fear
squashes you. Love, on the other hand, expands you. If you have a solution or a product or
links or resources that will help people, put the details into the chat as well. If
you have any people you want to add to the invitation list, email me or put them in the
chat or DM me privately. The meeting is recorded and is uploaded onto the Rumble channel. Now
before I welcome Bobbi Anne Cox, the one thing I want to add is this is a free speech environment.
I had a comment from someone last week that somebody was or a particular profession was
attacked in the chat that the practice of a particular thing is bullshit. Now,
someone's allowed to believe that. And the fact that someone says that a particular profession
who might be on this call is bullshit, just let it go. That's what free speech is about.
That's not an attack on a person that says this profession is bullshit. We've had the comment
made that virology is a non-existent science. That is not a personal attack. Anyone who attacks
people personally, I'll give them a warning and I'll remove them from the meeting. But if you
express a point of view, that's what it means to have free speech. Okay, so it's not a per- if it's
a personal attack, we won't, Stephen and I won't stand for it, but you're allowed to express views.
That's what it's about. So please understand that important distinction. And if someone says
that a particular profession is bullshit, it's not my job to stand to speak and defend a particular
profession. So come on, we come from love, not fear. Don't worry about what anybody says about
a particular profession. So, and that particularly applies to lawyers, Bobbie Anne, doesn't it?
Well, I've got millions of jokes. I mean, I mean, what do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 50?
Your honor. You know, and why do they bury lawyers 12 feet under? Because deep down, lawyers are okay.
So, you know, we've got more jokes about lawyers than any other profession. So hello.
Okay, and now welcome to Bobbie Anne Flower-Cox officially, but Bobbie Anne Cox for our purposes,
wonderful New York lawyer who's spoken to us before. And we thank you again,
Bobbie Anne, for giving us your time. And thank you, Stephen Frost, again, for creating this group
and for organizing Bobbie Anne. Bobbie Anne, over to you and you can share your screen if you wish
at any time. Great. Thank you so much. Thank you, Charles. Thank you, Stephen. It's great to be here
again. So I'm not sure if everybody on today's call was on the call when I spoke last year.
Certainly not. No. Okay. So basically, what I've been working on for the past year and almost a
year and a half is this lawsuit that I brought against the governor of New York State, Kathy
Hogle and her Department of Health. In New York State, we have a quarantine law, which we've had
for 70 years. And it is basically, you know, pretty, pretty well full of due process protections,
you know, in order to quarantine someone against their will, the law says that you need to,
you know, prove that they're sick with whatever the communicable disease is that you think they
have. And then there's, you know, an investigation that's had, they have the right to an attorney,
they have the right to a hearing in front of a judge. And if it's proven that that person is not
just sick with the infected or the communicable disease, but also is comporting themselves in a
manner that is dangerous to others, so they're not being careful to try to not spread their germs,
then the judge could issue them an order of isolation or quarantine in a hospital where
they would, you know, get proper treatment or whatever. But our governor decided that
she was going to make a regulation through her Department of Health. And forget all that law
stuff with all the due process stuff, she was just going to say the Department of Health here in New
York State could pick and choose which New Yorkers they could issue orders of isolation or quarantine
to. And then they didn't have to prove you were sick, they didn't have to prove you were exposed
to a communicable disease. There was no time restraints, so they could have locked you up or
locked you down for days or weeks or months. They got to decide where you were locked up. So they
could have forced you to stay in your home, or they could have removed you from your home and put you
into a facility or a detention center of their choosing. They could have used local law enforcement
to remove you from your home and put you where they wanted you to go. And once you were there,
there was no way for you to get out of isolation or quarantine. So what I mean by that is last year
we were having oral arguments in front of the judge, and the judge asked the attorney general,
you know, let's say you take a family and let's say you put them into isolation or quarantine in
a facility. Let's say you put them in a hospital, let's say. How do they get out once they're in
there? And the attorney general kind of thought about it for a minute and said, well, you know,
I guess they could hire a lawyer and they could sue us. So there was no due process protections
in this regulation that the governor and her Department of Health made, but they made it in
the name of COVID, you know, COVID emergency. And so last year, I actually found out about this reg,
the end of 2021. And so I immediately started drafting a lawsuit against the governor and the
Department of Health because it was completely unconstitutional on multiple levels. Number one,
it had no due process protections. And in the United States, our constitution and in New York
state, our state constitution both say that you have to have due process protections in not just
your laws, but in your regulations as well. And it also conflicted with existing New York state law,
as I had mentioned previously, we already have a law which is full of due process protections
so that the government doesn't abuse its power against its citizens. And this regulation
completely conflicted with our existing law. It conflicted with our constitution and it was a
complete power grab by the executive branch of government, which is where the governor and her
departments sit. They're the executive branch. They're only supposed to enforce laws as per our
constitution. They're not supposed to make laws. And they're certainly not supposed to make rules
that conflict with our laws. And then our legislature is our elected representatives,
our elected senators, our elected representatives in the assembly here in New York state.
They're the ones that are supposed to make the laws. And we elect them every two years here in
New York state. So, you know, what I did was crafted a lawsuit against the governor and the
Department of Health and my plaintiffs are a group of New York state legislators. And our argument has
been the governor has overstepped, has crossed over into the lawmaking realm, has exceeded her
powers that are established for her branch of government. And as a result, she has injured
my plaintiffs, which are Senator George Borrello, Assemblyman Chris Tague, Assemblyman Mike Lawler.
So, this group of New York state legislators, lawmakers, are having their power taken from them
by the governor and her Department of Health. It's unconstitutional and that was our argument and
we won. The court struck this down last summer. They said it was unconstitutional, breach of
separation of powers. They declared it null, void, unenforceable. They prohibited the promulgation
of the regulation or enforcement of the regulation going forward. So, that was in July. And then we
had elections in November here in New York state and both our governor and our attorney general
were running for office. And of course, they didn't want the public to know what they were up to as
far as quarantines, forced quarantines and quarantine facilities. So, they didn't actually
appeal the case until after the elections, which they both won in November. So, we still have the
same governor and the same attorney general as we did last year. And so, they waited until early
this year to file the appeal. So, now we're in appeal. We're now at the appellate division,
New York state Supreme Court appellate division. And now I've got to fight them all over again
and convince this court, this new court, the appellate court, that the judge below made the
right decision and that this is indeed an unconstitutional regulation and should not be
reinstated. So, the importance of this case is really striking because, yes, it's about quarantines
and that is obviously a very severe deprivation of your rights, right? If the government can come
and lock you up or lock you down whenever they want with no proof that you're sick,
no proof that you did anything wrong for however long they want, that is totalitarianism, right?
That is, you can call it authoritarianism, you can call it, you know, scary as hell, whatever you want
to call it, it's not happening in this state, it's not happening in this country, not on my watch.
So, that is one element of this fight that I've got going on. But the other element is that
if the court now reverses that lower court decision and says, no, the governor and her
department of health, they can make this reg, this is okay, no problem, they've got the power to do
this, that's going to now completely abolish separation of powers because what it's going
to do is it's going to elevate that branch of government, it's going to say the executive
branch where the governor sits and her agencies is now going to be more powerful than the
legislature, which is our elected representatives to every two years we can elect them, you know,
vote them in and out if we don't like what they're doing in the legislature, it's going to elevate
the executive branch above the legislative because the legislature could make whatever laws they want
and then the executive could come along and say, well, you know what, I don't really like that law,
so I'm going to make a regulation or a rule, whatever you want to call it, that conflicts with
that law and overrides that law and look, there's nothing you can do about it because
the court's already said I've got the power to do this, right? So, the floodgates will indeed open
and you will see agencies around New York State start making regs, rules, whatever you want to
call them, that conflict with the constitution and conflict with existing New York State law
and we're going to have complete totalitarian rule in this state. Why does that matter to the other
states? Why does that matter to the rest of the world? Because what happens in New York spreads
always, whether it's clothing fashion or whether it's, you know, these crazy laws that they come
up with in our state legislature, it spreads. When one state sees that New York can get away with
something, they do it too. Well, New York can do it. Well, the courts in New York said that the
governor can do that, so, I mean, our governor can do it too, right? And then it starts to spread and
then it becomes a trend and then when other countries see, oh yeah, the U.S. can have forced
isolation and quarantine facilities with no due process, why can't we do that, right? So, it becomes
like this accepted craziness and we have to nip it in the bud. Well, we did nip it in the bud,
but now they're appealing. So, the case is, unfortunately, not being covered by mainstream
media. All last year, I mean, I literally spent the entire year working on this case.
I started drafting at the end of 2021. I got my plaintiffs in early 2022. We filed in April of 22.
We had a decision in July of 22 and then the remaining months of the year were spent trying
to spread the word about this case so that people would know before they went to the polls in November
what Governor Hockel and Letitia James, our attorney general, were up to.
So, mainstream media wouldn't pick it up. I mean, there was maybe one article in the New York Post
about this, but no New York Times, no Wall Street Journal, none of the television networks would
pick it up. Now, alternative media did. They were great. I can't count how many podcasts I was
on and local radio stations and such. I've written many articles about it. I have a substack
and I write once a week an article and push it out through substack, but there's no coverage from
mainstream media. Now that we are fighting in the appellate court, so now they appealed, the governor
and the attorney general appealed, Fox News wrote one story on it and I think I'm going on OAN in
like a week or two or something, but this needs to hit mainstream media. I mean, this is what they do.
They keep these important cases and issues out of the public eye because, honestly, in my opinion,
and I've spoken to many people about this case, I mean, I literally travel across the state. I
crisscross New York state almost on a daily basis, a weekly basis, giving speeches in various counties
and cities all over the state. And sometimes I even go to other states to talk about it, Connecticut,
Georgia, Florida, whatever, but it's really fascinating that so many people have not even
heard about this case, let alone the fact that we won, let alone the fact that now the governor
and attorney general are appealing to try and get this crazy power back. And it's so dangerous
because whether you're Republican, Democrat, liberal, conservative, independent, nothing,
I don't care what you are, it doesn't really matter. We are not talking about something that's
conservative or liberal or progressive. We're talking about basic human rights.
You cannot lock people up just because you're the government without any proof that they've done
anything wrong for however long you want. It blows my mind. As an attorney, it blows my mind.
As a citizen of our world, it blows my mind because no government should have this power.
So this is where we are with this. I'm working very closely with New York State legislators,
the ones of course that are on my lawsuit. There was also another group of New York State
legislators last year who are not plaintiffs in the case, but who wrote an amicus brief to support
the case. And that was authored by Assemblyman Andy Goodell, who's also an attorney and signed
onto by Assemblyman Will Barkley, who's the Republican head of the New York State Assembly,
and then another assemblyman named Joe Giglio. And now this time around, the New Civil Liberties
Alliance said that they are going to be writing an amicus brief to support our case. And then
possibly also the Government Justice Center based in Albany where the state government sits in New
York, they might write an amicus brief as well. So I'm hoping my goal now is to try and get PR on
this because we can't let stuff like this fly under the radar anymore. We need to wake more
people up. And if this doesn't wake people up, then nothing's going to wake people up
because this is a direct attack on your literally your individual autonomy, your ability to get up
and walk out of your house and go to work or take your kids to school or do whatever you want to do.
This would because this reg says that you can't you don't the government doesn't even need to
prove that you're sick and they can hold you wherever they want for however long they want.
I mean, that is the antithesis of freedom. And it is so dangerous. We can't allow them to have this
power. If the populace doesn't like something, generally speaking, it fails in government,
if there's a proposed law, that's really controversial. And enough people hear about
it and speak up about it or write letters or send emails, or do rallies or whatever their way of
protesting is. Typically that bill that proposed legislation will die because it will not gain the
support because the politicians their number one thing that they want to do is get reelected.
So if they think that there's something a topic that is so controversial that it could cost them
their job, they absolutely will back off. The problem is reaching enough people to get them
to speak out to write letters, send emails, make phone calls, make appointments and go actually
sit down with your elected representatives and have them hear your voice. Here in New York,
in December, this past December, it was like two or three days before Christmas. And the New York
state legislature called a session. So in New York, our legislature, the senators and assembly
members only work from January to June. It's a part time job. It's six months. It's not even
six months. It's five and a half months. And so they finished the beginning of June. They called
them back to Albany, back into session the very end of December, this past December, five months
ago, because, oh, it's such an emergency. We have to come back into session two days before Christmas.
We have to pass this bill into law. Okay. What was the bill? Okay. The bill was to give themselves
a 30% pay raise so that they could now make $142,000 a year plus benefits plus per diems.
But that was even the worst part. They also put a provision in this new law that said that
anyone who serves in the New York state legislature can no longer have an outside job
if that outside job earns them more than $35,000 a year. So they've basically barred the members of
the New York state legislature or anybody that wants to run for that office from having a job
the other six months out of the year when you're not actually in Albany being a legislator.
So what have they done? They've overnight created career politicians. So to serve in the New York
state assembly or the New York state Senate, you have to really at this point only be a legislator.
You can only rely on that as your source of income and that is your profession. So now what happens
are you going to listen to the people and what the people want or are you going to listen to
your special interest lobby groups that are paying your campaign bills? Which one are you going to be
beholden to? You're not going to listen to what the people want. You're going to listen to what
your special interest lobby who pays you however many hundreds of thousands of dollars to stay in
office. What they want, that's what you're going to do. What your party tells you to do, that's
what you're going to do because if you don't, well your party will put somebody up against you in
the next election. Your party won't support you. They won't give you any financial contributions
to your campaign when it comes to I'm for reelection. So you've now made it that every
person in the New York state legislature is beholden to their party and is beholden to their
special interest lobby groups. You know in New York state we have a super majority of Democrats
in our entire government structure. So our state senate super majority Democrats,
our state assembly super majority Democrats, our governor Democrat, our attorney general Democrat.
So what does that mean? That means that you are getting literally one side rule, one party rule.
There's no discourse going on in New York state. There's no discussion. There's no other side of
the equation because the Democrats have such a massive power grab right now. They don't even
need the governors. Even if the governor had lost and let's say the Republican won last year,
it wouldn't matter because with a super majority in both houses that means if they want to pass a
bill into law and the governor says no and vetoes it, they would have the power to override the
veto. So it is so dangerous and we've had one party rule, Democrats in charge, nothing,
the Republicans have no voice in this government in New York state right now. We've had this for
five years in New York and this is what we're seeing. We are seeing regulations like this
running amok. We are seeing things like there was a bill that just passed last week out of the
assembly health committee. Now it's going to the assembly floor which says that children of any age
can consent to get STD vaccines without parental knowledge, without parental consent. So a nine
year old could go to a medical facility and ask for an STD shot. Okay and they're not allowed to
tell the parents. Okay so first of all that's a violation of our federal law but I won't get
too much in the weeds there. There's another, I mean it's secondly, it's a huge attack on
parental rights. There's another bill being proposed right now in our state legislature
which has a bill in both houses which says that every school in New York state would have to teach
comprehensive sexual education to all the children starting in kindergarten.
Okay they want to teach five-year-olds about sex education. So what we're seeing here is
a complete attack on pretty much all of our rights that we have. They are attacking parental rights.
There are other bills that are pushing to become law that are fierce attacks on parental rights.
I'm just giving you those two and they're attacking our very freedoms, our very essence of
what it means to be free. Oh we can lock you up into quarantine facilities anytime we want for no
reason. These are things that are the very cornerstone, the very basis of our society
and not just our society. When I say our society I don't just mean in the United States, I mean
everywhere. Everywhere on this globe parents should have the right to raise their children
as they deem fit. You are the ones that know your children. You made them. You raised them.
You get to decide how they learn about sex education and when they learn about sex education
you get to decide what drugs go into their body or not. I mean just think about the
take away the legal aspect of this argument for a moment. Think about the medical aspect for
of this for a moment. If a child is allowed of any age is allowed to go get STD shots without
their parents knowledge what if that child is allergic to one of the ingredients in that shot
then what happens? The kid gets the shot, the kid goes home and now all of a sudden they start
going into some sort of you know allergic reaction. They're having a shock, they can't
breathe whatever. The parent doesn't even know that they just got a shock. The parent has no
idea what just happened because the parent wasn't there and wasn't told when the child received an
injection. How are the paramedics going to save that child? They don't know what the child just
got injected with either or that the child even got injected. I mean it's absolutely it's insanity.
It's absolute insanity. This is what's going on in New York and you know there is there's a ground
swell. We do have the grassroots that are rising up to fight against this and obviously we have
the legal side of it but we just we need it to be more widespread. We need the word to be
pushed out further and faster and you know we're playing whack-a-mole here. You know an emergency
pops up like oh they're trying to push this bill through oh my gosh are you kidding? You know and
then it's like you try and put that fire out and then while you're trying to put that fire out or
as soon as you get that fire out there's another one over here that pops up right and we can't just
keep playing defense. We can't just keep bringing lawsuits to try and quash these things or push
them back in their lane. Lawsuits take time. Lawsuits take money. Lawsuits take energy
and as you fight it out in the system it can take years to get a resolution a final resolution on a
lawsuit and meanwhile you've got all these people who are suffering you know probably children but
people that are suffering being injured I mean it's absolute insanity so I'm happy to take some
questions if people have specific questions on either the regulation the isolation and quarantine
regulation or some of these insane bills that are coming up here in New York State.
If anybody has questions on that I'm happy to address. Very good very good Bobby Anne thank
you so much thank you for your fight. I've got a couple of comments before Stephen asks his
questions to start. The first is how are you managing to fund these cases because this is a
magnificent contribution you have made to the fight for freedom and you know I know how much
well you said you've been working most of the year on this matter so how is that funding happening
and then secondly what's your view on Ryan Oformick's comment you know that and it's
probably well that the court system is hopelessly hopelessly corrupted so the court system hopelessly
and as a lawyer I say majority corrupted but not totally corrupted either two. How are you funding
this all this work and your overall view of the U.S. court system and the corruption of judges?
Yeah so as for the funding this quarantine lawsuit I am self-funding. I've been doing it pro bono for
almost a year and a half now and it has taken up probably 90 percent of my of my practice. I was a
property tax certiorari attorney for like 20 years before I started doing this work and
so my practice has now shifted into this this realm of constitutional law you know civil rights
and I basically donations are how I can keep doing the work. People you know I have a donate
button on my website coxlawyers.com and I have you know some some people that are basically very
very concerned about this issue and concerned about the fight and you know they're helping to
fund the case or just my work in general not just the case because I am constantly giving speeches
in various parts of New York so it's definitely not great in the sense that you know the left
is so well funded they can do you know pretty much anything at the on the drop of a dime but
the other to the other part of your of your question with regards to the courts
so it really depends what court you are in. In New York generally speaking it is tough to win
these constitutional battles because New York New York City is a very blue place and so are you know
the other big cities in New York State Buffalo and Utica and you know you've got Albany which
is where our state capital is and such but really New York City is the issue because we have nine
million people in New York City and so if you look at our if you look at a map of the for example
the past this past November when we had a gubernatorial election if you look at the map
most of New York State is red meaning most of New York State would vote Republican or
Conservative but New York City doesn't and because New York City doesn't and they have such a large
population it's kind of like whatever New York City votes wins and so it's the same thing with
judges here in New York in the state courts because we have two different court systems
in the United States we have the state courts and then we have the federal courts.
My case was brought this quarantine case was brought in the state courts in New York
and that area where we brought the case which is up in western New York which is where my lead
plaintiff Senator George Borello that's his district that's where he lives and represents
we got a judge New York State Supreme Court judge who honors the constitution understands
the constitution and upheld the constitution in this decision so it really does depend and
there have been others one of my colleagues brought a lawsuit in another region of New York
State also in state court and her case was to try to strike down the governor's rule or regulation
that said that all the health care workers in New York State had to get the COVID shot
in order to continue working in health care which resulted in like 35,000 health care workers losing
their jobs in New York State and so a colleague of mine brought this lawsuit and again state
court and she won of course again the governor is appealing and bringing it to the next appellate
division to try and get it overturned so it really depends what court you're in what state you're in
and whether your judges are appointed or your judges are elected so here in New York State
our trial level judges which is the first level that you start at they are elected so they will
reflect really the people who live in that community when you get to the higher court levels
like our appellate division courts and our highest court in New York State which is called
the New York State Court of Appeals those are appointed those judges are appointed by the
governors so it's again really super important things that people don't think about but when
you're electing a governor you're not just electing that person for that role that governor gets to
appoint judges it's when a vacancy comes up they can appoint a judge so anyway it depends on where
you are. Bobby Anne that's that's that's most helpful and when I use the word corrupt judges
I think it's interchangeable with politicized judges but perhaps not I should have I should say
judges who don't rely on the rule of law but who follow politics that's a more
accurate description of what I mean and certainly you know some judges are corrupted but I'm not
saying that that's really not where I'm headed and it's a problem here in Australia and you
explained it well as to what's happening in New York. So we've got a string of questions now
Bobby Anne I don't know where Stephen is that's okay we will go with Rose first Rose Roloff.
Hey first off thanks so much for all your work it's very impressive I wanted to know if you're
working with other attorneys with other states because we've been fighting the exact same thing
in Florida and they basically gutted SB 222 and replaced it with a vanilla basically paper 252
so that oh well for COVID you don't have to but now it's wide open for any other pandemic that
they may choose to declare so we've got the exact same problem in Florida that people aren't aware
of and I think it's important especially if DeSantis declares he wants to run for 2024 and
again people don't look at the specifics of the law so for example they said oh we're going to
protect doctors licenses but I'm like but what about their credentials they're ripping these
doctors credentials out so it's like oh well we'll protect your license but you still can't practice
because we removed all your credentials. Yeah yeah I do have a network of attorneys
now I've been doing you know what is it called fight for freedom I don't know you know since
since March of 2020 when when our governor then it was Andrew Cuomo first said you know
everybody locked down two weeks to flatten the curve you know the hair on the back of my neck
stood up and I was like oh no no no first of all you don't have the power to do this and second
of all it's not going to just be two weeks and in New York the lockdowns lasted for months
and so it's it's become over the past three years that yes I know and have become friends with
attorneys in other states who are also standing up and fighting against the tyranny and the gross
government overreach in their states and yes I am aware of what goes on in Florida I have actually
a couple of pretty good attorney friends in Florida fighting the fight so it's we do now
we have started to have a nationwide network of attorneys we did the first ever they called it the
COVID litigation conference in Atlanta Georgia that was held last month or actually was held in
March the end of March and I went down I was one of the speakers at that conference and actually
had ran a civil rights panel with a couple other attorneys so the idea was to draw other attorneys
in to educate them on what we've all been fighting and doing the past three years and try to get more
lawyers involved in picking up the torch and saving the constitution so yeah so there we are
working on a network definitely. Okay thanks Bobby Anne we've got Stephen back so Stephen
as I said traditionally goes first questions but not quite first and then after Stephen we'll go
to Glenn Stephen over to you. Yeah I was here all the time but I hadn't got my camera on and I don't
know why I'm in a different position from normal on the screen that is so I just wanted to ask you
Bobby Anne so compared with other states in America and compared with other countries
from your knowledge how bad do you think it was in New York state I've also heard that California
was pretty bad but how bad was New York state because as you say New York state would be a
big target for these globalists because what you can push through in New York state you can push
through everywhere in the world well that's how they look at it probably so um and so I just wonder
how bad in your view you don't if you don't know that's fine but was it in New York state compared
with other states in America and how bad do you think it was compared with say France, Spain, UK
from what you've heard? Are you referring specifically to quarantine? The measures in
inverted commas you know the lockdowns the masks whether the masks were forced and there was no
escape from that? Kind of everything okay yes um I'm not so familiar on an international level
but certainly within the United States because of my my network across many states in the nation
um New York was was one of the worst if not the worst um we had schools closed for uh I think
some of the public schools were closed for almost two years um with children doing you know remote
learning uh and the the teachers it has now come out that the teachers unions didn't want to go back
to work um and so they played a big part in keeping the schools closed um the children are
experiencing tremendous this this is nationwide in the U.S. but particularly in New York the children
are experiencing huge deficits in learning um the younger kids who were supposed to be learning how
to read at that time many of them are now delayed and and having problems with reading and understanding
and and staying at grade level so um what they've done is um you know forget forget the psychological
and everything with the masks and the social distancing just closing the schools what they've
done has devastated uh New York children and you know the hardest hit are the ones that can't afford
to pull their kids out of the public schools and put them into the parochial schools or the charter
school you know the the private schools you know those are the ones that are going to suffer the
most so what it's caused is a further striation and a further separation between um you know
the class up here and the class down here uh which is which is what they wanted right they
they wanted to have they want to destroy the middle class yes destroy the middle class and
the other agenda i can see emerging is that they want to destroy nation states by reducing uh the
populations of the world's um states uh the the confidence that the people have in their politicians
and you can see that everywhere certainly in the united kingdom there is no respect for politicians
in the united kingdom they don't deserve the respect but we better be careful because we
actually may get in the states that politicians have no authority whatsoever and they can't keep
the peace so and then the global authorities will come in with their immigrant uh armies possibly i
don't know so um what i wanted to ask you asked you were talking about whack-a-mole you feel like
you've got to do it because there's another fire over there's another fire over there there's no
fire engine so don't you think the answer is that we need to teach people don't understand about
totalitarianism they seem to they they think it's all um how should i say uh theoretical when in
fact it's on our doorstep or we've got it already arguably um and we need to so people need to
understand about totalitarianism and such a big word isn't it so we need to think of other words
like tyranny but that doesn't really encapsulate what we understand by totalitarianism so i wonder
how do we get so we need to educate people how do we do that and the other question i wanted to ask
you was have you thought so about totalitarianism for example couldn't you form a group and i could
help you new york state against big brother new york state against totalitarianism too big a
name maybe in a title for a group but but new york state against big brother and then
you know so on the the model we've got for this group we could do exactly the same in new york
state or in america because i think the battle is going to be won in america what so what are
your thoughts on that yes um so there is um there are many grassroots groups that have
some that were here before 2020 but some that have come into existence since 2020 um actually
one of them which i i failed to mention earlier when i was talking about my quarantine lawsuit
one of them is one of the plaintiffs in my quarantine lawsuit um it's an organization i'm
close with and work with um often uniting new york state it's uniting nys.com and it's a group of
i mean they have thousands of members across the state of new york and um work specifically to try
to alert the public to what's going on bad bills coming through albany or being proposed in albany
um obviously the quarantine lawsuit and keeping everybody up to date on that um we we need more
uh but bobby it wouldn't you wouldn't have to be raising the alarm about specific fires
if people understood totalitarianism so because so this is the problem right
yeah so we need to get to the situation where people are triggered by certain events happening
in their neighborhood or in their state or in their country and they understand that it's
totalitarianism at the moment they don't understand this i've got it in my own family it's crazy yes
and the problem this is the issue that i've been dealing with for three years right i mean they
said lockdown two weeks to flatten the curve you know save your neighbors save your grandmother
and immediately i was like guys okay they can't do this this is this is not how it works here's how
it works you know and the problem which is exactly what you're saying which is what i said before
is that people don't know what's going on they don't know what's going on number one number two
if they heard what was going on they need to like you're saying they need to recognize that that is
an illegal act it is a violation of their right it is totalitarianism i call it tyranny
uh and which is the definition of tyranny is when somebody in power takes uh or brings gives
themselves an authority that they they don't have they don't have a right to right that's the
definition of tyranny the problem is you have to educate the public to what their rights are
if they know what their rights are when they see something coming at them and attacking their
rights then they'll automatically step up and say wait a minute you can't do that sorry you're
stepping on my rights they don't know their rights because particularly here in the u.s and i don't
know about in your country for example but particularly here in the u.s they stop teaching
civics classes in the schools so they don't teach the constitution they should be teaching the
constitution starting in kindergarten not sex education they should be talking about the
constitution and your rights starting in kindergarten and going every year straight up through 12th
grade and then into the universities and did they teach that when you were at school bovyan
they they did they did have civics classes they were way more prevalent than they are today
today they're there i mean there are some schools that don't even say the pledge of allegiance
it's it's horrific and they're doing it on purpose the education system has been
rewired really particularly particularly in states like new york you know perhaps not in
every state in the nation but um the danger is that yeah i mean i just wrote a sub stack
last weekend um you know and the theme of the sub stack was he who controls the children controls
the future and it's but it's more than that bovyan because actually what they're doing
what they want to do in addition to so breaking the middle class breaking nation states but they
want to break social bonds very importantly and social bonds is part of the is uh what the
universe 25 experiment is about breaking social bonds so that would include breaking
uh relationships within a family but also breaking relationships with friends uh breaking uh
relationships with your country with your culture breaking social bonds that's what happened to the
mice in the universe 25 experiment he had 150 i think it was mice or 170 mice uh left out of 10
thousand uh he bred them up you know they had loads of space initially then they got overpopulated
and then the social bonds were broken he ended up with 150 mice came down to 150 they all died
they started to die he couldn't understand it and then he finally worked it out i think i'm right in
saying this and he said that the 150 or 170 remaining would all die because their social
social bonds had been broken and that's what they're doing they're in my opinion
they are trying to break the social bond this is unbelievable evil by people who
uh yeah guilty of hubris arrogance and hubris i don't know what they think
absolutely the the attack is um on it's coming from multiple you know i was
walking into a um uh thursday night i gave a speech up in duchess county about an hour and a half from
my house and i was walking into the event and i was speaking with a woman and she said you know
um the group that i'm a part of is focusing on this and then you know my friend is in this other
group and they're focusing on this and then you know you're focusing on the quarantines and blah
and i said yeah i said they are coming at us from all aspects of our society and our world
um and it definitely can feel overwhelming um but if if there are groups that are focusing
on certain pinpointed goals um then we can and it's and it's you know a coordination between groups
we can definitely overcome it um the the the will of people for their freedom and for their rights i
think is much greater than um the the totalitarian or the tyrannical regimes that we're seeing so
it's just reaching those people and i think you and i are saying the same thing steven
it's reaching those people and letting them know that yeah you know what i'm sorry but you know the
governor of new york can't tell you to wear a mask on your face you know she can't tell you to wear
you know a pin in your hair you know she can't tell you to wear you know your hat you know
tilted to the right or left you know that's not a power that the governor has you know so
people need to understand their rights um and then understand okay sorry you can't do this
that's tyranny and i'm not going to listen to you right so problem is bobby and i don't think a lot
of people uh maybe not in this group either um they don't understand the word tyranny because
they don't need to understand it in their view and they don't need to understand the word
totalitarianism either because that happens in the soviet union it doesn't happen in the united
states of america doesn't happen in england united sorry united kingdom um and so they think they
don't need to know about it and if you uh try and get them to to think about it they don't want to
do it because it's too uncomfortable and they say oh that won't happen here in the uk for example
yeah people don't it's it's actually um it's fascinating that when i talk to people about
my quarantine case sometimes the reaction i get is um i i are you sure like i'm not i don't know
about that i say wait a minute am i sure that i just spent the last year and a half of my life
working on this yeah i'm pretty sure would you like to see the judge's decision you know and then
i have so many people come up to me and say oh you know i was talking about your case the other day
and people were looking at me like i had three heads and they were you know and a lot of times
the reaction is oh they would never actually use it oh yes they would my response to that is well
if the government didn't actually want to use their forced isolation and quarantine regulation
then why did they fight me so hard last year at the trial court level and why are they now fighting
me so hard on an appeal correct now that they've lost and a judge has said you can't do that get
back in your lane you don't have this power why are they now fighting the attorney general has
hundreds of attorneys across new york state and all of our tax dollars to fight me on this and
and and they are why are they doing that if they don't really want to use the power i mean that's
just such an ignorant statement right but people don't want to believe that their government would
do something like that to them but i'm here to tell you that they will sure and all you have to
say to them is why do you think that that the united states of america and new york state in
particularly you could say um lock down their schools for did you say two years some places
they were closed for two years oh my goodness that's terrible for the children and kids some
schools were doing um you know alternate like you know you could go into school this day for half a
day but then you had to do remote the rest of the day or you could go in every other day
or like this was your week to go in but then but then that was the other kids week to go in i mean
it was that's horrendous there was no there was no learning going on so the arbitrary rules and
they were arbitrary there's no way that they can be related to health those arbitrary rules must
have been very very confusing for many children even in stable families so anyway i'll give
someone else a chance yes very good this very good discussion and the education issue i just saw
i just got a note that dan astin gregory is talking on education on a world premiere today on
some channel but dan astin gregory does some good stuff all right glenn
hi i'm glad to speak with you bobby ann um i'm going to start out from uh what charles said
and uh relative to uh our uh is there in fact a potential that there's a large number of completely
corrupt judges so if if i look at what you described uh it seems like a so simple a case of a power that
was being grabbed from the legislature and completely against both federal and state
constitutions so how is it a rational judge that was following any kind of principle
and rule of law would ever uh rule against you other than total corruption
yeah right well he didn't he ruled in my favor so okay all right well i again uh charles
quantified it as a well uh perhaps it's not just corruption i'm saying it is corruption so let's
now walk you through the the situation you have and potentially a more efficient use of your
ability you you were taking this on on behalf of the legislative branch is that not correct
yes they represent a group of new york state legislators so under rational conditions they
would have been funding the effort is that not correct no no it's a pro bono case i did the case
no no i what i'm saying is you're doing it on their behalf if if they were in fact defending
themselves because that's what they're doing they're supposed to be defending their own body
uh they would have uh either concluded that gee this is our role to defend our legislative body
uh we will go get gather the funding for that or we'll contribute our time so many of them are in
fact lawyers why couldn't they have been doing all of the background work for you and and just
having you file yeah they do spend um time with the pr side of this case doing interviews um and
giving statements and press conferences and uh you know issuing press releases and stuff so
they are working at it in a different way um but yeah this has been a a huge um the the lack of
mainstream media coverage on this has been a huge blow to um to the really to the whole idea of
i get that i'll get to that i'll get to that part of it but let me continue walking through this so
in general uh the legislative branch should have been defending itself and that should have been
across the board and i'm sure you misunderstood glenn so i think that bobby is having a parallel
conversation but so i have understood that um bobby ann was representing a few legislators
not the whole legislative body is that what is that correct bobby ann yeah excuse me steven
this is my my question steven i don't know why you're interrupting me
did i interrupt you no no you didn't know but i'm just i just see parallel conversations going on
it's my question why don't you let me complete it
thank you so so again if if this were an honest body meaning the legislative branch and it was
concerned around the duties that are signed to it according to its constitution shouldn't even all
of the democrats been in favor of funding the action against this step by an agency
but the democrats the democrats didn't even talk to me about it democrats won't even talk i'm asking
you that from a context of of a legitimate mechanism of government of how governments are
supposed to work where there's duties and in this case where they uh where an agency was
explicitly trying to take away their duty you know it's like the old days when remember when
legislative branches were concerned about free speech and and and defended that under all
conditions i'm i'm simply saying isn't this isn't this a case where in a normal environment
the the every every member of that legislature should have been defending the legislatures
and and that you never had to get involved at all yeah well one would think but that's not how it
works particularly when there's a super majority of uh democrats in our state senate and our state
assembly it's it's not going to happen a a a super majority shouldn't relate to people ignoring
rules ignoring constitutions and ignoring uh rule of law so uh in this particular case i as a sort
of an alternative uh might it have been more useful uh if if you if you laid it back to
the legislature to say gee you guys need to put the effort into this uh to continue and and then
allowed you uh bobby and to to to work more on the on the awareness side of the of the avenue
to say uh that more of your time could have been spent in in preparing the public and getting the
public engaged in it uh i mean particularly i mean a lot of people i think have followed you
uh as a strong woman and you know looking out for for basic parts of of law and and and that
it addresses the family and that women have a greater purpose around defending the family and
and might that might have been been more useful if you were able to allocate your time
purely toward the the path of informing the public and getting them engaged in the same way as as
has happened with the uh bud light that at certain point the public finally got into the game and
said no more this hasn't got anything to do with our values and and how would you bud light and all
of budweiser yeah well i i that's exactly what i've been spending my time on is is trying to
raise awareness and that's why i do what i do and uh okay and have been doing so uh yeah that's
that's exactly what's been going on and that's what needs to continue going on but there needs
to be uh some mainstream media getting involved in this because correct correct it's going to
take a lot longer and there's going to be a lot more pain involved uh with you know more lawsuits
and more time wasted and you know more bad bills and all this other stuff let me suggest a way that
maybe we can accelerate this and short-circuit it so uh i'm i'm leading the humanity coalition
as a variety of people in this uh group that are that are working with me uh both across canada
and australia um we have we have drafted a petition to take to congress it's titled campaign petitions
congress to restore democracy the subtitle is eliminate the billionaire control of the party
caucus uh in that the party caucus which becomes a tyranny mechanism that completely eliminates any
notion of one one person one vote has completely turned upside down both our uh our cat our national
constitution as well as virtually every state constitution and and therefore uh going forward
and eliminating that control and and petitioning uh the individual uh legislators to say it's time
for you to stop uh taking any uh direction from party caucuses because they have nothing to do
with their their duty or with their constitution and and so that's that's an item we've we've
drafted and we're about ready to go out with and uh is that something that both you think you could
support in a strenuous way and and and help engage others to also uh support yeah i mean i
have to again is yeah i'd have to read it through i i just the the reaching the masses on um any of
these topics is is a huge challenge of that everybody that is has been working for the past
three years to you know try to retain our rights and uphold the constitution no matter what country
you're in um getting to the mainstream media and getting these crucial messages out is the big
problem so it doesn't really matter what the topic is whether it's a petition that you want to do
whether it's quarantines whether it's masking whether it's six feet social distancing whether
it's lockdowns whether you know any of this stuff it's always goes back to the same problem of
well it's not not exactly the same in in that uh a party caucus mechanism is is always been counter
to the constitution unfortunately it's been allowed to occur at some point it was probably
viewed as advisory it's long since gone completely away from advisory it's an edict it's an edict
from a single leader at the top of of a party and and as such completely violates every notion
of one person one vote it overrides it's a dictator mechanism that overrides every other part of how a
legislative body operates so i'm i'm simply saying uh isn't this actually true from an operational
viewpoint and therefore we should be pressing forward to say all party caucuses of any type at
at either a federal level or a state level should be viewed as outlawed
uh i i don't know that's that's a political question that's that's not a legal question so
no that's not true it is a legal question it applies it's not a conversation i'm going to
get into because i feel like it's political i i don't i don't do politics this is about
human rights this is not about politics yes charles yeah look the glenn if bobby n says
politically doesn't answer it doesn't have to answer it please ask questions rather than having
speeches all right then as a simple question would would you support a public move uh to
encourage the all congressmen let's let's add a federal level uh to uh ignore any position of
their party caucus and to only vote according to their oath according to the constitution
well i i think politicians no matter who you are what your name is or what level you are should
uphold the constitution i that i think i've been pretty clear in my message the constitution is
the only way following the constitution is the only way that we're we're going to get out of
this mess but um yeah that's that's the problem is that people don't uphold the constitution
and we're seeing that particularly in new york state we're seeing it at the federal level there
are plenty of agency overreaches going on in the united states at the federal level the cdc issuing
an eviction moratorium that got struck down the united states supreme court it's completely
unconstitutional wrong branch of government same thing with osha issuing a reg that said that all
employers in the united states of america had to have that had 100 or more employees had to have
their employees get the covid shot otherwise they had to wear a mask and test weekly at work
completely unconstitutional scotus struck that down wrong branch of government same thing with
the epa they made a regulation that to control the emissions air emissions out of a certain
industry scotus struck that down wrong branch of government complete overreach by the executive
branch so i can go on and on with examples of how the executive branch whether it's the federal
level or the state level is out of control doing what they want and the attitude is again i wrote
a substack on this the attitude is catch me if you can i'm gonna do what i want i know i don't
have this power i know i'm not allowed to do this but i'm gonna do it anyway and come get me if you
can come file a lawsuit against me see what the court says if the court strikes it down and says
i can't do it okay then maybe i'll stop doing it but if the court doesn't then i'm just gonna keep
this power for myself that i gave to myself unconstitutionally and i'm just gonna keep going
so that attitude of catch me if you can is has to stop the way that that stops is by waking enough
people up so that those people will change the leadership at the top you have to vote these
people out we have to get people who honor the constitution and know what the constitution means
and says to run for office and help them get elected it's a very simple equation the the
people at the top are wreaking havoc on our rights replace them with people that won't
wreak havoc on our rights so the problem in that very simple equation is getting enough people
to know what's going on and like steven said understand what it means when they're looking
at tyranny when they're looking at a totalitarian rule that's being shoved in their face if they
don't know that it's tyrannical then they're not going to step up and say stop doing it i object
so the the problem the root of the problem is reaching the people and that means that breaking
through the censorship there's terrible censorship going on at all levels yeah
30 seconds 30 seconds just so so my only comment would be that i believe the people can be reached
i could i believe they can be reached far quicker than than an election cycle that we can do that
here and going forward and and myself and many others believe that large-scale group prayer is
one path to awaken the locals and to get them engaged and get them engaged very soon and around
that all of the representatives in congress should should follow the people's intent not the power
brokers thank you thank you thank you glenn so bobby and we now have jack and jack wrote a thesis
in the 60s on comedy but he's not a comedian but he's close to a comedian hello jack
hi yeah well i'm writing a book right now where i do bring in humor and certainly it's one of the
things we've seen it's a rebellion that's going on all over the country of the united states
and much of it is expressed initially through humor because humor is a mechanism for expressing
aggression and getting applause for it simultaneously
you know bobby and where i live in oregon exactly pretty much a parallel across the
other side of the country from you and of course we're seeing the same identical phenomena here
in particular the abrogation and disregard of parental rights
and the sexualization of children
and the lack of learning they did some achievement testing here just recently and they found that
kids have lost two years of school they haven't learned a damn thing through all of the you know
electronic education that supposedly supports the planning human beings because it's natural
for young people to learn from other human beings from their elders and so that that's good news
that we're not if we're already elderly like you and i then then we can learn from
from youtube and so forth but we're not we don't as children now you already brought up something
that i was going to ask about and that is it was the it was the fifth circuit
in new orleans which reversed the decision of osha regarding mandatory vaccination
for employees of companies of over 100 employees i think that's what you were referring to
uh but that was a fifth circuit decision and it was very well written and it was upheld by the
supreme court and so that's an extremely important precedent for all of us and all the agencies
are all legal challenges to agencies that are violating the separation of powers and that has
been the the basic legal mechanism for everything that's gone on violation of powers and that fifth
circuit opinion was was brilliantly written i thought i really was impressed with it but that's
what they focused on the separation of powers and they didn't go into the weeds regarding the
virtues or vices involved in the and the vaccination risks and the vaccination
illegalities it was separation of powers period so maybe you could talk a little bit about that
oh i would also add that we're seeing all the same things here this is not only a national
and it's about an international scheme and it's uh it's been orchestrated from very high places
and obviously the who as has been mentioned has been controlled by the gates foundation
and then there's some very wealthy psychopaths in charge and that's one thing that people aren't
recognizing that uh our country uh and much of the world is run by psychopaths because uh
psychopaths represent about four percent of the population that doesn't seem like very much
i i've met quite a few in my life and i've been burned by a few of them even though i should know
better and they're really the only uh uh clinical subdivision that really seeks power
uh i don't think the rest of us are are interested in power i'm certainly not i've
been the principal investigator on a whole series of federal research projects and the part of it i
don't like is having to manage people i don't like telling other people what to do or trying
to control their behavior but that's what psychopaths live off of and uh i'm in my 80s now
and i can think of only two presidents in my lifetime who i do not think were psychopaths
john kennedy was one and he died trying to fight the psychopaths and i think probably jimmy carter
wasn't either jimmy carter was a little naive but i don't think he was a psychopath everyone else
every one of them clinton was a horrible is a horrible psychopath obama was a horrible psychopath
horrible psychopath these the the democratic psychopaths are sweet talkers they're very
articulate they're very clever uh they were attractive they they look good they can shoot
baskets and all that but obama is yeah it's very interesting he went to he took his first two years
as an undergraduate at occidental college in southern california which is a traditional
rival of the college i attended famona but then he transferred to columbia
and guess what at columbia he studied under zabigniew brzezinski author of you know the
grand chessboard and that's what's going on right now with this with this war in ukraine it's all
about who controls the chessboard and we are losing russia and china are winning and they will win
but that's kind of an aside but all the people who are making these decisions and controlling
things are psychopaths because they have a distinct advantage over the rest of us and faride first
recognized that 100 years ago or more and he recognized it in terms of people who could lie
without conscience what a wonderful competitive advantage and all you have to do is overcome
external obstacles and you have no internal obstacles whatsoever do anything you want to do
that's why the smartest ones and the richest ones rise to positions of influence and power
in corporations uh and in politics so that's what we're up against we're not like up against
people with a normal conscience and but we do outnumber them about 19 to 1 and that's the
that's what we have to take advantage of and the law i think is the the surest way of doing that
so i think you're you're on the right field on the right side i'm a psychologist so i don't have
that kind of power maybe it was a mistake of me to go into that field
but that was that that fifth circuit ruling was about osha and they told osha you do not have the
power to do that yes so that ruling um which was january of 2022 so it was just over a year ago
um that was a very clear that decision was a very clear explanation of separation of powers
and why osha which was or which is an agency in the executive branch under the president
doesn't have the power to make a rule like that and our um my quarantine case is the same
as i had mentioned earlier is the same premise of separation of powers the constitution lays out
three co-equal branches of government judicial which is the court and the judges legislative
which is the people we elect our representatives the senators and the assembly members and then
the executive which is at the state level the governor and and whoever they have appointed in
there to run their agencies and then at the federal level it's the president and whoever he
appoints to run his agencies so the the executive branch um and their agencies will do something
that they want to do um what we've seen over the last three years with covet is they do it in the
name of covet right we're trying to save you we're trying to keep you safe we're trying to
but what they're really doing is taking a power that they don't have and it's it's a negative
effect on the citizens so um you know the three co-equal branches of government are key because
they're supposed to work with checks and balances on each other so that not one rises above the
others they're supposed to all stay co-equal they just have their own separate domains that
they're supposed to operate in when one of them crosses over and takes a power from the other one
we have a big problem and that's the the idea of the doctrine of separation of powers stay in your
own lane everybody do your own job and we'll all be fine but that's not what's happening and i was
very pleased to see scotish strike that down that osha reg i was very pleased to see uh scotish
strike down the cdc regulation which was cdc is the center for disease control for anybody that's
not familiar with that uh agency and they had issued um a reg that said that landlords across
the country were not allowed to evict their tenants for non-payment of rent because somehow
that would spread coven okay so they did that almost immediately that was that was almost if
it wasn't march 2020 it was maybe april or may and when they did that that is the moment i knew
that this was not about a virus because my my world was real estate law right it was property
tax certiorari and real estate law and so i worked on a daily basis for property owners
and when they issued that regulation my phone blew up my email blew up and i had people calling
me texting me writing me saying wait a minute hold on they're telling my tenants they don't have to
pay rent and they can't get evicted and how am i supposed to pay my bills like i use that rent
money to go and pay my property taxes on the property the maintenance on the property my
mortgage on the property my insurance on the property so it was a direct attack on the middle
class that's what it was because the majority of landlords in our country are mom and pop landlords
they're regular people who just saved up bought a property that's a multi-family a lot of them live
in one part of the property and then rent out the other part or parts of the property and that's how
they make a living that's how they pay their bills that's how they put food on their table
and clod their children so by telling landlords you can't kick your tenants out if they don't pay
the rent you're telling the landlords you're not going to get any money coming in but you have to
keep paying for your property right and now what what should have the government done the government
should have if they wanted to help people stay in their rental properties and not get kicked out
because they thought it would spread covid they should have just issued rent vouchers to the
landlords on behalf of the people the tenants the people that were renting the places out because
then you're not giving the money to the tenants and saying to the tenants here's some money yeah
go pay your rent no you should have just given it to the landlords and said here this is for your
tenant so that you are at least not bleeding out money and your tenant can stay in their property
you know it was just it was very obvious what was going on so it was it was a complete attack on the
middle class and landlords across the nation were going belly up they either had to they either had
to sell their properties for for less than they were worth to get out from under them because the
bills were piling up and they couldn't keep the bills up because the tenants weren't paying the
rent because the government told them they didn't have to or they were just you know going belly up
foreclosure or bankruptcy you know and block rock was standing by to gobble up those properties
yes the big corporations yes the big corporations definitely could swoop in and buy these properties
for less than what they were worth and block rack was offering huge amounts of money even more than
they're worth and jack and bobby anna i think that a lot of people don't understand why the middle
class is so important so if you haven't got a middle class you've got the rich and the poor
so you've got the oppressed you've got the oppressed and you've got the oppressor but you
have no disinterested party if you like in in society and the middle class is the common factor
in democracies and it's only happened in the western world arguably in
world when would you say it started i don't know after the second world war probably the 50s and
60s you know during the obama administration that the middle class became less than 50 percent of
americans yeah so we need to we need to educate the public about the the importance of the middle
class as well and any attack on it should be perceived as a return to tyranny because we have
human beings have lived under tyranny most of the time and i'm talking about kind of yeah very good
all right we've got lots of questions jack thank you for that and i just wonder if you want to note
what bobby an said a few 10 minutes ago and it's anna de buisere has also been saying it to us
and and we haven't seen anybody really doing much of it and that is to educate people about their
rights and it's an interesting thought i bobby anna noted i mean moderating there's many steven
no one has really you know we've talked about it but it's interesting we've been talking about
jab injuries but and we and i urge us to think about gosh how do we educate people about
our rights because people won't bobby anna you're totally right people don't know about the
constitution or our rights they they will believe what government tells them so that's a call out
to everybody for all of us to think about that jack thank you for your comments well we don't
know what to fight for and obviously yeah if you're in a fight and you don't know what to fight for
if you don't know what the rules if you don't know the rules are you yeah if you don't know
what the rules are correct very good um now bobby and we've got mark next on question mark
presented to us two weeks ago on 5g and mark is globally renowned on his 5g knowledge so mark over
to you it's been really good to hear what you have to say bobby um court cases obviously they're
with the corruption etc the um you know within the judiciary however
i've had some very very interesting results positive results in relation to the 5g narrative
and the reason for that when the judiciary are presented with the you know the contaminated
vaccine when they're presented with the interconnection with the 5g network
when they're presented with their demise their extermination it's a very powerful tool i mean
you talk about new york new york's a very interesting part of the world i call it
let's say ground zero and i call it ground zero because i've never seen as much
5g transmitters or extermination equipment ever if you were going to pull an electromagnetic
radiation pulse weapon new york definitely would be the place for that and i'm pretty sure that's
what they're planning but the threat of death you see we have a lot of corruption in the um
in the judiciary unfortunately you know a lot of these people do is that tool for lots of different
reasons monetary etc etc political however if we play the uh let's say their own self-interest
nobody wants to die and this this equipment will kill and most certainly is killing people
significant numbers across the world we see a significant number of people who are now dying
in their beds at night i'm pretty sure it's part of the target acquisition weapon system that's
been installed by bill gates with his azure 5g lockheed uh network where we can actually
surgically target acquire and cause a tonic seizures from people who unfortunately have
been vaccinated but also people who had taken the pcr test one of the things i'm pretty concerned
about there's a lot of there's a lot of um let's say information about the negative effects of
vaccines what we seem to miss is the uh the negative effects of the pcr test and the loaded
weaponry the uh the graphite ferrous oxide so basically the carbon nanotube uh payloads that
were actually put into the hybrid gel that was actually squirted into people's nasal passages
so where they had a bud it was it was the uh basically a small injecting type uh piece of
equipment the reason why they had to get it in very very close into the brain where these
nanoparticulates these carbon nanotubes can then pass across the blood brain barrier and they can
be activated and i think what was quite interesting in the science that we have is a 450 nanometers
frequency which unbelievably is 666 terahertz so we've got a lot of people walking around who
unfortunately didn't take the shot as obviously they were quite concerned about the uh you know
the experimentation and the speed of how it actually came about but a lot of people actually
did have the um pcr test and what i'm you know from a from a legal perspective is it not the
case that what we need to be bringing into these court cases is the terror of what's really going
on to these to the judiciary because you know i'll meet these judiciary i've met quite a few
after like said i've had quite a number of successes in the courts the panic when they
realize that the equipment that's being installed will kill them then that then leaves them with
two choices either go along with the cult members do as you're told you know or for
monetary gain or whatever and die it's quite a simple choice equipments there they've installed
new york's absolutely horrific by the way i would think it's probably one of the most dangerous
places in the world to be living at the minute uh due to the densification of the 5g network
and not only that we also have the new york um you know authorities talking about
the temperature increase so we've got this climate emergency temperature increase however
we've got these same bodies installing multiple transmitters that cause microwave radiation as
everybody knows who has a microwave oven cause temperature increase now if let's see i increase
the temperature of one and a half to two degrees in a cityscape obviously in the summer that's
going to be catastrophic because i'm adding that to the summer temperature so where we're going
to start seeing a lot of people die from this due to the added burden of microwave radiation on top
of natural occurring temperature increase so it's not really a complicated argument i have and i'm
pretty sure that any people in the judiciary they understand the fact that they're going to die
because this is going to kill them it's not always about it the people who are behind this
what i call cult members are planning mass murder and unfortunately those judiciary who
for some foolish reason want to go along with the cult agenda it's going to kill them
and i think this possibly could be a very very powerful tool in any cold case i've just generated
a quite an interesting case in birmingham where birmingham city council fitted 107 000 transmitters
to street lights each one's 100 milliwatts and causing a thermal temperature increase in a body
at one so much so that the maximum exposure to one milliwatt is actually six minutes so they've got
they've got a hundred and seven thousand hundred milliwatt so 100 times the eknup guideline each
one has a 10 mile footprint so i cause this massive increase in microwave radiation temperature across
the cityscape at the same time birmingham city council call a climate emergency because they
expect to see a 1.5 to 2 degrees centigrade and they've actually installed the equipment
that not only causes a temperature increase but causes the coronavirus type symptoms
so this is another issue that has to be addressed because like i said the threat of death
and destruction to individuals within any of these organizations that's going to panic them
you know if this evidence was actually taken into a court then i'm pretty sure they're going to be
pretty upset i mean no judge is going to be pretty on side of the cult if he realizes being injected
with a nanoparticulate contaminant that i can track them and i can actually kill them with it
you know these atonic seizures that we see in beds across the you know for as far as i'm concerned
this is all part of the weapon system that's being deployed and i think it's a very interesting way to
tackle these cult members because unfortunately you know we're banging our heads off the brick wall
it's a bit like the child services programs where i'll see people being you know children
being taken from families etc when this thing turns around and the judiciary realize that they
are the target for this weapon that could possibly change their opinion on what's happening
bobby and great question because i've been saying for some time
judges will wake up when their grandchildren start dying suddenly and bobby and so what mark is
saying is that new york state is probably the place in the world not just state in america but the
place in the world where you're where you're most at danger from these 5g towers and considering
that the pcr test you know not just the injections but the pcr test and if you remember they were
testing children all the while in schools i was thinking about this why are they putting that
damned swab so far up just beneath the crib reform plate um just beneath the brain if you like
why are they doing that and mark came along two weeks ago and for the first time i hadn't heard
anybody talking about this anywhere in the world mark uh enlightened me and us uh but actually
these pcr tests were injecting people if you like by by stealth so i was thinking why are they
pushing the pcr test so much is it just about diagnosis you know to diagnose as many covet
cases possible so they could inject fear into the population and then mark comes along and sure
enough there were two reasons it seems that they were injecting sorry yes using the pcr test
uh to increase the fear through diagnoses but also to set them up for attack from 5g towers
is that right mark have i misrepresented you no no that's correct the uh the the carbon nanotubes
that we're seeing the um in hydrogel can be activated using some of the frequencies in the
5g network it it it was one of the things you know we had a lot of people who resisted the
contaminated vaccine you know it was rushed uh unfortunately there was a lot of people who
did take these pcr tests the whole purpose of grilling this bud this cotton bud around
there was these small um injectable uh it's like a fiber with the um and it's just squirreled around
and pull it out it then injects the uh the contaminants directly into the uh as close
as possible to the brain they then pass across into across the blood brain barrier and i know
particulates they're injected in there and it allows the ear um a tracking with the um with
the 5g network so i can basically see these people but mark why so what is the specific
interest for bobby ann you're trying to transmit to her the danger that new york state citizens
are in absolutely is in and actually a way of getting out the i think he's quite right mark
mark um bobby and we can put you in touch with him i can put you in touch with him but the population
of new york need to be warned that they are most at risk of these attacks in the future well actually
now as well so um well one of the one of the one of the things i'll talk with me steven obviously
i i ended up in court uh where a local authority well the government tried to gag me over the 5g
network unfortunately for the uh they said i was a conspiracy theorist i don't mind that label at
all not not one piece because i know what a conspiracy is and also know what a theory is
so i don't mind that label however i was taking a court and said i was a conspiracy theorist
and i was frightening people by stating that this 5g network would kill them
um
they need to be frightened if it's true and well it's it's exactly well that's exactly what
happened we got the court their whole argument was that um um i was frightening people who
vulnerable people who would believe what i was actually saying people will believe in it because
they will become an ale in the environment where this 5g network had been installed
and consequently so as we went through and had lots of witness statements and the judge he then
stated the 5g risk must be debated sure it must be he said it must be can i ask you have you been
to new york state i haven't been in new york but one of the things i was quite concerned about i
came across a document about the the deployment of 5g in new york and also some of the coronavirus
type symptoms where there was a chap he was a consultant in a in an icu in new york where he
stated that people in the coronavirus pandemic were suffering from uh pulmonary edema or what
would be what most people would see is altitude sickness he said it looked as if they'd been
thrown out of a plane at 30 000 foot where they had this total flooding in the look when you lose
your oxygen supply you'll start to suffer pneumonia you start to flood and along
then that's what this guy anyway they sacked him but that was quite interesting because i was
following the whole 5g network because i knew 5g is what they're going to kill everybody with
you have a plan the globalists have a depopulation plan 5g is the trigger it's the trigger for
the activation of some of these pathogens but it's also what causes pneumonia flu type
symptoms i said that early in 2016 17 everybody said i was a conspiracy theorist unfortunately
all of the science now confirms exactly what i said in those days so it's not that i'm a you
know i'm not a clairvoyant i just follow the science and because i've been involved in these
weapons programs in in the early you know early years i realized that there was there was an
interconnection with people getting flu i mean a lot of the people i work with are dead a lot of
people i work with we were dealing with non-ironizing radiation which the scientific community of telus
perfectly safe those guys developed cancers and died of leukemia in their 30s our fortunately
or something expert well i do know why by the way why i did survive that but there was a lot
of people in the work that i did didn't didn't survive so i was always of the mind that non-ironized
radiation wasn't this thing that everybody tells you the same it's not enough energy in the photon
i mean it's absolutely garbage if i stack photons the same as a laser laser can cut stainless steel
but the relevance of this to bobby an is that we're trying to raise the alarm a bit with not
just with bobby amber with others but um but the point is that uh of course new york state would as
you said as we talked about bobby an it would be a target wouldn't it because you know what happens
in new york and london uh to an extent you know is going to be followed around the world so so they
would target new york and london and if you remember new in the uk and london they were
practicing psychological torture on the populations they were doing it openly with sage the advising
uh body to the government and the behavioral insights team otherwise known as the nudge
unit and they were practicing psychological torture on the british population uh to a point
that people have got stockholm syndrome in the uk in my opinion so the tyranny in uk was not overt
like in spain or so france and australia say um but it was the psychological torture i think was
actually the worst thing and in new york if you remember they were killing people in the hospitals
with protocols so you know and that was the worst place in the world for killing people in hospital
as far as i'm aware you know it's difficult to be sure but i think that new york was
gen would generally be the place that most people identify where it was worse now we've got and i
the 5g bit if it's true what mark is saying mark you need to go to new york state and measure
make the measurements there and then publish that's what i would say but quite as much you've got a
vote as much chance that the americans let me in the country uh steven i just more certainly wouldn't
uh the americans definitely would i'm built like julian assange i'm pretty sure they absolutely
would not want me going to new york and measuring the radiation levels anybody in new york and
measure those radiation levels i can tell you now they're pretty catastrophic the cause pulling me
edema their cause and they're having they're having fully weaponized this is this is what i
call soft kill the soft kill element of 5g is basically just blanket coverage where you'll
start to see people suffering all sorts of different maladies it's an immune system
suppressor but the reason why i wanted to interject here with bobby the fact she's a lawyer in this
state these judges given this evidence they will absolutely see i've had many results but the reason
why i've had the results is because i've taken the evidence into the court i've got a code code case
currently in birmingham in the united kingdom and that code case will show the local authority who
called a climate emergency a temperature increase actually they were responsible for the installation
of the microwave radiation emitters that caused the climate increase and not only that they're
planning to set fire to the city i can burn a city to the ground with his equipment and this is the
next one they're going to start seeing burning you're going to start seeing temperature increase
and everybody's going to say oh it's climate change and then you can have this climate change
emergency further lockdowns we've already seen the secret plans of the british government
who are talking about this emergency these net zero 15 minute cities get rid of your car
it's all carbon dioxide we know that's absolutely horse shit and they're going to drive the whole
narrative because if the the general public do not understand that microwave radiation cause
temperature increase in cities yeah very good thank you okay we're going to move stephen we're
going to move we've got five hands up and and bobby and i really think mark is onto something
here not that he's going to go to new york and not that you have to do this but i think
bringing this evidence before the courts with mark's science i think could lead and i'm thinking
the same thing for australia mark we've got pre-bandar in australia there are some 5g experts
here and this the dangers of this 5g roll out um you know it seems to me the science is certainly
on mark's side bobby and so food for thought yes i think i think children's health defense
um here in the u.s. had had a 5g lawsuit or something i'm not i'm not quite sure but
um yeah that's good mark i'll check mark can you check the children's health defense website
or anyone else because they list the cases that they've been running there mary holland spoke to
us and by the way she's not she's not currently president sorry she's president of children's
health defense but she's now joined bobby kennedy's team so laura bono is now president of
children's health defense well chd are a good they're a good group of guys what the what they
don't understand is 5g is a weapon system and are you in touch with them i do know people in chd
i could put you in touch with them so if you're here that will remind me let's let's be sure
that we're going to keep moving mark great work you're doing great work john bodwin
um hello bobby n i'm going to go a little bit off topic here and talk about loft that's okay
that's a joke by the way sorry yeah so um i missed you down in atlanta sorry i didn't get to meet you
um i was uh i was the one on stage when warner cut me off and i didn't get to talk about what
i wanted to talk about which is what i'm going to ask you about and do it here instead so let's
start with article three section two cases and controversies going up through 100 years of
standing doctrine ending up in luhan in like 91 and then to iqbal in uh in the 2000s um it seems
to me that standing doctrine is the single uh biggest enemy of the first amendment right to
petition for redress agreements it leaves the judges a lot of subjective wiggle room
to toss a case on almost anything because you know something that is likely not merely speculative
i mean if you define speculative it's anything between uh absolutely happened and absolutely
did not happen okay everything in between is speculative whether it's 99.9 to 0.01
and so the merely being a qualified now i don't want to talk too much on that i'll just say that
lawyers have a duty to the client before them just like doctors have a duty to the patient
before them and what that what happens is you get a lot of one-off legal strategies and you
don't have an overall strategy where you can get and other guys have heard me say this here
you're not hitting multiple legal theories in multiple fora at the same time in order to figure
out which one works and all you need is one to win and we have not done that we've had individual
litigation cases where there's multiple people trying the same legal theory everybody's getting
knocked down we're all getting our asses kicked and standing doctrine iqbal has to go it has to
be challenged and taken out at the supreme court level if unless we do this we leave what charles
would call corrupt judges to have this objective their their own subjectivity to toss anything
they don't want you know that federal judges get a call everybody has a boss and they get a call
saying you can't take this case you got to get rid of it and then they just use their you know
whatever motion is dismissed from the state on standing they're like yeah okay uh okay we'll kick
that out because it's merely speculative or um the right uh the redress of grievances isn't um
well that's that's where it would merely speculative i won't go through the traceability
and injury in fact i think you get what i'm saying how do you feel about getting together with other
lawyers to have a greater strategy my career was putting multiple teams together around the world
to sign a big contract for eight figures um for a raytheon or a lockheed martin or a lucent and
we didn't try to hit people individually we tried to win the corporate deal all nationwide
and that requires um a strategic effort in multiple locations i never see lawyers doing this
would you be up for that kind of thing do you have any comments on everything i said
um yeah i mean standing is definitely um an issue it's there are pros and cons if you don't have the
standing doctrine then uh the courts will be completely flooded with with you know lawsuits
that have no validity or you know people just want to get a judicial declaration on something
and there's no you know injury to be resolved or anything like that so it's um it you know it's a
double-edged sword really but um as far as the idea of um you know getting lawyers together to
you know to coordinate um it's very difficult it's a good idea in theory but it's very difficult
to do logistically i mean that conference in um georgia was the first one of its kind and um
it was great because then you could see which areas you wanted to pursue or which areas you
are involved with and then meet other people that are in that involved in that area as well so
i think more uh perhaps more like that would be helpful um but to have a um
what what we typically have in law is um like um there are certain different bars so like if you are
um a a litigator or a trial attorney or you know you'll be a member of one bar which is just like a
a group basically um if you are in you do elder care law or something but you're a member of that
bar and the point of the bars is to meet other attorneys that are in your field and share
information and talk about issues or cases or whatever so that was the whole point of that
that georgia coven litigation conference was to start some sort of a um uh covid litigation bar
you will um which it was a nationwide thing i mean there were lawyers that i met there from
you know literally states on the other side of the country so um yeah that that is an idea and
that's i think what the point of that organization or that conference was
yeah thank you the john john the great challenge there is a covid litigation group
warner mendenhall started i'm on that group it has some very interesting conversations strategic
conversations and and you're right and john all of the major law firms get the bulk of their
income from big from the big business and from government the majority the big law firms all get
their income from there so they're not going to bite the hand that feeds them for the same reason
the doctors aren't going to bite the hand that pays them money for killing people in hospitals
so that's not all doctors uh charles nothing is all doctors nothing is all lawyers
a cinema so one comment though um with regard to what will happen if they take too many
if so i really want to write a book if you look at the intersection of law and economics especially
at a chicago school of law and economics you look at the work of like a richard epstein
and he has authored a number of books on torts and so forth what you'll find is that the
predo efficient outcome of leaving a more laissez faire standing doctrine is that cases would be
adjudicated and um you know mandatory authority would then exist more succinctly so that people
wouldn't bring cases you know a lawyer would would not bring a case against cell of law because
you have sanctions against we have sanctions against lawyers there are rules against that
uh was it rule 11 um so the standard answer and i don't i'm not knocking you at all i love you
i think you do great work really appreciate it love sujata uh gibson on stage two um you do i
love lawyers that work for the people and individuals but the standard answer from
people who rise up through a career in a system they tend to not think outside that system and
i'm an engineer sorry i think with with uh an mba so i think of systems of economic balance
and the problem with the whole litigation system in the u.s i think the biggest problem we have is
standing doctrine cases are not settled if you look at i just did it's um there's over a hundred
and something thousand excess cases in 2020 i think it was in a single year if you just take
less than half of those fewer than half of those at 50 000 cases most of those could have been
settled by a hundred cases that were taken but but instead most of them were tossed on standing
so if you can get call it precedent for people listening that that's the word they understand
um if you can get precedent on cases then the system comes to an efficient outcome very quickly
and you won't have all these frivolous things being brought it wouldn't happen so it's just
kind of changing the mindset i don't think i'll get there i don't think i'll change the mind of
all the lawyers i do plan on trying to get a case before the supreme court for standing though
if i can change one thing in our entire system at standing because that that is what has removed
um our right for redress and grievances more than anything thanks for your time
yes thank you i i like i said it's a double-edged sword there are good things about the standing
doctrine and there are bad things about the standing doctrine but um it would require
scotus overturning so it is uh definitely a not a quick fix
thank you thank you john thank you for being three questions we've got
25 minutes to go then we go that those those who have the time can go the tom rodman group katherine
hello gobby ann it's nice to see you again i think i did briefly speak with you at at the
coven litigation conference and it's kind of appropriate that i came right after john there
because uh as as charles mentioned there is a base camp group that warner had started about
a year and a half ago now and we did add all of the the lawyers from the conference to it and i
see uh i did invite you but i can resend the email to bring you into that and so that's kind of the
beginning of the the coven bar beyond the conference um i do get the emails i just need
another 15 hours in the day to read them so yes i'm already on there yes all right good
base camp's a little funky there so i wasn't sure um but yeah hopefully we'll be getting to a better
system soon so if you're getting the emails that's all good um and for everybody else here uh for the
videos uh from that conference they are finally out vsrf finally put them out a couple weeks ago
but they really didn't publicize it so i can drop the link in the chat for for people who
weren't there i think it's 200 for the entire conference obviously anybody who attended the
conference can get it for free um but yeah that's that's all i wanted to say so excellent could we
put the chat put put the link in the chat please kathryn yep we'll do so bobby ann you don't need
to say anything on that we go to gary finkelstein now it's yeah no i mean that that was good
information um and yeah thank you for that i just it's i'm i'm on that i'm on that email
right you know already yes thank you kathryn yeah hi uh pleasure to meet you um so i have a quick
question and one one question one comment the quick i i i was um the question really about
the separation of powers and my concern is uh the possibility of packing the court and what happens
then and uh and how can one stop it um because it seems that those that want to uh not live by the
constitution will will will do anything to you know get what they want and my comment is i don't
know if you've come across uh law any of lord chief justice assumptions lord jonathan assumption
retired lord chief justice in the uk um for me a seminal moment i'll put a link in the chat or
something for me a seminal moment uh obviously being was right at the time of the very first
lockdown in the uk so at the very start of the pandemic uh he went public uh and you know smelling
a fish because uh apart from being the lord chief justice he's also a very eminent historian and
what he observed is a power grab and his observation from history is whenever you get an extreme power
grab built on fear it's it's very slow slowly if ever given back and it leads to tyranny so one of
it's amazing that we i mean we haven't fully come out come out of it but you know we were
it's anyway i just wanted to i'll draw that to your attention because sounds like you haven't
come across his work um but he's obviously uh he clue on the law on this side of the pond but if
i don't mind if if you don't mind what's your thoughts on subverting the
separation of powers uh through packing the court
oh yeah it's it's a horrible it's a horrible idea um they threat to pack the supreme court is
um i think a fear tactic to try to um get the because it's currently six to three supposedly
um conservative um but yeah i think it's i think it's a scare tactic so that um you know hey do
do what i want you to do kind of a thing uh otherwise i'm going to pack the court and get
what i want that way um but yeah i mean i definitely am against it i think that it's um
a big problem if they do pack the court because they're going to pack it you know going the wrong
direction for the constitution um but even as it is with the six three split right now there have
been cases uh decisions that they've put out that i'm just like this is this is against the
constitution you know where are you getting this from so um i i can't really say you know what
will happen but i definitely i am against packing the court absolutely okay thank you gary um
jonathan assumption was often referred to as the cleverest man in britain but now nobody talks
about clever people in the united kingdom yeah and also i think i'm right in saying um that he
actually took the jam to go on holiday after he did that brilliant speech in september of 2020 i
think it was he was coerced he was coerced well he's not clever enough when it when it comes to
i know he said that he wanted to travel so yes i know i've got friends who were unbelievable
that even jonathan assumption with his understanding of history and having worked it all out um at least
to a degree he then goes and takes the jab so steven i've got friends who had the jab because
they wanted to travel that is called coercion they were coerced because otherwise they couldn't
travel that's a simple coercion yes but but jonathan assumption understood yeah i get that well
he's not as he's clever at history and clever at law but he's not clever at at science and medicine
and statistics and was not very clever of being a human being as a okay well i think he's great
though he well his speech i think was the 31st of march or 31st of may on bbc radio 4 was a
seminal moment from here that was the wake up moment he had done a he'd done a speech before
that in i think september 2020 i can't remember i used to send it around and i ended up speaking
to jonathan assumption yeah he didn't like my letter to the lancet though
thank you so okay rose and then back to steven for last questions and then we'll be finishing up
thank you gary rose hi two quick things for bobby and then one for bobby and mark um
why isn't anybody going after the governors who in my opinion did absolutely unconstitutional
hospital liability exemption when all the hospitals had to do was use a who icd code of
covet to get away with malpractice and manslaughter and number two for you bobby is i had mentioned
on the previous one about the 1974 national research act that the majority of people are
not aware of because that reviews the informed consent you can't do coercion unduly influencing
etc and then the one thing i have for both of you is nobody's reviewing insurance policies
i found an insurance policy for a public school back in 2017 and in it it read specifically
exemption from coverage from direct or indirect injury from emf exposure so i have a loaded three
part actually one the 1974 was just informational but then the other two are questions
and rose rose can you bring that to bobby an's attention because bobby an came from a real
estate background she's doing this great work because rose raised this a couple of weeks ago
bobby and and this read this 1974 legislation has some interesting implications rose can you
explain that to bobby an yeah sure um bobby my background is i've been in health care for
40 years so um nobody is aware of the 1974 national research act which was signed in
from the belmont report because of the tiskegee scandal and they very specifically outline
the safety parameters for bio and emotional experimentation and it specifically goes over
the need for informed consent you have to give added protection for the non-autonomous which
would be children the elderly in hospitals people in prison etc and it's very clear verbiage about
autonomy justice must have comprehension there's so much wonderful language in there and nobody's
aware of the 1974 national research act which was signed by nixon
yeah so um to answer you what was the first part of your question i'll go in order oh the other
is um why isn't anybody going after the governors who in my opinion they unconstitutionally just
gave hospitals liability exemption that's that was ludicrous and unconstitutional yeah i'm not
familiar with um if it came from the governors or if it came from the state legislatures
um i have not looked into that um i i have heard about um the protection and the liability and such
but i i can't really speak to it because i don't know if it came from governors or the legislature
two different branches of government nobody's addressing it at all because it was completely
unconstitutional i don't know if anybody's addressing it i think yeah i have i have heard
about it um in some context which i think maybe it was in florida maybe maybe people
that i'm in contact with in florida were talking about it or something like this but um
so i don't know there might be people addressing it but i i certainly can't speak to it because i am
not familiar with the topic at all and the other part of your question was about the this federal
law yeah i just wanted i just wanted to make you aware of its components and i can post the link
again but the other part was for you and mark steel of is anybody reading insurance policies
and going from that angle because i actually sent 5g information with that to like county
commissioners and i said basically if you're allowing the rollout of 5g with the potential
of invalidating all of these people healthcare policies yeah um again not i'm not familiar with
that i don't know anybody doing that um and so i i can't speak to that topic so so okay well i
want to throw it out to you and mark steel that that's an approach that people need to really
start hammering i think rose garry finkelstein who just spoke he is an actuary uh for insurance
companies i think um i don't want to misrepresent is he still on i wonder and i'm still here i've
been wondering garry is that right are you an actuary with insurance companies yeah although i
don't look at property uh stuff i'm really just focused on mortality and yes okay so i don't
understand as a doctor in the uk garry why why the actuaries and the insurance companies aren't
noticing the uh the excess mortality or if they are they're not saying anything why aren't well
i don't know they absolutely are so we are seeing excess mortality at the current time and
the institute of actuaries has got a board called the continuous mortality investigation bureau and
they report i think it's every week every month or every week it's every week actually and yeah at
the current time there is quite a significant excess mortality there's a bit of a debate going
on about you know the causes and um there's multis considered to be multi-factorial uh you know this
the interventions but um no also some things there's a bit of obviously there's controversy
and people look at data in different ways i haven't heard any controversy though and so i so i knew
that you're an actuary in an insurance company garry but you haven't been on recently as far as
i know and i wanted to ask you why aren't the insurance companies who have a vested interest
in as few deaths as possible in a given time making it more noise about the huge number of excess
deaths in the united kingdom for example i think it's something like 150 135 000 is it so
a couple of things um it's a it's we are having excess mortality and it is going on uh like i
said the institute of actuaries does have a continuous mortality investigation bureau
and they do publish it and and it's being looked at very closely one thing about the uk life
insurance industry is it's very heavily weighted to what used to be compulsory purchase pension
annuities so these are policies that pay out if you live not if you die and and if people die
sooner than expected that insurance company actually makes money so the the uk industry
is a little bit different from i mean there is a lot of term protection insurance which pays out
short if you die there's quite a lot of that but the uk industry is very diversified
but insurance companies have a responsibility to society as well so if they have the they must be
looking into all these figures analyzing them to death why don't we hear anything from the
insurance companies well i mean you can go to the industry of actuaries website and you'll see what
they have to say about it what i'm going to say is within the industry the insurance industry
there is a the excess mortality is visible at the moment it was it hasn't always been excess
mortality at all in all quarters through the through the pandemic just i mean through the
last three years no i've seen i've seen a graph and there've been rises in i've seen some of the
graphs in this group but they're not correct um the the the why aren't you sharing the graphs
with us because i remember you saying before you had any figures it would be very interesting to
see the figures now the figures we haven't heard from you so i just i'm not criticized i just want
wonder it's frustrating i'll be happy to put a link to this insure actually uh web website where
you can see the excess mortality being being measured by the way that's the excess of mortality
of insured lives it's a little bit different to the excess mortality of the whole population that
comes out of the office of national statistics i understand that um but it's you know the the
mortality of insured lives across the whole industry is still very you know from memory i
remember you looking forward to the time when you'd have the figures so i must have this so i
as you know i was personally looking at these figures up until the end of 2021 and of course
during 2020 as well 2020 the excess mortality had nothing to do with the vaccine
at the end of 2021 there was no mortality in 2020 there was there was a very significant excess
mortality through the first half of the year oh in the first lockdown yes exactly but from a doctor's
point of view i can think of many reasons other than um injections for that well there weren't
any injections in 2020 but um what i'm going to say is that the the the controversy within
the industry of the excess mortality we're seeing now is one of the principal causes and you know
is it due to the effects of lockdown is it due to the delayed treatment is it due to
but gary i've never heard i've never didn't even know there was a debate going on there's no debates
been reported anyway oh well so there's a separate there is a debate within the within the industry
for those that are in that field but i think one of the things that our guest has pointed out is
our media at the moment is very selective about what they want to report
right so will you come on and talk to us as a group about um the the figures
yeah i'll i'll i'll have to plan plan it out with with you but yes i'll i'll come back to you on
that yes okay can you email me we're gonna move we only got a few minutes left we've got janet
rose are we finished metaphorically speaking with you before janet
looks like we have yeah i was on me yes go ahead i'm good thanks thanks rose janet and then steven
we're finished yeah thanks um yeah i just wanted to say that my understanding is that um health
damage from emf from whether it's wireless routers or masks or phones or what have you
has never actually been insurable and my understanding is that for example if a
farmer has a a mast on his land if there is any health damage from that mast in local people
he is actually liable but the actual um the companies who supply the masks and who
transmit this wireless radiation they're not uh then it's not insured so um i think you know that
might be worth looking at and i think that that covers things like 3g 4g as well as 5g
yeah and janet um do you think there's a what do you understand so janet's a medical doctor bobby
and um and i just wonder whether janet uh what do you think about the pcr what mark steele says
about the pcr uh possibility of uh essentially injecting people to get this uh structure in so
that they can attack human beings with uh 5g is that right is that they're not they're not
5g is that right is that they were they were talking about um these little black worms in the pcr
swabs weren't they in 2020 and people were having a look at them and same thing in the masks as well
and i don't know what the structures were but i mean certainly people were finding anomalous
structures within those and you know you have to wonder oh so it's not just the pcr tests the masks
as well yes now you mentioned it i remember that yeah yeah wow wow
yeah yeah all right thank you thank you janet thank you janet bobby and great great work steven
any final questions before we let bobby and go through it's so kind of you to give us two and
a half hours we know how busy you are but it gives an opportunity for people to to craft their
thinking and i again reiterate we need to and and the bus raise wind driving and bobby ann as well
we need to educate people about their rights so then they'll stand up for them because a lot of
people think they haven't any bobby and i think that's so so crucial secondly we wanted those of
you who can donate or find other people to donate to bobby ann's work go to the websites cox lawyers
correct yeah i'm gonna put it in the i'll put it here in the chat it's my website is cox lawyers
and then if people want more information about the quarantine lawsuit the citizens group uniting
new york state put up a website specifically about the case so i'll put that here in the chat as well
please please put that in there all right so steven last last one let bobby and put that
into the chat and then last questions and we'll go across to tom rodman for those who can
yeah uh i thought steven do you have something because i can oh yeah sorry i thought you were
doing that so have you finished yeah no i was just going to say if anybody wants more information
to uh yeah to check in the chat i'm putting the links in there but uh thank you for having me on
i appreciate it and um yeah it's it's always great to see so many people fighting for our rights
around the world so everybody keep up the good fight so bobby and i hope it hasn't been too
horrible an experience but we we were on your side even though it may not have seemed like that to you
um of course and i would like to congratulate you on behalf of the group um for your brilliant work
and what better state in america to do it than new york state yeah i know it's it's quite uh it's
quite a challenge but we we beat them once so we will we will keep trying to beat them again
yeah can i just ask you bobby and um what do you think it was in your childhood or your upbringing
which brought you to this point so you saw something that no other lawyer in the world saw
apparently and you brought a case against the new york city new york state governor and won it um
on a constitutional issue and that's just brilliant and i don't know whether you fully realized
um so you're rather special from my point of view uh when do you what was it in your childhood or
in your upbringing which led you to this place of special responsibility if you like yeah uh you know
what i it really is quite an amazing story uh i did an interview with epoch times um last november
uh about it if anybody wants to get here you know the nitty-gritty details that that interview on
epoch times is on my website under my media page um on cox lawyers.com but um in short basically i
you know i had when i learned about that regulation the quarantine regulation i had reached out to many
colleagues um and i said to them you know you need to read this regulation this is horrific
you know we have to bring a lawsuit we have to strike this down
um because my my background was not constitutional law it was not civil rights i had never filed a
civil rights lawsuit in my life um so nobody would step up nobody would take the case nobody
would come on the case with me um well yeah and anybody noticed it apart from you oh yeah other
attorneys had had heard about it um but they didn't want to you know they didn't want to work
for free uh they didn't think my theory was was good you know um they just weren't interested i
reached out to organizations you know these uh civil rights organizations um brought it to their
attention they weren't interested in getting involved uh most of them didn't even respond
were they really conflicted do you think with hindsight bobby and i think of many of the
traditional so-called traditional civil rights organizations um are not what people think they
are i think they've proven themselves to be exactly the complete opposite of the exact opposite yeah
controlled opposition international is a good example because yeah because i and i wrote a
sub stack about it uh a month or so ago you know where aware have the civil rights organizations
gone right because because they're not here and they wouldn't even not only were they not involved
in the case they wouldn't even write an amicus brief to support my case you know and and now
that she's appealing they're still not writing an amicus brief to to support my case so um i just
you know i i saw something and again this was after two full years of complete government
overreach living under complete tyranny in new york state right um and seeing everybody around
me suffer and seeing my clients suffer and it was all at the government expense it was all because
of what the government was doing to everybody it was whether it was through schools or through the
you know eviction moratorium or through the masking or through the social distancing it was
all government controlled complete breach of of the constitution on multiple levels and then when
i saw this i said no way there's no way i'm gonna let them get away with this so nobody wanted to
do it i did it myself so wow yes brilliant great worker well okay thank you thank you we honor you
bobby ann thank you for being with us everybody um mainstream media we need media attention you
got you got a clap of hands here from gary fink here bobby anne can i just ask a bobby anne one
question charles she she so bobby anne i'm in touch with daniel estrelin who has a platform of
10 million people would you like to be interviewed for the spanish speaking world
oh yes that would be wonderful definitely we have to bring more people into the fold absolutely
great idea yeah great idea so i'll arrange that with daniel estrelin and if i seem to have
forgotten when you just would you mind reminding me just because i'm trying to remember all this
stuff and so difficult yes i i will definitely reach out to you um and ask you to connect me
because i think the spanish speaking world yes we we need to reach all all societies all over the
place because this is yes you know this is step up and do something now or you're gonna have no
rights that's it gone especially yes exactly thank you so much thank you yes everybody thank
you for the links um wonderful i'll keep the chat open for a minute or so bobby ann will send i'll
send through the chat to you make sure have you saved your chat there's some lots of yeah there's
lots of good stuff and i think and i just i see carlos was live streaming thank you carlos
um he he does a live stream on his facebook i see it very good yeah
very good that sounds a spanish name to me anyway i'll put you in touch with daniel estrelin
and uh he's such a clever guy knows exactly what's going on excellent thank you so much
he'd be very interested to meet a lawyer who's been fighting for the constitution of new york
state and america of course oh then yes absolutely i would like the introduction
bobby ann before you go everybody while we're waiting for the last comments in the chat
uh i'm going to tell you a story about a new york judge hearing a case and he called the
council for the plaintiff and the defendant up to the bench as they often do in u.s court cases
never happens in australia and he said to the plaintiff's lawyer uh you have given me five
hundred dollars to decide this case in your client's favor you turn to defense counsel you've
given me a thousand dollars to decide the case in your client's favor i'm going to give you back
five hundred dollars to the defendant's counsel i'm going to decide the case on its merits so
uh
off we go bye okay see you steven i'll send the chance to tom rodman is about you know
do you sorry atrass do you know carlos bobby ann yes oh you do okay well if he wants to come along
and live streamers every week he's welcome to do that and we'll get you in the loop of the bobby
ann interview all right everybody thank you so much thanks everybody thank you
uh charles we've got um what's his name yorker and norden gourd on tuesday wonderful the swedish
kind brilliant one and the thing we want to learn from him is how do we handle this
bio hose of information that's what i'm really interested in tom rodman had some exactly so
we're learning on this good okay excellent thanks steven it's worse than medical school
yeah bye carlos hey hold on a second and now i can i put my microphone charge i don't know how you
found me i know bobby i did many interviews with her and i take the risk to to put it in
in my facebook channel uh i have 380 okay i'm here yeah very good 380 50 000 followers has been
restricted but when you what you said stephen please let me know because i am in touch with the
the spanish community i am from argentina so since we won the world cup we can do anything
yeah sure yeah we need people who can do anything who believe that carlos i put steven's i've sent
you steven's email address in in the chat for you charlie how how did you find me you have been
sending me this invitation for many months how did you find me you don't even know don't even
know okay we don't even remember we don't even remember someone must have recommended you it
might have been bobby and i don't know maybe it's on callis what's what's your email address
uh okay i'll type it here for for everyone uh okay let me see the one that you i am receiving
this invitation from you yeah from you from your email yeah and two two
uh okay i got it i put it here yeah so how many meetings have you been to carlos this is the first
one because i usually i'm playing beach volleyball i live next to the beach in los angeles so
but i tried to cram on another one and then i couldn't get here because there were too many
people well you must try to come to the one on tuesday because we've got the the swedish expert
on um world economic forum and bilderberg group and all the rest of them on um and he's an expert
he's been working on his own and i've managed to persuade him to speak to us because he uh
uh well he wanted he got so many things to do in scandinavia and i said well nobody's gonna
hear you in scandinavia um so anyway he came on he's coming on to on uh tuesday okay i will check
if they made that i received i think yesterday that information is there but thank you so much
and i try always to help thank you very much how many people are watching on your
facebook um well let me tell you right now what happened is my three pages have been restricted
now but still i have a good okay let me tell you right now a good following uh i tell you right now
so i do in my three pages one has 450 views the other 500 the other 600 but in a in a few in a
week they will have two three four thousand each one excellent oh very good yeah so well done carlos
we're gonna go see you next time and and you've got steven's email vice versa and uh we'll we will
get the spanish you know i i always restream whenever i can beautiful thank you bless us bye
bye bless yes thank you charles thanks steven thanks everybody
you